Who has the best system for voting?

[Ingomike]

For example, in the Alaskan method, as I understand it, a large 3rd party vote could make its voice heard but in because they pick the top 2, I don't see how an L vote is a vote for the D because if the D and L candidates are at the top there would be a run off.

This was just put in place by Murkowski to stem the grass roots tide against her. The republican challenger has beaten her twice this season and now it falls mostly to who the democrats want to pick of the republicans candidates.

Ranked choice voting is an incumbent protection racket…

 

[Ingomike]

Same in Georgia, if no one gets 50% there is a run off. Hard to say a vote for the L is a vote for R in that circumstance because at some point the Rs would have to recognize and meet some of the L demands and the burden of proving oneself at some point falls on the candidate.

Again, an incumbent protection racket, any challenger must beat the power twice…

 

[Ingomike]

I am not really seeking input on improving the quality of the voter, that would be long and drawn out in the courts, but rather how the election law in, say Indiana, could be changed to allow a 3rd party voice to be heard without the a vote for the L is a vote for the D.

The answer to your question is conservatives need to stop blaming others for their own lack of effort and initiative. It is not hard at all to get a candidate on the Indiana ballot, but we don’t. We need to give that candidate money to get the massage out, but we don’t. We need to support that candidate all the way to the finish line, but we don’t.

We all need to do it and stop blaming others for choices we do not like…

 

[buckwacker]

but to do that we have to accept infringements of the 2nd as valid to justify regulations on voting.

Besides. Voting is at the state level and the 2nd is at a national level. I don't think we want to elevate voting to the level of the feds regulating it.

But it's a fantastic demonstration of their authoritarian hypocrisy.

 

[Ingomike]

How about we just do away with "Parties" and judge each candidate on their own merit and record?

Yes, while we are destroying the constitution the right is association while we are at it.

 

[Quiet Observer]

All elections are already state and locally controlled. If cheating occurs, it is done at the local level. The federal government does not count votes. I am not addressing the Electoral College. A civics quiz would be found to be unconstitutional, as were poll taxes and literacy tests. The test would be open for interpretation by an examiner. Do you want a LWW reviewing your answers? The questions would have to made public ahead of time.
Also, do you support an extra tax and mandated tests to buy a gun or ammunition?

Just because your team or hero lost, does not automatically mean that the other side cheated.

 

[BugI02]

Yes, while we are destroying the constitution the right is association while we are at it.

If it also meant the complete and utter destruction of all HOAs I might be tempted

 

[Kurr]

I did not consider the Right of Association in my comment, ya'll are correct. I'm just sick of the team / tribal mentality and our "choices" being the ones that the parties throw their support behind.

And haven't we been shown that since 2020 the right to freely associate no longer exists? Our entire society was locked down and not allowed to associate.

 

[jwamplerusa]

My $0.02...

The Federal governments only interference in elections should be limited to clear violations of civil rights. These are mostly those adjudicated and demonstrated to be unlawful. Poll taxes and other such clear efforts to disenfranchise citizens.

Relative to Civil Rights issues and voting, I believe the conversation needs to be flipped. Citizens votes are diminished when votes are diluted by illegitimate votes. There needs to be a strong effort at the State and Federal level to ensure each citizen can vote, and only citizens vote. Further, there needs to be strong efforts to ensure that no vote is coerced, or permitted to be subjugated to another citizen's will.

My greater concern is election integrity. For this I believe the Florida model is probably the current best example. So far they appear to be the only State which is willing to go after vote harvesting and abuse of actual mail ballots. Tucker Carlson had an excellent piece on this last night, which aligned well with my concerns.

Personally, disallowing purely electronic voting is necessary to trust and confidence in elections. Requiring paper back up with primacy for any electronic voting means is simply required.

Disallowing non-verified mail ballots. By this I mean that any mail ballot would need to be completed in the presence of an accredited canvasser, you apply for a mail ballot and if local someone from the jurisdiction brings it to you, you vote, and they take it. If non-local, they mail it, you complete it and seal it in the presence of a Notary, then mail it.

