As wonderful as the Alabama win was to the state legislature the abysmal turnout (14% or so) exemplifies the erosion of the three pillars you mention George. Educated, informed and engaged…I have never understood nor accepted the choice people make to not exercise the hard earned right to vote.
As wonderful as the Alabama win was to the state legislature the abysmal turnout (14% or so) exemplifies the erosion of the three pillars you mention George. Educated, informed and engaged…I have never understood nor accepted the choice people make to not exercise the hard earned right to vote.
In Australia, voting is mandatory. The fine is small ($20) - but it sends a symbolic and clear message. "This is your country and your democracy. It's your responsibility to participate."
According to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), 16.4 million people were enrolled to vote in the 2019 federal election. Of these, 92% voted.
Australia has one of the highest voter turnouts in the world. Since voting became compulsory in 1924, over 90 percent of those registered have voted in every federal election. Compulsory voting means every eligible Australian citizen (18 years or older) is required by law to enroll and vote. For more information about elections, visit the Australian Electoral Commission website.
Bill, do you have any information as to how knowledgeable Australian voters are? I can see uninformed voters choosing virtually anybody simply to fulfill their obligation and avoid a fine. If it results in a better civically-informed roster, then I'm all for it.
I'm not sure how well that system would work here, though -- I'm much more in favor of getting rid of outside money in politics, at least on the federal level, and having publicly-funded campaigns. Each party would be financed via a quasi-public group.
Bill, I just read an article in the Concord {NH} Monitor about Gov Sununu's speech that he just gave. In it:
"The country’s current political system, with PAC donations driving multi-million dollar campaigns, is what deterred him from running for Senate in 2022, when Republican leaders hoped he would challenge current U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan.
" “They’re pushing to get me elected based on something I might not even believe and that’s screwed up, right?” he said. “The fact that someone can write a $250,000 check to a PAC and no one ever sees it or knows where it comes from, that’s bogus.” " (per Concord Monitor)
Yet he apparently offered no solution.
And I'm no Sununu supporter, by a long shot, but his words are true here. Unfortunately, he also pledged to vote for Voldemort, because he'll put Repub administrators in place, which he said would be better than "President Harris". He speculated that Biden won't last 5 more years (but failed to opine on whether Voldemort will preside from prison.)
I would say that a degree from even a prestigious school like Harvard does not insure thoughtfulness or critical thinking. Book learning does not equate wisdom either. Human beings can fall prey to greed, lust for power, etc. no matter how educated they are.
Bill, I’m for ranked choice open primaries. I’m also for proportional awarding of electoral college votes. That would help to get rid of the idea of “swing states”. If every state awarded electoral college votes by percentage of votes, then every state would contribute to each candidate. Those voters in mostly blue or red states who currently think that, being in the small minority , their presidential votes don’t matter since the state “always goes in the red/blue column”, might come out and vote.
"proportional awarding of electoral college votes" Yes! Sounds like real democracy! Sounds like people's votes in a National Election having VALUE. Having a half dozen states determine the election undermines voter turnout everywhere.
All States, except for Maine and Nebraska, have a winner-take-all policy where the State looks only at the overall winner of the state-wide popular vote. Maine and Nebraska, however, appoint individual electors based on the winner of the popular vote within each Congressional district and then 2 "at-large" electors based on the winner of the overall state-wide popular vote.
While it is rare for Maine or Nebraska to have a split vote, each has done so twice: Nebraska in 2008, Maine in 2016, and both Maine and Nebraska in 2020.
I have a question about ranked choice voting -- RCV-- (which has made me queasy for some time), and forgive my being ill-informed and possibly paranoid: How does RCV work in the case of hand recounts? It's easy enough (though laborious) to recount single votes, but having to tabulate 2nd or more choices adds complexity.
My paranoia comes from my deep distrust of electronic systems which can be hacked (look at how voting machines were stolen in AZ and I believe GA in 2020 by those pretending to be concerned with vote-rigging.) Hand recounts in both states proved the election wasn't stolen; would RCV complicate or muddy the data?
Doug, the recount would be more extensive since it would be multilayered, with the loser’s votes being reallocated to their 2nd choice candidate. Perhaps, to make things easier, there could be multiple stacks for A’s votes depending on the choices: Ab, Ac, Ad, etc. then Ba, Bc, Bd…
I think that ranked choice would result in less-partisan candidates and, eventually, in fewer recounts due to partisanship “If I lost, it must be because the vote was rigged!” As I recall, 50 years ago, recounts were rare; now they’re a standard part of election denialism.
