What I mean is if we, the USA, change our system, could we possibly use Alternative Vote Plus. This system is proposed by the UK and consists of having 80% of the members elected in SMDs using the Alternative Vote (Instant Runoff Vote for us)and 20% elected by open lists representing counties; counties would have 1 or 2 Topup members. I'd like to now if any of you would support a system like this or possibly have mixed districts like the Preferential Plus (B.C. Citizens Assembly). I'd like some ideas, support, critics, etc. I'll take everything but we can help our country before it's too late.
206467
might get a honest election ?
166346
I love this question...we could be like the 60's and just boycott! If you can find someone to organize this nationwide...I'm in...until then I suggest we all get more involved in our community, state and national elections. The fact of the matter is that only a small percentage of the public actual vote. If more people were like you and purposed this question, maybe we could do something about it!
558244
The truth is there is no "one man one vote," and there hasn't been since the beginning. It's just more obvious now, that our government is really about "one dollar one vote." Such is the way of a republic. So save up your money and become one of the haves.. that's the only way to win. Our government has no power. It's a front.
665420
right now it seems, none of us... for instance in Florida, we have new computerized voting machines with NO paper trail.  why?  when you purchase something at a store don't you want a receipt?  but for an election there is no proof that i even voted.  wake up america.
45455
Good point, and yet another flaw in our voting process. I would suggest that all voters would have to take a simple test, whether they understand the workings of our government (unbiased ?'s like "How many people on the Supreme Court", or "Name the governor of your state").\n\nTrouble is, voting tests are often associated with the biased "literacy tests" in the South, to make sure blacks couldn't vote. So this idea, while interesting, is unlikely to go anywhere for a while.
278545
FIRST OF ALL:  a_team_rerun, your answer was beyond condescending.  I haven't noticed that this board is a spelling contest.  Occasionally people inadvertently use a wrong word or an incorrect spelling.  Glad we have you to police things.\n\nIN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION:  It would be wonderful if we could do such a thing.  There have been a lot of suggestions on this board recently about how our election system could be changed; however, a lot of people always seem to point out that there are too many reason why those ideas wouldn't work either.\n\nWe have three main strikes against us, as citizens, right now:\n\nOne, the entire Nation is infected with apathy (they don't seem to care; they think someone else will 'take care of it');\n\nTwo, we, as a Nation, seem to think like 'a_team_rerun' in that we have been doing something too long to change it.  Thank goodness our founding fathers didn't have those same ideas.  Without change, we are rapidly becoming a stagnant pond and the stench of rot is becoming wide spread.  Why does everyone pretend it doesn't stink?\n\nThree, until the American people have had it up to their eyebrows with the corruption that is going on and everyone stands up on their feet at the same time and starts yelling 'WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE" ... until we have massive demonstrations on the White House lawn ... until we get pro-active and stop being inactive, nothing at all is going to change.\n\nYour idea is not bad, but my humble opinion is that a very charismatic man would have to be found to run for office; one who can sell ice on the North pole, so to speak; one who can easily make himself understood to all people using common, ordinary, everyday words that everyone can understand.  A man who can get the majority of America to support his campaign financially.  The list is endless.\n\nDo i think someone like this exists?   Yes, i do!  The problem is, where do we find him and how do we promote him?
33521
It's not likely for a couple of reasons.  First, campaign finance laws rig the system in favor of Demopublicans and Republicrats.  Second, if an issue championed by a small, independent party becomes big enough, one of the two major parties will take it over as their own.\nMore Americans should register as Independents - that's the American way to vote!
7343
There is a problem here that goes a little deeper than you might expect.\n\nIn my humble opinion, people in our society have gotten very used to having someone else (i.e. "the government") do things for them.\n\nThey have moved away from (or forgotten) the concept of collaborating with their neighbors, friends, co-workers, acquaintences, etc., to accomplish needed missions and goals.  For instance, the United States has a relatively low voter turnout compared to other countries.  As a matter of fact, sources rank the U.S. in the lowest 25% worldwide in terms of voter turnout among different countries.  It should be noted that some countries such as Belgium, Australia, Brazil, Singapore, Uruguay, to name a few, have compulsory voting.  If you don't vote, you are either fined or disenfranchised.  Compulsory voting is an admirable, if not misguided, attempt at keeping people from becoming complacent.  I believe it is better though to make our decisions freely.  Free will is what was given to us by our Creator, to make right and wrong decisions.  It is what makes us Human. \n\nNow, if we don't tell the government what it is that we want, how can we expect the government to "do anything".  To take it a step further, do we really want the government to "do anything"?  After the tragedy of 9/11, the government "did something" by removing various and sundry civil protections that were afforded to us by federal statute and the Constitution.  Now that's "doing something!"\n\nI, personally, work for the government (a state, but government none-the-less).  Now, I am here to tell you that you really don't want the government "doing anything" without very clear, concise, and incontrovertible, instructions.  It is very important that you go visit at least one government office a week (preferably with a group of your associates) and let them know in very clear terms, what it is that you want them to do. You also could possibly write a letter to the manager or director of the government offices, while sending a copy to your congressman, alderman, commisioner, or what have you, clearly indicating exactly what it is that you think should be done.  Otherwise, the people that work there will go on their merry way, doing what they think they should be doing, when that's not really what they should be doing at all.  