Tuesday, October 28, 2014
What do You Think About This?
It has been proposed that our election laws be changed to allow a voter to vote either for or against a candidate. The way it would work is, the negative votes would be subtracted from the positive votes to determine the final count. It may not make much difference for party line voters since the Democrats would vote negative for all Republicans and the Republicans would do the same for Democrats. But, what about third party candidates? A well qualified independent might have a real chance against two main stream candidates who were found equally repugnant by the electorate, kind of like the Florida Governor's race this year. Some states have a "none of the above" option, but none go this far. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I’ve thought a lot about proportional representation but not sure just how it would play out under our system but first past the post as it is called here in the UK produces the same political tit for tat. One thing that I think should disappear is party designations as part of a person’s identification. If people didn’t have a ‘D’ or ‘R’ to aim at on a ballot perhaps people would actually study the candidates more.... but then again a certain political party would somehow want to fold that into a violation of the Civil Rights act of 1964.
ReplyDeleteThe negative vote is interesting perhaps allowing for three or more candidates to appear on the ballot... again with no party designation. Given the awareness of most of the electorate people might take their own candidate out.... hum... another violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The thing that I find interesting here in the UK is the ease with which a party can appear on the ballot. I would think that it makes the ballot that much more challenging and voter awareness much more important. It managed to split the two major parties last election where the conservatives, in order to have a strong presence in parliament, entered into a coalition with a lesser party. While the conservatives still held the Prime Minister slot, they and the liberal democrats actually had to sit down and work with each other to push an agenda against the labour positions.
To bad we can't use the Sherman Act against political parties.....
Excellent points, thank you. I really like your suggestion that party designations not appear on the ballot.
DeleteTS, this is a nice and of course completely unbiased and objective assertion that Democrats will protest anything fair via the Civil Rights Act. Here's your cookie, good boy.
DeleteAside from that ridiculous nonsense, it is indeed high time we get past the lock that our two party system holds. A lesson both parties have learned in this country is that when voter turnout is strong, conservatives do not do well. We've seen legislation to make it tougher to vote. Another lesson learned is that money spent makes a difference. The result of that is that we have a supreme court decision that stipulated that free speech demands we allow unlimited spending in our campaigns. We are literally spending BILLIONS of dollars to elect our legislators. Think about that. For a job that pays less than 500k, we are spending billions of dollars. I do not give money to ANY group that will use that money to influence a race in a state I don't live in and moreover, I detest the practice that allows both parties to do so.
You make good points TS despite the fact you have no sense of objectivity.
I could have said it the way I did because anyone who wants voter ID is only looking to repress democrat leaning blacks at the polls. I could have said it because any mention of states rights draws the label of bigot even though we see time and time again that the one size fits all approach of Washington creates more problems than it solves. I could have said it because any mention of the inconsistencies of the Civil Rights Act garners a racist accusation. I could have said it because rather than creating situations where voters actually understand why they vote draws objection from democrats ... and some republicans... who prefer their cannon fodder to be dumb as a box of rocks.... but alas... I only said it cause sometimes I just like to go throw out a hook and see what I catch.... just fishing...
DeleteOf course there is a lot of money involved in getting anyone elected... of course the money is obscene but the Supreme Court only made the playing field level. Level in that all money is now welcome and not just money that unions force people to pay when they don't even want to be part of the union because unions got democrats to pass laws. When you get private business out of Washington decision making, you will automatically take the money and the lobbyists and the cronies out of Washington and when you get the money out of Washington, perhaps you get people who once again run for civic duty. You can't see that concept because you believe that Washington is business, that Washington is the job creator... that were it not for Washington’s direction business would disappear... I beg to differ because my objectivity is just fine.
Taking Washington out of business is a lot like taking the 'D' and 'R' off of the ballot. The minute you make the election about personal recognition and what the individual stands for the money for, attack ads dries up immediately... you just don't want to spend a dime giving name recognition to the opponent.
Yesterday here, our Mainstream Media, the Government owned but totally independent Australian Broadcasting Commission; proclaimed that for the mid term elections President Obama is so much on the nose that Democratic candidates are avoiding mentioning his name. In North Carolina, Kay Hagen was highlighted as being behind in the polls and also avoiding connection with Obama. Now our ABC is always a left leaning outfit, even though they deny being so. Can readers here please supply a short opinion of both the national trend and the N.C situation? There does appear to be something of a chance for the Repubs to regain control of both houses; if so, I wonder what that says to the voters who received only two years of a four year term of office. I presume O will be somewhat neutered if both houses go Republican
DeleteCheers from Aussie
‘Democrats’ all over the country are catching on. Blacks can especially see the contradiction in electing a black president who is working to uplift blacks from the tyranny of such an oppressive society while importing thousands of workers who will compete directly with blacks and the youth for already scarce jobs. People are starting to see they convoluted reasoning that forces business to raise the minimum wage while flooding the market with cheap labor. And those who stretch that reasoning just a little farther can see the feds policy in tandem with the White House that deliberately holds asset prices like housing artificially high while flooding the market with low paid workers and prattling on about income inequality. People who voted for this president and his cronies are making noise about such stupidity and the cronies are listening. Democrats, whose sole purpose of existence is to be elected, those that supported, in lockstep, this presidents policies are now throwing Obama under the bus.... but anyone paying attention... and blacks in particular are paying attention can see the hypocrisy of their actions. Mid terms may favour the party that is out of power but I think we are fixing to see a shift in the way a whole lot of ‘democrats’ vote in the future and the words “throw the whore out the door” may well shift more than a few female votes forever.