True, Mary, but such recounts also serve to prove election integrity. Georgia was forced to count votes THREE TIMES, and each recount showed Biden won.
As to mail-in voting, making ballot access easier and auto-registration, I still don't get why Repubs are so against those ideas. Maybe it's because their policies are anathema to young voters especially, and the American public generally. Their calculus has been "if we can't persuade them with our ideas, we'll make it harder for them to vote for candidates we oppose (starting with gerrymandering and work outward), and we'll put in place judges who are sympathetic to our policies."
Such howls are being made now about anything Dems do. But public funding of campaigns wouldn't include endorsement of party, platform or candidate -- it would only provide the funding to get the message out.
Until Citizens United is overturned, it will never happen in the U.S., and probably not even then.
Overturning Citizens United..., yeah. We didn't even flinch when that one got greased in. Such disgusting use of noble sounding words..i.e., "citizens united"...., "heritage" foundation...., "make America great (again, yet)..., "right to life"..., huh? And on and on. Like a cleverly baited hook. ha.., "CLEVER" .., such an inocuous, yet insidious word describes the way we've been reamed.
Glenis, I totally agree with your mom! For years I have wondered why we seem to be in a perennial “election season”. No wonder it’s so expensive, and exhausting too….perhaps that’s one reason folks tune out….like all those “Medicare” Advantage ads on TV/mailers….snore….
A good point Christine. I think much of it is a happy (for the GOP) by-product of toxic, negative political campaigns. Many folks working paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by think the system is so corrupt and poisoned -they don't want to be involved. It is self-disenfranchisement.
As wonderful as the Alabama win was to the state legislature the abysmal turnout (14% or so) exemplifies the erosion of the three pillars you mention George. Educated, informed and engaged…I have never understood nor accepted the choice people make to not exercise the hard earned right to vote.
Me too.
In Australia, voting is mandatory. The fine is small ($20) - but it sends a symbolic and clear message. "This is your country and your democracy. It's your responsibility to participate."
According to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), 16.4 million people were enrolled to vote in the 2019 federal election. Of these, 92% voted.
Australia has one of the highest voter turnouts in the world. Since voting became compulsory in 1924, over 90 percent of those registered have voted in every federal election. Compulsory voting means every eligible Australian citizen (18 years or older) is required by law to enroll and vote. For more information about elections, visit the Australian Electoral Commission website.
https://www.aec.gov.au/
Bill, do you have any information as to how knowledgeable Australian voters are? I can see uninformed voters choosing virtually anybody simply to fulfill their obligation and avoid a fine. If it results in a better civically-informed roster, then I'm all for it.
I'm not sure how well that system would work here, though -- I'm much more in favor of getting rid of outside money in politics, at least on the federal level, and having publicly-funded campaigns. Each party would be financed via a quasi-public group.
Getting rid of big outside money in elections would be Paramount, IMO.
As to voters bring uneducated, not sure how that should be defined. After all, we Harvard educated people supporting antivax ideas and Project 2025!
I would register people to vote automatically at age 18. Then at least make it safe and easy to vote. Mail in voting should SOP.
And ranked choice voting would pull in disaffected voters as well as preventing needless third party destruction.
Bill, I just read an article in the Concord {NH} Monitor about Gov Sununu's speech that he just gave. In it:
"The country’s current political system, with PAC donations driving multi-million dollar campaigns, is what deterred him from running for Senate in 2022, when Republican leaders hoped he would challenge current U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan.
" “They’re pushing to get me elected based on something I might not even believe and that’s screwed up, right?” he said. “The fact that someone can write a $250,000 check to a PAC and no one ever sees it or knows where it comes from, that’s bogus.” " (per Concord Monitor)
Yet he apparently offered no solution.
And I'm no Sununu supporter, by a long shot, but his words are true here. Unfortunately, he also pledged to vote for Voldemort, because he'll put Repub administrators in place, which he said would be better than "President Harris". He speculated that Biden won't last 5 more years (but failed to opine on whether Voldemort will preside from prison.)
I would say that a degree from even a prestigious school like Harvard does not insure thoughtfulness or critical thinking. Book learning does not equate wisdom either. Human beings can fall prey to greed, lust for power, etc. no matter how educated they are.
