quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic ABT, however, I'm a little shocked that you think that your vote doesn't really matter anyway. Why would you vote then? (and I know you voted for Bush, so don't tell me that you don't)

yes i voted for bush ...and you know it!

two things:
1) your votes technically don't count towards the election process.... your votes get added up by your district's electoral college and your electoral college representative decides on HIS vote (that counts) based on who was voted for in his district AND by what his personal decisions are. Now, this may sound kind of biased and faulty, but it works well and has served us well. (contrary to popular belief that they just add up all the cards and send the totals to washington.... they add up all the electoral college votes and send them in.) The issue they had with the voting problem in florida was a scandal under a few of the electoral colleges and they re-counted the publics votes, but when all was said and done, the votes that were affected by the mixup were only counting for 2 or 3 electoral college votes, which is why the outcome of the election wasn't affected.

2) the little help your vote does add to help the count for your electoral college doesn't really matter in this sense (i meant): Most politicians only differ on minute issues.... most of the general politics is the same (lower taxes, more education, blah blah blah).... and EVEN on the different issues, you have the system of checks and balances - 3 different powers.... the different branches are there to keep each other in check... and 9 times out of 10 the different branches are NOT controlled by the same party. Soooooo, say you have a really radical president (that you voted into place), and he tries to pass a bill (say "outlaw all guns"), that bill will never make it past congress.... vetoed right away. Say this same president did the same thing, but you hated him and you didn't vote for him.... still no worries.

So what i'm saying is, that your vote technically won't make that much of a difference b/c most of the policies that separate the beliefs of the two presidents are so miniscule OR so radical, they won't ever affect you.

And i can think of a million examples. The last time a dramatic law was passed that was against everyone's will was prohibition in the 30's... that was 80 years ago and failed miserably.... the US government hasn't had anything similar since.

Hope you got all that, sometimes i'm not the best at explaining....

-ABT-

___________________
Peace.

I'm not American but a little lesson in the different type of Democracy...(a small sample, but I would suggest reading it all)

quote:

Representative Democracy in the United States The Unites States of America is a Federal Republic. Federal and state government choose officials based on the popular vote. This is commonly referred to as "representative democracy", and assumes voters choose candidates who represent their views. Voters can remove an elected official when their term is up by voting for someone else. Traditionally, candidates campaign by arguing the merits of their personal views on issues, and committing themselves to specific policies (if elected). Voters are expected to choose the candidate who's policies are closest to their own views (or at least the candidate who's views are the least offensive). After an election, the power vested by citizens in a public office is taken from those citizens and put in the hands of the winning candidate, who is free to govern based solely on self-interest (if they choose). The electorate does not expect them to govern according to the views of the individuals they serve, and who's office they occupy.

Source

I believe the Internet will eventually change the way we handle government since most opinion polls and votes are taken from a percentage of the people (sometimes less than half come election time).
With the Internet (once they perfect it) a very large sample can be collected and be a more accurate representation of the people, a Direct democracy as apposed to the Representative democracy of today.

Here are some definitions of democratic governments:

quote:

Democracy: "Rule by the many", especially majority rule. Used to refer to group decision-making by voting, with members getting one vote each. As a form of government, democracy can be applied several ways. Direct democracy: Group decision-making by direct vote. Easier with small groups who are in one place and all familiar with the issue being voted on. It can become more complex as a group gets larger, is more spread out, and requires information on the issue. Representative democracy Government by the majority vote of elected representatives who act as proxies, representing the will of their constituents. Designed to free the public from the responsibilities of the daily business of government without stripping them of political power. Democratic Dictatorship: A election by majority vote of a single ruler with absolute power, unconstrained by checks or balances. Democratic Oligarchy: The election by majority vote of a small group who holds power.

We really have to be specific when we mention "Democracy"...but I will say this, Democracy is not free and does come with a cost. Mostly at the cost of human lives defending what we so take for granted...

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

interesting question. I like democracy because its the best form of government you can get @ the moment, but its nowhere near as perfect as some people think. first of all in how many countrie do you can actually vote directly for decisions. As i recall Switzerland was the ONLY country who needed the "Yes" from the people to actually entry the UNO!!! But here we can also just decide in some questions not every political movement our government made. Add to that the public opinion can be "formed" and lead to one direction very well by installing a media campaign. the common man (or woman) does not take the time to inform himself the best possible way. He listen to a politician or read a nwespaper and thinks "oh this statement seems logical so it must be right" and doesnt look for other sources. Look what happened these days in the USA with that day for remember or that TV serie of CIA-activities, etc. And its not just happend in the USA it happen everywhere. As long as you have a lobby (the economie for example) behind your interest its easy to win even its "not right".

In conclusion: democracy is WAAAAYYYY overrated, but we have to find first a better state-form to replace it.

