Basically, we are voting for someone who vote for issues for us. That is where the corruption. Why can't the general public vote for tax increase, cut spending and all the detail. I mean, as general public, we should voice our vote. Everytime we vote, it is just a vote, because policticans abuse their power. I really wish they could set up all the minor items like property tax increase, cut spending in the voting booth instead just of a person...
Look at the judicial system, minior or civil case, the Judge can decide who is wrong. However, when it comes to criminal case, they pick 12 common people to do the jury duty. Why? I mean if general public can decide who is guilty or not, (they won't bother to hire professionals or like vote a professionals to do the judge) can we general public just decide the increase of taxes or cut spending???
p.s. Major issue like WAR doesn't count, but at least in a local government level, small people should be able to voice.
2006-09-08 08:46:39 · 19 answers · asked by mystery t 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
why vote? I vote for more money, they keep taking it away............................
2006-09-08 08:49:35 · answer #1 · answered by Only out of this world 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can vote all you want. Unless the majority of people vote exactly like you in your state, then your vote will not count. Only the majority vote wins in each state. So if you live in the wrong state your vote will never get counted.
We are suppose to be a democracy. We no longer need an Electoral College if we actually believe that most of us are literate and know something about each election. Between National Party Machines and the Electoral College system of counting each states' alloted electoral votes, and not the actual popular vote, we don't have a vote in our government at this time. Only the Parties get to vote for which Party won. The Parties are totally corrupt, so now we have no checks and balances.
When 1 party happens to be in power every term it is time to choose a new supreme court justices and then uses those justices to try and keep themselves in power, then it is time to revamp our way of voting. The people need to be able to vote to protect themselves from losing their rights as has happenned these past few years. Bush would not have won the first or second time with a popular vote. He was not a good leader of Texas and has not became any better a leader with the passing years.
Yes, we need to change the way we vote, but neither party will allow it. It would be too easy for a Third Party to win. This would put a drain on the good ol boy system of trading favors, as the new Party wouldn't owe anyone anything.
We need a Third Party right now. It is the only way we will regain all the freedoms our fathers fought so hard for.
As for it being feasible, supposedly they are counting all of our votes now. What would change that? The only change would be we would lose the middle man and the president would have to be elected by all the people not the some national Party.
Election fraud is occuring now and no one is doing much to stop it. If we had our votes counted we could get a receipt which could then be recounted by a some other entity, like the internet. If enough of a decrepancy occurred, then we could hold anothre election. Cost should never be a problem, as we have seen billions going to one military contractor.
2006-09-08 09:07:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This system of direct participation of citizens in law making can be found in some cantons of Switzerland (at a local level). But for a bigger state like US it will become unwieldly and impossible to manage. But if some modus operandi is devised where citizens can express their feelings on law making by voting on issues (for example on internet) it wouldn't be such a bad idea.
Another problem in this system of voting would be that there will be too many split votes. Presently US has two-party system, when there are more than one parties even forming a coalition government is a difficult job, leave aside deciding issues.
Finally the vested interests will get involved. Agriculturists will look for their benefits, Industrialists for their and traders for their own. Infact we do have a system of functional representation in the upper house of Ireland parliament. But there is always too much friction when a person's direct interests are involved.
Nonetheless its a good question and needs some deliberation and discussion.
2006-09-08 09:06:51 · answer #3 · answered by Rustic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree! The electoral college is an anachronism and doesn't work. Yet if everyone were to vote individually, it'd have to be by computer...and we've all seen how well THAT works! There is new legislation (pending?) to reform electronic voting, but on a state-by-state basis, I think. Still, even if it's implemented, the Republicans/Wingers will just get hackers to use it to fix another election.
Education is the answer! Improve public education, so that the country will no longer be run by Ivy-League puppets of the oil industry who are able to hoodwink the average, ignorant voter.
2006-09-08 08:54:27 · answer #4 · answered by Gwynneth Of Olwen 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
With the electoral college system, I feel it's unfair. California and other large states are not even considered important -- less populated states get all the attention of the candidates because they know those few people will decide the election.
I always feel that my vote doesn't even count in Federal elections.
2006-09-08 08:50:58 · answer #5 · answered by Lynda 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
New Cyber Sunday vote casting is stupid, i favor to %. what's going to be placed on a pole yet now i'll't because i do not stay contained in the country. previous ones obviously weren't rigged: they would not have had HBK attempt to artwork a singles adventure with his completely destroyed knee that one time, that they had have placed him contained in the tag adventure. Plus very last 365 days Dusty Rhodes replaced into continuously being pushed because the only to %. and yet "Rowdy" Roddy Piper received the vote.
2016-11-25 20:58:41 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We live in a representative democracy which has worked for the last 200plus years. It has withstood the test of time while truer democracies have failed. The system works but the politicians are the ones to blame.
2006-09-08 08:55:14 · answer #7 · answered by Robert B 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No matter how much you think the US voting system sucks, remember...at least you can vote. And no matter how much you think that the US government sucks...it's still a hell of a lot better than a lot of other countries.
2006-09-08 08:52:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would think mob rule would be worse than our current system.
The problems you list could mostly be rectified if more people voted. That way the corrupt politicians, i.e. Byrd and Kennedy, will not be re-elected in perpetuity.
2006-09-08 08:49:08 · answer #9 · answered by barter256 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Personally I think as hard as it may be to understand, we have the best method going. We do get a choice, which many countries do not.
2006-09-08 08:50:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Direct election. Then everyone's vote matters
2006-09-08 08:48:15 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