Bill, I’m for ranked choice open primaries. I’m also for proportional awarding of electoral college votes. That would help to get rid of the idea of “swing states”. If every state awarded electoral college votes by percentage of votes, then every state would contribute to each candidate. Those voters in mostly blue or red states who currently think that, being in the small minority , their presidential votes don’t matter since the state “always goes in the red/blue column”, might come out and vote.
"proportional awarding of electoral college votes" Yes! Sounds like real democracy! Sounds like people's votes in a National Election having VALUE. Having a half dozen states determine the election undermines voter turnout everywhere.
Best idea of the day, Mary.
Found this harsh reality at: https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/allocation
Allocation within each State
All States, except for Maine and Nebraska, have a winner-take-all policy where the State looks only at the overall winner of the state-wide popular vote. Maine and Nebraska, however, appoint individual electors based on the winner of the popular vote within each Congressional district and then 2 "at-large" electors based on the winner of the overall state-wide popular vote.
While it is rare for Maine or Nebraska to have a split vote, each has done so twice: Nebraska in 2008, Maine in 2016, and both Maine and Nebraska in 2020.
I have a question about ranked choice voting -- RCV-- (which has made me queasy for some time), and forgive my being ill-informed and possibly paranoid: How does RCV work in the case of hand recounts? It's easy enough (though laborious) to recount single votes, but having to tabulate 2nd or more choices adds complexity.
My paranoia comes from my deep distrust of electronic systems which can be hacked (look at how voting machines were stolen in AZ and I believe GA in 2020 by those pretending to be concerned with vote-rigging.) Hand recounts in both states proved the election wasn't stolen; would RCV complicate or muddy the data?
Doug, the recount would be more extensive since it would be multilayered, with the loser’s votes being reallocated to their 2nd choice candidate. Perhaps, to make things easier, there could be multiple stacks for A’s votes depending on the choices: Ab, Ac, Ad, etc. then Ba, Bc, Bd…
I think that ranked choice would result in less-partisan candidates and, eventually, in fewer recounts due to partisanship “If I lost, it must be because the vote was rigged!” As I recall, 50 years ago, recounts were rare; now they’re a standard part of election denialism.
True, Mary, but such recounts also serve to prove election integrity. Georgia was forced to count votes THREE TIMES, and each recount showed Biden won.
Doug, the first recount showed integrity. I believe that the second and third were for partisan (“I can’t believe I lost—it must be rigged”) reasons.
No
Kathy, I'm trying to understand who or what you're saying no to. Can you please clarify?
would RCV complicate or muddy the data?
All excellent points, Bill.
As to mail-in voting, making ballot access easier and auto-registration, I still don't get why Repubs are so against those ideas. Maybe it's because their policies are anathema to young voters especially, and the American public generally. Their calculus has been "if we can't persuade them with our ideas, we'll make it harder for them to vote for candidates we oppose (starting with gerrymandering and work outward), and we'll put in place judges who are sympathetic to our policies."
Doug, once again, 45 has spoken the quiet part out loud: “if we make it easier to vote, Republicans will never be elected again.
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/trump-republican-party-voting-reform-coronavirus
True enough, Mary. And he speaks for most Repubs in this case.
Doug, true—imagine having an agenda so unpopular that you only want those who support the agenda to vote.
Brace yourself for the great howl about socialism.
Such howls are being made now about anything Dems do. But public funding of campaigns wouldn't include endorsement of party, platform or candidate -- it would only provide the funding to get the message out.
Until Citizens United is overturned, it will never happen in the U.S., and probably not even then.
Overturning Citizens United..., yeah. We didn't even flinch when that one got greased in. Such disgusting use of noble sounding words..i.e., "citizens united"...., "heritage" foundation...., "make America great (again, yet)..., "right to life"..., huh? And on and on. Like a cleverly baited hook. ha.., "CLEVER" .., such an inocuous, yet insidious word describes the way we've been reamed.
Yup. Like "Americans for Prosperity". It's almost morbidly humorous to see political ads being sponsored by anodyne-sounding PACs
Hello George Orwell.
My mum (aWWII war bride) often spoke of this. She also talked about how much SHORTER their elections were. Ours are ridiculously long !
Glenis, I totally agree with your mom! For years I have wondered why we seem to be in a perennial “election season”. No wonder it’s so expensive, and exhausting too….perhaps that’s one reason folks tune out….like all those “Medicare” Advantage ads on TV/mailers….snore….
A good point Christine. I think much of it is a happy (for the GOP) by-product of toxic, negative political campaigns. Many folks working paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by think the system is so corrupt and poisoned -they don't want to be involved. It is self-disenfranchisement.