Oh and democracy function @best when it reigns only over a small region. Thats the reason Im not very sold of those multinational-buildups like the EU, where you (as the citizen) has absolutely no possibility to make decisions, you just have to thrust the politicians and thats a huge risk.

Give not to much power to a man!! That's not a socialist comment its just plain right as it lays in human nature to abuse the power!

___________________
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness - only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate - only love can do that... The chain reaction of evil--hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars--must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

quote:

Originally posted by cweb Give not to much power to a man!! That's not a socialist comment its just plain right as it lays in human nature to abuse the power!

Exactly...you just explained one of the issues with a Representative Democracy!

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

actually, a representative democracy would be better than a pure or direct democracy... IMO....

think about it... there are a LOT of fucking idiots walking around out there that shouldn't be allowed to breed much less breathe.... much less VOTE! I don't want the guy who can't tie his shoe having an "equal say" as me on the important issues....

thats how the representative democracy comes into its advantage....

....and there are a LOT of idiots out there....

-ABT-

___________________
Peace.

True...but how do you determine who is fit to vote and who isn't?

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

maybe have something like IQ cards instead of ID cards...]

forget 18 to smoke, 18 to vote, 21 to drink BS.....
everyone takes an IQ test when they're 16 (and again later at 18 & 21 if they wish), and they get an IQ card..... this allows them certain privileges and denies them others. (i.e. being allowed to purchase a gun, allowed to vote, allowed to drink, etc...)

man sometimes i'm good.

-ABT-

___________________
Peace.

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline maybe have something like IQ cards instead of ID cards...] forget 18 to smoke, 18 to vote, 21 to drink BS..... everyone takes an IQ test when they're 16 (and again later at 18 & 21 if they wish), and they get an IQ card..... this allows them certain privileges and denies them others. (i.e. being allowed to purchase a gun, allowed to vote, allowed to drink, etc...) man sometimes i'm good. -ABT-

sounds good, but what about those friggin geniuses that cant hold their booze? one of these MIT mfers tops himself from alcohol poisoning, then what? plus who is to say that a certain IQ is necessary or reqd for certain things. i know 'smart' people that cant drive worth shit, and duumbasses that are practically prodigies...bounce/

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

ok....

how about :
"smart guys have shaved heads"

and

"stupid guys have short/long hair" ??????

LOL!!!! bwaaahahahahahahah!!!!

SHAVED HEAD RULES!

-ABT-

___________________
Peace.

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline actually, a representative democracy would be better than a pure or direct democracy... IMO.... think about it... there are a LOT of fucking idiots walking around out there that shouldn't be allowed to breed much less breathe.... much less VOTE! I don't want the guy who can't tie his shoe having an "equal say" as me on the important issues.... thats how the representative democracy comes into its advantage.... ....and there are a LOT of idiots out there.... -ABT-

I disagree! of course you made some valid points. but what about the idiot elected as president? when you do not have a direct democracy he can almost do what he will. On the other side ther may be plenty of idiots in the "folk" but there also plenty of studied people, etc. who know whats going one. I think its way better to have a slow progress because you need the "yes" from the folk than blindly thrust a president and see what happen in 4 years.

___________________
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness - only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate - only love can do that... The chain reaction of evil--hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars--must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline maybe have something like IQ cards instead of ID cards...] forget 18 to smoke, 18 to vote, 21 to drink BS..... everyone takes an IQ test when they're 16 (and again later at 18 & 21 if they wish), and they get an IQ card..... this allows them certain privileges and denies them others. (i.e. being allowed to purchase a gun, allowed to vote, allowed to drink, etc...) man sometimes i'm good. -ABT-

I favour this idea! Maybe it could be refined, so that you got a questionaire like:

1: Do party X prefer nuclear power, windmills or fossile fuels?
2: Are you allowed to...
3: ...

Then you got as many votes as correctly guessed answers. Maybe I wouldn't be allowed many votes, but at least those who did would be people actually knowing and caring about what matters...

Or maybe we should pursue pure technocracy instead - at least that would prevent charming fools from gaining more power than they can handle

quote:

Originally posted by cweb I disagree! of course you made some valid points. but what about the idiot elected as president? when you do not have a direct democracy he can almost do what he will. On the other side ther may be plenty of idiots in the "folk" but there also plenty of studied people, etc. who know whats going one. I think its way better to have a slow progress because you need the "yes" from the folk than blindly thrust a president and see what happen in 4 years.

i disagree

anyone who is elected president is NOT an idiot... just b/c you may not agree with what he says/does doesn't mean he's an idiot! presidents are typically VERY smart, and here's why: you don't have to be a bookworm, you just have to REALLY be good at telling people what they want to hear, you have to be good at massaging the public. If you can do that and win popularity contests, you are by definition, a genius.

OK, so maybe presidents' aren't geniuses... but they sure as hell aren't idiots... and remember, we have 3 branches... even if we had an idiot president he wouldn't be able to get stupid shit passed....



-ABT-

___________________
Peace.