Advan046 said:
In reply to Adrian_Thompson :
I actually think we could get to a single government model. At a minimum the effort and activities required to try to get there would be beneficial.
What would be necessary to make you feel comfortable that corruption was combatted enough to be ok with a single government? Should we try to do those things now regardless if it led to a single government or not?
I wish I had an answer for you but I don't. I feel we talk one step forward then two steps back on political money. We got Frank Dodd after the 08 melt down then special interest has spent the interveining time dismanteling it as fast as they can.
I know it would get howls of protest from some quarters, but how about have a 100% voting law like Australia. You can vote 'Non of the above', but you have to vote once you turn 18. but but but at 18 you're too young to understand the world and be responsible. OK so we better stop 18 year olds entering the military or getting guns......You can't do that, 18 year olds have just as much rite as anyone else to own weapons, join the military etc. This country is built on freedom.... Excellent, Let's all drink to that...Oh no, 18 year olds are too young to understand responsible drinking.....Insert circular argument right back to step one and political and social gridlock.
Toebra said:
Adrian_Thompson said:
- It can be argued that the Electoral collage has ended up as an unintended form of Gerrymandering when twp of the last five (40%) General elections have elected a President who lost the popular vote.
Not really, it works exactly as designed
MAny would disagree with that. It was to stop the larger States holding the smaller ones hostage, but instead we get the country being held hostage by smaller states. Semantics and it's going to be hard to get agreement, so let's just agree to hold different opinions and move on.
Advan046 said:
In reply to Adrian_Thompson :
I actually think we could get to a single government model. At a minimum the effort and activities required to try to get there would be beneficial.
What would be necessary to make you feel comfortable that corruption was combatted enough to be ok with a single government? Should we try to do those things now regardless if it led to a single government or not?
I wish I had an answer for you but I don't. I feel we talk one step forward then two steps back on political money. We got Frank Dodd after the 08 melt down then special interest has spent the interveining time dismanteling it as fast as they can.
I know it would get howls of protest from some quarters, but how about have a 100% voting law like Australia. You can vote 'Non of the above', but you have to vote once you turn 18. but but but at 18 you're too young to understand the world and be responsible. OK so we better stop 18 year olds entering the military or getting guns......You can't do that, 18 year olds have just as much rite as anyone else to own weapons, join the military etc. This country is built on freedom.... Excellent, Let's all drink to that...Oh no, 18 year olds are too young to understand responsible drinking.....Insert circular argument right back to step one and political and social gridlock.
Toebra said:
Adrian_Thompson said:
- It can be argued that the Electoral collage has ended up as an unintended form of Gerrymandering when twp of the last five (40%) General elections have elected a President who lost the popular vote.
Not really, it works exactly as designed
MAny would disagree with that. It was to stop the larger States holding the smaller ones hostage, but instead we get the country being held hostage by smaller states. Semantics and it's going to be hard to get agreement, so let's just agree to hold different opinions and move on.
