If yes, what do you think of his idea of allowing voters to pass laws by popular vote?
132504
I haven't heard of him until now.  Letting voters pass laws by popular vote could in theory be a good idea, but I'm worried that it could lead to some very stupid laws, like a nation-wide gay marriage ban, or making September 11 a national holiday.  I know, our current system of lawmakers passes some very stupid laws, but this could even be worse.  Also Gravel will be 78 years old in 2008, and he hasn't served any political office since 1980.
533243
NO!\n\n        Guy had the best idea about MPs ever.
309986
Ideally yes, but he has to deal with Congress who are up for election (2 yrs-House, 6 yrs-Senate).  Not to mention he has the option to run for reelection.  The people will be royally pissed if he starts acting in a way contrary to what he said during the race.
389299
I'm voting for him.  That will be a vote switched from Feinstein for whom I voted last time.  \n\nWill he win?   I don't know.\n\nShould he win?  \n\nAbsolutely.  California's schools are being wiped out, along with its middle class.\n\nWe need to send a message that if our Congressmen vote against what they know the majority wants, they will lose their jobs.  Right now they hope it isn't a high enough priority with us to govern our votes.  I don't agree with Mountjoy on everything, but given that politics is about compromise, I'd rather have him on capital hill than Diane Feinstein.
665178
well according to the way the system works he won both elections.  Everything, even voting has systems of checks and balances.\n\nedit, person above me, we don't use a popular vote, this is to help even things between large and small states, also bush is not the first president to not win the popular vote and win the election, and wont be the last.
208129
In addition to the fact that such a law is unconstitutional and could only have a chance if it came about through a ratified Constitutional Amendment (which would never pass).  It would likely demonstrate that un-a-lined voters out numbered members of the two major parties.\n\nIf ever enacted it could have an unexpected result, that is, the same number of people who don’t vote today say, “I still won’t vote, come and get me.”  \n\nIt might be a better idea to give people some reason to want to vote.  Say, by adding something interesting to the ballot.  As. . . . . the final line for each elective office have it say, “None of the above.” And have that line able to win.  That would mean that some elective office could end up with no office holder until a new election were held.  That could mean that the candidates would have to actual, and honestly, serve the electorate.
669305
I would thank him for showing interest in the electoral process and maybe ask him if he would like to join my gay friends, black and Hispanic friends as we go around registering people to vote. We don't have to discuss political viewpoints, we just want people to vote.
630659
Regardless of how the votes went, YES, "we" as a country elected him and he is our President.  I would suggest that it was "our" apathy that got him elected personally.\n\nWhy you suggest that "we" have to be reminded I am not sure, since he is the president of a country where we have the right (and often the duty) to voice our opinions about our elected officials, INCLUDING our President.\n\nMany have died defending this country and it's right of freedom of expression.  I for one, do not take it for granted, but am offended when people suggest we cannot say anything bad about him or it is unpatriotic somehow.  \n\nI vote, that gives me the right to complain about the wrongs I see WHEREVER they are.  (and yes, I also do things to try and change those wrongs, but since I am not democrat or republican, I am stuck with those candidates they give me.)
366094
I agree. He understands the historical perspective. He views politics as history. Although he has baggage, his ideas for fundemental reform of our governmental institutions are worthy of discussion. As to the idea of blowing Liberal BS away, I believe that he has the ability to confront it and provide an alternative that large segemnts of the population agree with already.
134032
it was January 23rd (but i didn't vote for him). he was elected into a minority government. which means that he has to get votes from other party's to get bills past. Its a delicate balancing act. But i do not believe he will last long.
114675
I'm not sure it would work.  I think we would have to test easier ways of voting first.  Then find ways to curtail the fraud that will come with it.\n\nBesides, as an American I know how easy my fellow Americans get bored.  We have a short attention span, so eventually all of the voting would be done by people who do nothing but sit around and vote.  Kinda sounds like the system we have now.
286283
On the one hand, I applaud the concept of making every participate in our democracy.  No one should feel marginalized if they had a hand in electing their leader.\n\nOn the other hand, I am like a lot of the Founding Fathers who expressed severe doubts that the average person could make intelligent decisions.  I live in a typically middle class area where you would expect people would have the education and the interest in politics to understand the issues.  However, the amount of fallacious thinking I encounter is downright scary.\n\nI'd have to consider your idea further, but right now my gut tells me this: If someone isn't interested enough to vote of their own volition, how meaningful will making them put an "X" in Box-A, or Box-B ?  A lot of these people would know nothing about the candidates.  I think it would encourage candidates to "dumb down" their campaigns, and pander to certain groups.
148805
I'm for it, and most Americans are, at least those who understand what it is all about.\nThe problem is, as it's a constitutional issue, we need to make an amendment. That requires that two thirds of the States need to approve it.\nThose States with low population numbers, will vote against it, as it isn't to their advantage.\nIt has been suggested, that each  of the most populist states, eg, California, New York, change their constitution, to give all their votes to the winner. That way, they will get around the smaller States, and for once, the candidates, will  have to spend more time and money getting their votes.
139248
This site does make for some interesting reading, he has some good stands even on the things that I would disagree with him on.  The most important thing that a campaign of this type could do for this country is actually educate the voters on Special Interest and the money it spends to gain for their interest which is not always ours.  Every few years you need someone to come along and shake things up a bit.  He could do it, he is a well known face and name and that is half the battle in politics.
525046
if it was not a felony, he is allowed to vote
541781
Agreed. I believe that's what voters are for. I mean, think about it: if the Supreme Court was appointed by his daddy, who do you think they'd give (give being the key word) the presidency to? Even if it took longer, wouldn't it've been a better idea if the whole country just re-voted?
587171
I would vote for a law that would prevent misinformed and stupid people from having their vote count.  (weighted according to knowledge level at the very least)