DeleteThis short video typifies a new black reality and why democrats are venerable this election. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUSRZo1BE5o
KING here in NC (yes it is my home state) Money spent on the election between Kay Hagan our current junior senator and Thom Tillis our current speaker of the state legislature is absolutely obscene. It will go down in history as the most expensive senate race in the history of the United States. Kay Hagan has been especially targeted because she is said to be the deciding vote on Obamacare. Outside groups led by Carl Rove (crossroads GPS) and the Koch Brothers ( Americans for Prosperity although the claim falsely that they have no connection) have spent 12.5 million on this race alone. The Koch's are very much against Obamacare.
DeleteTo date 30000 TV ads have been run for Kay Hagan statewide and she has taken in 34.85 million 27 million of that from the Democratic senatorial committee and Senate Majority PAC.
Thom Tillis has taken in 40 million run 27052 T V ads and only 10 Million of his take is from the National Republican Senate committee.
Needless to say we have been absolutely inundated with ads for these two along with all the local and congressional races. Kay Hagan and Thom Tillis are running neck and neck in the polls Tillis at 48% Hagan at 47, and Sean Haugh the libertarian candidate at about 4%. That leaves 1% undecided. In early voting I saw numbers last week showing absentee ballots are running about 38,000 voters with 27,000 going to Tillis. In person early voting is being dominated by democrats with about 300,000 already voting as of Oct 27. That's 2.5 times as many early voters as the last mid term in 2010. Of those voters 148000 are dems 88,000 repubs, 59000 independent and 700 libertarians. Heavy early voting traditionally favors democrats as we are the lazy party, correct William and TS. I have had two people come to my home already trying to get out the early vote of course both represented Kay Hagan. I did William go yesterday and proudly cast my vote for Kay Hagan for NC senate and Democrat John Barfield for NC district 6 congressman. Because of gerrymandering I no longer get to vote against that despicable Renee Ellmers. This brings me great sadness.
So King that's how it's going in NC despite what any other poster here might tell you. I am in the midst of it, they aren't. we will see if money buys this one or not.
No, the Democratic power structure is very energetic... the fortunes of the wealthiest and most powerful democrats are dependent on every vote and they will go to extraordinary lengths to get them...
Deletehttp://nypost.com/2014/10/30/democrats-threaten-voters-to-get-to-the-polls/
TS and Rick
DeleteThanks for the input. I have also received a personal message from Louman so am pretty much up to speed. I tell you something, American History is a pleasure to study.Amerian Politics is a buggar to understand!
What is frightening for a stranger is the amount of cash needed in order to even get on the ticket. The ability to raise cash appears to be more important than belief or policy ideas. An interesting comparison is James A Garfield your twentieth President. Born dirt poor but with a mind full of enquiry and a soul full of passion and benevolence. A man assassinated in the course of his presidency and now forgotten by all except amateur historians such as me a foreigner.
Would the current crop of hopefuls reach such heights in the same circumstances? The Kennedy’s and the Bush dynasty born to rule and the people, having long ago severed ties with the silver spoon brigade, go along for the ride and then bemoan the fate which befalls them.
My friends, I am sure you will get the Hill you deserve; in a democracy the people seldom get it wrong and I for one will continue to observe and, if permitted, get under your skin on occasions.
Cheers from Aussie
A time honored trick of the Democrats is to vote early, and often. This of course is easier to do in the geographic locals of cities for the distances required to travel are much shorter, and the teeming metropolitan streets offer anonymity.
DeleteThe money game in NC is being driven by the G O P ' s attempt to limit the Southern infection that has already turned much of Virginia into a DC suburb. The formerly renown NC collegiate atmosphere has attracted enough Northerners and their relocation is having a predictable outcome in and around the major NC cities. Of course the standard measure of race baiting, especially demonstrated by Ms. Landrieu of Louisiana this past week, properly stirs up the large populations of low information voters.
This is how the socialists always do it. Nothing new here. Promises, and in recent cases threats, to the less fortunate and ill educated always work.
A similar situation plays out in Georgia with its heavy black population surrounding Atlanta. This is what community organizers were trained to do and do best. Unfortunately once these organizers (read Unions) are actually elected we see the paltry results as they have not clue one as how to govern.
Enjoy the last two days observing the DEM's throwing Obama under the bus on the one hand, while relying on his organizational machine to produce hard results for them on the other.
I will be voting traditionally on the first Tuesday of November. I have a choice between Mr. Bell who's main issue is reinstating the gold standard, and Mr. Booker who I formerly supported locally until he was shown to be an utter failure as Newark mayor and a renown Obama toady. Our faux presidential candidate Mr. Christie was nice enough to endorse his party mate Mr. Bell last week, at the last minute. He has been busy with medical issues, one Ebola case, and yelling at citizens over the horrid pace of recovery efforts from Superstorm Sandy.
Such are the choices in life for a Tea Party supporter as we experience our sixth year of existence.
You William are so ill informed. We vote early and once. The northern infection of the south has been nothing but good to the area. I got into this argument with a local conservative not long ago. I told him to name for me one substantial business in NC. that had not been brought here from the north or west. his answer NASCAR. And you call us uniformed, sheesh.
DeleteBy the way... where might I get that idea????
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/20/justice-dept-blocks-ncs-nonpartisan-vote/
I think you meant vulnerable, I cant think of any politician that I would consider venerable.
ReplyDeleteVenerable Definition
ReplyDeletedictionary.search.yahoo.com
adj. adjective
1.Commanding respect by virtue of age, dignity, character, or position.
2.Worthy of reverence, especially by religious or historical association.
3.Used as a title for a person who has reached the first stage of canonization
Ouch... I guess my spell checking of the spell checker was lacking. My Texas drawl got in the way vauner / vulner .... my silent 'L' was my undoing. Thanks for the catch.. :-)
DeleteTo be clear... Democrats are vulnerable this mid term
Yes they are.
Delete