I consider issues of party / candidate access to be a separate issue from the actual legal act of voting.

Party and candidate access to get on the ballot is largely controlled at the State level. I do not see a Constitutionally sound method to circumvent that control, and I also do not see State Legislators changing systems to benefit outsiders. It is simply self-preservation for the local semi-professional politician class.

The form of ballot, is a State matter. I am not a fan of ranked choice. Mostly as I know few who will spend even an hour assessing candidates, let alone a day or more which is what it takes me.

 

[manifest destiny]

Parties, such that they are, are the detriment to voting. A party member's allegiance is to the party. If one strays from the party line they are removed. There should be 535 independents in congress. Not Independent Party members, independent persons. Ranked choice voting looks great on paper but look in to the practice, such that it is, and you'll find it is used to further eliminate candidates - candidates that may have technically won the first round of voting. Indiana doesn't allow for L's unless they clear a pre-set threshold. Gee, I wonder who sets that threshold? Parties are the bane of politics. Getting "on the ballot", in any state, is a political game; a game governed by... the parties. Eph the parties. Now I will wrap myself in fire-proof gear and accept the flames... from party members.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

We need to give that candidate money to get the massage out

Massages are expensive! Like $80 - $100 per hour unless you have a Groupon.

 

[manifest destiny]

Massages are expensive! Like $80 - $100 per hour unless you have a Groupon.

Chump change if you own an NFL franchise.

 

[kickbacked]

Remove the option to vote straight party on ballot and remove party associations on ballot. You can still vote all dem or republican but youd actually have to know the name of the person you cast your vote for. Not knowing candidates would risk voting for the “wrong” side. No need for a test, if you strongly believe in a person’s policies you should be able to remember their name. Idk if that violates any laws but if it does I’m sure someone will tell me.

 

[BigRed]

You don't have to read our Political forums long to find out here are strong opinions about 3rd party candidates. When to rally behind your parties candidate etc.

Mostly these seem to be along static lines.

What are some innovative ways to bridge that gap?

For instance. What laws could we change to address the concerns of all parties?

Alaskan ranked voting? Georgia 50% threshold?

What changes would allow more voices to be heard?

330,000,000+ people scattered across approximately 3,800,000 square miles ruled by 545 people in a far away place is simply too large to be a functioning republic as designed at its establishment.

Dissolve the central state.

Item no longer available

The item you are looking for is no longer available.

www.abebooks.com

 

[Ziggidy]

Voters should have to pass a civics test before being allowed to vote.

Teachers need to learn about civics first, then agree to teach them.

 

[Quiet Observer]

The party system in the U.S. dates back to the Federalist and Democratic-Republican parties of 1792 to 1824. Has the country been going downhill since 1792?
People of similar views will always band together. They will support others with the same point of view. A group has more influence than a single person. If there were 535 independents in Congress, they would soon form coalitions and eventually parties.

Corrected typo: ban to band.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Teachers need to learn about civics first, then agree to teach them.

I thought about this. It’s a big hole in my proposal. With what we’re seeing kids be taught, even up into the college level, no telling what the test would be comprised of or how with equity measures, how it would be scored.

 

[foszoe]

330,000,000+ people scattered across approximately 3,800,000 square miles ruled by 545 people in a far away place is simply too large to be a functioning republic as designed at its establishment.

Dissolve the central state.

Item no longer available

The item you are looking for is no longer available.

www.abebooks.com

Does this book make the BEST case for dissolving the central state and the legal framework of how to do so and what comes after?

If so I would be willing to read it.

 

[BigRed]

Does this book make the BEST case for dissolving the central state and the legal framework of how to do so and what comes after?

If so I would be willing to read it.

It does address the after. Worth the read IMO.

 

[edporch]

For Starters here's a few,
- State level Voter ID
- Election DAY, not election season
- ONLY votes cast by the time the Polls close count
- Votes to be counted promptly after the Polls close
- Early voting in person only in the week before Election Day
- No mail in voting
- No Drop Boxes
- No ballot harvesting
- Absentee Voting limited to those physically unable to come to the Polling place