But you can't blame them... you didn't tell them!  So how are they to know?  They are people just like you and me.  But sometimes they get isolated and lost, and they forget. At first, it may appear that they are unresponsive.  But that is only because they have gone so long without being reminded what it is that they are supposed to be doing.  It may even be necessary, at first, for you and your associates to stand out in the street in front of the government office, and make a spectacle of yourselves.  But like I said, it's only because the people that work there have forgotten, because we all have gone on our way and left them to their own devices without the guidance, experience, and knowledge, of the body politic. \n\nI noticed in your question that you mentioned your paycheck.  Have you discussed this with your co-workers?  Are they having issues with their paychecks?  Maybe you should consider organising yourselves as a group, and discussing this with your employer?  Perhaps as a group, in negotiations with your employer, you could come up with ways to increase production and efficiency.  This would increase your employer's profit margin and thereby  make it easier for him to give you a raise.  Of course if after you increased his profit margins, he found himself still unable to consider your plight, you would already have formed a group of people with a common bond and concern that would find it within their ability to deal with that too!\n\nSo to answer your question... No, I don't feel particularly betrayed by my government.  I f
538831
This supposedly free system of elections boils down to two candidates and parties, so why bother if you don't want either candidate, choose the lesser evil and it's your time and gas.\nI would think this has much to do with it as well the registration of voters is outdated as Americans move so often. Change the system and reform. Regardless which candidate you elect or re elect it comes down to what their party wants and the money that supports them.
325450
That's a hard one.  I wish we could move to handcounted paper ballots, but they will say they put too much money in buying the new machines that they purchased due to help America vote act, but if we can't see the software programming, they can still rig them..many programmers say that.  The system works fine in other countries, but when they don't want accurate vote counts, we won't get that.\n\nWe should be in the streets every week like they did in the Ukraine.  You people who say its sour grapes are simply not informed or were not there, but what can you expect from sheep?  Intensive research, not?
654934
But if the people don't even know about an issue, how can they have an informed opinion about the bill?  The actions of congress are online, and you can keep up with them, and email your opinion to your representative at any time of day.\n\nWho would propose laws in your scheme, without representatives?  All 298,444,215 of us?  That could lead to a lot of votes.\n\nDo I think our countries laws should be decided as snap-decisions by inattentive members of the public - like American idol? NO
84733
Since the Electoral College is specifially provided for in the U.S. Constitution, if you don't like it your lawful choices are:\n\n1) propose and campaign for an amendment to the Constitution (2/3 vote in each house of Congress + majority vote in 3/4 of the state legislatures)\n\n2) whine\n\nNote that your alternative of having some sort of nationwide referendum (if I've read you correctly) is not one of the options.\n\n(Incidentally, I don't think you have a ghost of a chance of changing it anytime soon.  Too many of us believe in the FEDERAL system and don't want everything decided by a few big population centers.)\n\nAlmost forgot to answer the first question -- yes, the American people WERE allowed to vote for the Electoral College system, at least as much as for anything else in the Constitution, THROUGH their representatives (in each state) who voted to ratify the Constitution.  (That's called a representative --or, if I dare say it, 'republican' form of government, and it's the one we've had for over 200 years.)
411964
I would vote the way that I felt was right.  That's the point of having representatives.  If we just wanted to do what the constituents want every time, we'd have a direct democracy.  Sometimes the constituents don't have all the facts and don't know what's best.
630439
I think it's time to abolish the electoral college.  Right now everything breaks down into "red states" and "blue states."  If you live in a 90% red state, you can forget about any presidential candidates taking an interest--you're already in the bank for the Republicans.  And if you're a blue voter living in that red state, you're effectively disenfranchised... so why bother getting involved at all? \nI think a direct election would get a lot more people involved and interested.  I'd have a reason to come out to the polls, and if I managed to influence just one of my neighbors, I know that would make a difference in the outcome of the election.  \nI still vote, by the way, even if it doesn't count in the end.  But I'd rather that it did!
372035
I'm afraid our election system gets pretty complicated but there's plenty of information available. So, here's a few places for further reading! Wikipedia is a great place to start looking for basic information on any topic. You'll also find more links there.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_house\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_house\n\nCongratulations on learning about our system!
547554
Not in my state, we had a few elections like that. Ones where there were a few hot issues, a lot of people came in and voted on those issues leaving the others blank. The problem was there were other issues that needed 60% or more of total votes to pass, with all the blanks they didn't pass. They had enough if you only counted the yes/no votes on that issue, but the law stated you needed 60% or more of total votes. The ended up bring the issues back the next elections. Anyway here in ND we count them.\n\nRemember if you don't vote, you can't complain. And if you don't vote you just voted against EVERYTHING you stand for.
524887
I have wondered that and kind of would like to see that day.  It wont happen until a third party stops trying to win at the top of the ballot and learns to win at the bottom.  Americans will not vote for someone they havent heard of for national office.  I was thinking about how a major third party could have changed the outcome yesterday.  If no party received a majority, two parties would have to come together and form some sort of coalition for the purpose of leadership votes, who gets chairmanships, etc.