• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

U.S. Senate candidate pledges direct democracy; electronic vote on all bills

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
It doesn't really matter any more.

If Government is unlimited, then there is no vote. No reason to vote.

The few folks that aren't on the Government Gravy Train by now, should be.

Because this train is going to spend it's way into sparklemania.

-John
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,565
1,051
126
Yeah, what could ever go wrong when the majority has the ability to create laws at the expense of the minority via a direct democracy system. /sarcasm
It's pick your poison really.

What could ever go wrong when the minority has the ability to create laws at the expense of the majority via a corrupted representative government? /serious

Lose/lose really. The best we could hope for is some kind of balanced approach, but that's pretty much impossible to determine.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,395
128
106
Voting on everything is a terrible thing.

However, look at the swiss. They vote more or less on all major things.

Problem with voting on all this tho, is that average joe often is unwilling to take the needed steps.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,897
638
126
It will never be allowed. We ceased to become a representative democracy a long, long time ago. We hire (vote for) people to go to DC to vote the way whomever is stuffing the most money into their pockets wishes them to vote. The system will not change until it collapses upon itself or is forcibly overthrown.

Mr. Hollingsworth will not be allowed to win the election.

Disuss the concept if you wish, but file his potential for attaining the office under ain't gonna happen.
 
Last edited:

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
A large portion of our society isn't just ignorant, they celebrate their ignorance. We elect officials, who are (hopefully) better educated than the average citizen. We hope they make the best decisions for us. Though, many are cynical & believe that a lot of back room stuff is for them to make the best decisions for the elected politicians. And, though this doesn't happen always, it certainly does happen (see gerrymandering for one obvious example.)

With direct democracy, it would be a clusterfuck. Let's just talk about tax rates - there's been plenty of discussion about tax rates for the rich lately. I think it's safe to say that the majority of Americans don't even understand marginal tax brackets - the number of people who think that if you earn x number of dollars, then you pay one percentage of your income, and magically, if you earn x+1 number of dollars, then you pay at a different rate. Even educated people posting on this forum have inadvertently pointed out that that's what they had thought. It's an incredibly common belief - I hear people discussing it all the time at various companies: "It's not worth it to work overtime, because they take so much more out in taxes." And, you want THESE people having a significant say in tax policy??
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Wait a second - Hollingsworth's idea could work to some extent, particularly since it's electronic. First, both sides on an issue write a summary of their point of view & why the vote should go in a certain direction. Then, the person who wants to vote is required to read both sides, and then take a 20 question test (10 questions from each side, approved by the other side) on every issue prior to voting. A grade of 80% or more required for passing the test. No, make that 80% on each 10 questions - we would want to avoid partisan hacks who don't listen to the other side.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,435
84
91
How long would the citizens get to read a bill before voting on it? 6 minutes? Would any of the people actually read the bills presented?

As much disdain I have for the members of congress I think this is a horrible idea. I would not be long before lobbyists would be depositing money in paypal when people voted a certain way.
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
10,924
214
106
If there was a direct vote, it should be in the House not Senate. At least then there would be some balance. I have low confidence in my fellow citizens to actually know how laws would effect life. Heck, I don't have a full understanding of politics and law and wouldn't trust myself to vote on everything.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,565
1,051
126
How long would the citizens get to read a bill before voting on it? 6 minutes? Would any of the people actually read the bills presented?

As much disdain I have for the members of congress I think this is a horrible idea. I would not be long before lobbyists would be depositing money in paypal when people voted a certain way.
Hahaha, isn't that much the current situation, only with this we'd have payoffs going to people rather than only politicians.

Our political structure is beyond broken, I said it with W, and I'll say it again now. It just doesn't function.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
It's not as if you will possibly get everybody to vote this way.

They just need to limit senate terms and limit the length of bills to a few pages to ensure that they're actually read. Our current form of voting on bills that are all TLDR is just fucking absurd.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,299
350
126
I'm more in favor of slowly phasing out electing candidates at all and just instating a nobility. Let the workers work and the leaders lead, democracy and elections is an unneeded intermingling of the two.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY