Change the election process!

Brilliant! Our system is definitely over stuffed. Wish they would take a break and campaign again in October.

#3 is very scary, because the last people I won't electing my officials, are people who want free stuff and people who don't have a clue about gov't or candidates. May as well have the audience of "American Idol" phone in the votes for elections. The Candidates could do a 13 week contest, where each one gets five minutes per week to say something. The one who are eliminated each week, could come back the following week and repeat the same exact speech they gave the week prior, as we wish him or her good riddance.

Love #1, 2.

#4 is just stupid, unless the candidates are getting everyone drunk at the polling booths.

At a Country Club where I was employed, it was written in the Bi-laws, that on the day of Elections for a Board of Governors, that no alcohol sales would be allowed within the Club within a couple of hours prior to, and during the meeting. I guess they probably made that rule after someone got wasted and made an @ss of himself during a meeting. Surely, it had nothing to do with buying votes via drinks (or did it?).

#2 would seem to favor incumbents or people with name recognition over those known more locally or regionally.

.

I can understand #4, there is a history of giving people alcohol to vote for your candidate in the US too.

Indiana, South Carolina, and Utah all have laws about liquor sales on Election day and so does Puerto Rico.

I like 1 and 2. I could not support number three and as for number four, say it ain't so! How can one vote when sober? lol

#2 would seem to favor incumbents or people with name recognition over those known more locally or regionally.

.

You are correct. Their office becomes a long election campaign, just as it is currently. Look at the current candidates in the two big parties in the US. How much work, outside of poliTRICKin', do you think they have done in the last year? I'll tell you, ZERO, and each is a Senator. I say, serve your time and move on. A life of politics often leads to corruption, and destroys our gov't from the inside out.

#2 would seem to favor incumbents or people with name recognition over those known more locally or regionally.

.

I think it helps that their entire country's population is the same as NY and Chicago combined.

#1 is the only one that I would be in favor of - level the playing field.

#2 - I don't think you can truly know a candidate in 6 weeks - besides that I am a glutton for punishment - I actually like the political season.

#3 - Scary - See Smiling Joe post above

#4 - People that want to go to the polls drunk will do so anyway.

Hmmm.....#4 is the only one I like.


On a more serious note, most of these changes would require us to give up more of our freedom. Voting is a duty and a responsibility, not a job.

How is requiring people to spend more time DOING their job than CAMPAIGNING for it restricting our freedoms?

Requiring people to vote is a bad idea, but I think the current amount of time and $ spent needs to be reined in so #1 and #2 are good ideas.

How is requiring people to spend more time DOING their job than CAMPAIGNING for it restricting our freedoms?

Requiring people to vote is a bad idea, but I think the current amount of time and $ spent needs to be reined in so #1 and #2 are good ideas.

If you require someone to do something then where is their freedom of choice to not do it?

You can't seriously be saying that I am restricting/infringing upon people's freedoms because I want them to ACTUALLY BE PERFORMING THE JOB THEY ARE GETTING PAID FOR?

A politician can always resign if their basic job requirements become too onerous of a burden. :roll:

You can't seriously be saying that I am restricting/infringing upon people's freedoms because I want them to ACTUALLY BE PERFORMING THE JOB THEY ARE GETTING PAID FOR?

A politician can always resign if their basic job requirements become too onerous of a burden. :roll:

Or you could CHOOSE not to vote for them.

Hmmm.....#4 is the only one I like.


On a more serious note, most of these changes would require us to give up more of our freedom. Voting is a duty and a responsibility, not a job.

this is what I was thinking.

I do hate seeing so much money go into these campaigns - seems like such a massive waste - so there should be limits of some kind it seems.

otherwise, I think the process needs to be seriously long and drawn out. it is a very serious matter for issues and requires discussion and debate at length.

some say the democrats are doing the wrong thing by going at it like they are. I feel its extremely important that they do exactly what they are doing. important dialog is taking place, the people are participating, tuning in, learning, and the more they know the more prepared they are to make choices.

our system is far from perfect though. and probably needs some serious change. simplification sounds great. but probably can't simply to the degree scooter outlined in her observation of S. America. that process seems very limiting, but I'm sure it involves more than we know.

I think we need longer than 6 weeks, but the length of this year's election is ridonkulous and unnecessary.

1-2 months of campaigning prior to primaries and 4-5 months between primaries and election would give us plenty of time to hear opinions, check records, and dig up dirt/skeletons.

scooter - I am sick of all the primaries too. but I feel strongly that we are in such a critical period that much discussion needs to happen and that is exactly what is happening, even though so much of it is posing and strategic bullsheeit in front of the camera. those candidates are having to look deeper into the issues and pull out some real answers to convince us they know what the heck they are doing.

my advice to you is to ignore it for a while. don't turn on CNN or read the paper. listen to a few reports now and then on NPR. barely keep up with it and don't worry about it right now. unless you want to be more involved for your own reasons. we want to remain informed, yes. but you can do this without the overload. it is enough already, I agree. (imagine how clinton and obama feel). I do hold out hope that the campaign discusssions will help us to be better prepared for the major work awaiting the new president. may it be someone who can truly lead.

You can't seriously be saying that I am restricting/infringing upon people's freedoms because I want them to ACTUALLY BE PERFORMING THE JOB THEY ARE GETTING PAID FOR?

A politician can always resign if their basic job requirements become too onerous of a burden. :roll:

A agree. What other job in America can will your employer allow you to not work, yet get paid, all while searching for another job? Only in Gov't.

some say the democrats are doing the wrong thing by going at it like they are. I feel its extremely important that they do exactly what they are doing. important dialog is taking place, the people are participating, tuning in, learning, and the more they know the more prepared they are to make choices.

Are Hillary and Barack really going at the differences in their policies? All I hear is the talk about which one is the better bowler.

Are Hillary and Barack really going at the differences in their policies? All I hear is the talk about which one is the better bowler.

mainly there is a world of difference in approach to leadership, as well as philosophy and intention of working across party lines to really make a difference in our country. Senator Obama has shown time and again that he can rise above the ugliness in the campaign. While Hillary is very much speaking from her party platform, I feel Obama uses his party platform for discussion of policy also but not shoving it down throats because a President must be able to think outside that platform to find real solutions.

Are Hillary and Barack really going at the differences in their policies? All I hear is the talk about which one is the better bowler.

Obama has been talking policy again more but the media hasn't been covering that much. You know - we all want to know about bowling soundbites - we don't want to hear reports on policy for goodness sakes!

.