you can see the anti-gerrymandered districts.
Posted on 04/16/2012 11:42:06 AM PDT by Some Lib on the Wrong Forums
Hello freepers, I'm a registered Democrat, but I'd really rather not be. I would much rather sign myself onto some progressive party as I feel they would better represent me, my views and my country. However, if I were to do so in the current political environment I would be throwing my vote away and by not voting for the Democrat I'm helping the Republican candidate inch closer to a plurality. Similarly, I'm sure plenty of you guys would much rather have a strong Libertarian Party or some sort of Evangelical Party instead of being lumped in with the rest of the Republican Party. How do we remedy this problem? Well, that's the tricky part. In close elections if either of us put up an Independent candidate who supported reform, but otherwise held the same views as the candidate we'd normally vote for then we'd end up splitting the vote and guaranteeing that the guy we don't like wins the seat.
That leaves elections that are never close. The ones in the rural Midwest and South that will invariably go to the GOP and the ones in New England and the Northwest that will invariably go to the Dems. These are the incumbents that never have to worry about losing their seat in the general, they just have to win their primary. I honestly believe that by putting up an Independent in these races we can win enough seats to achieve reform. I don't want reform to favor one ideology or another, I don't want it to lessen the voices of conservatives or liberals and I certainly don't want to open up any possibilities of fraud. I just want the Senate and House of Representatives to actually REPRESENT the views Americans have. After that's done we can go back to disagreeing with eachother at every turn, but I believe in my heart that this is far too important of an issue to go unresolved just because I'm a liberal and you guys are conservatives.
Up to this point I haven't actually laid out any solutions, so I'll just list what I'd like to see in any reform.
-End Gerrymandering
-Replace First Past the Post with some sort of preferential system
That's it. That's the only groundwork I'd like in there. Those two simple steps are where I think we'll find common ground
>>I feel they would better represent me, my views
What are your views? Obama is as progressive as he can afford to be in a first term governing a right-of-center nation, with plenty of hints that he will move radically to the left after November.
The only thing more progressive than Obama in this term is a full-bore card-carrying communist.
Also what about making it that no one can EVER run Unopposed?
Also making it so that any incumbent past their second term would have to get 5% more of the vote than last election to win each subsequent race? (so if they won their second term at 51% their next term they would have to win at least 56% to get their next term)
That would be an alternative to term limits, so you would end the “gold olde boys and gals club”.
IBTZ?
Sorry, but if we could eliminate voter fraud the likelihood is that only about 10% of dhimmicrats would ever be elected again.
No?
Dearly beloved .... http://www.ilovewavs.com/Effects/Music/Sound%20Effect%20-%20Funeral%20March.wav
Democrats, up until Franklin Roosevelt, or possibly Woodrow Wilson, were fairly conservative. Religion (Christianity in particular) was much more respected, politically, up until Roosevelt, and later JFK. After FDR, people started looking towards government for help, and thus born the progressive agenda. In the beginning, the progressive left mantel was held by Pinkos and people like Margaret Sanger. The Democrat party has been hijacked from Dems like Dan Boren, for Dems like Nancy Pelosi. If you really want a party the espouses your views, either join the Green Party, or the Socialist Party, USA. There are plenty of choices for you. As for having a greater voice for your ideals, you have the GD president right now. The Republican party is a conservative Party. that is the fact of the party platform. I am proud to call myself a Republican because we are the patriotic, conservative party. We do have our moderates (those who are “moderate” on social issues shouldn’t be called moderates, rather progressive hecklers), but the base and the majority of the party is conservative, and it will remain that way until the Democrats throw off there progressive wing, rejoin the Repubs on the major social issues, and begin arguing with them about HOW to achieve an end, not what that end should be.
Yup
[ How about staring with having to prove you are a citizen when you vote, and then only being allowed to vote once? ]
Also how about making Voter Fraud be an act of TREASON?
Especially when it can clearly be proven intent to undermine the electoral system...
Nothing more I would to see but the “Vote often” DIMS to be hanging at the end of a rope for intentionally undermining the republic.
You must recognize the following, becuase it would resolve much of the quandry you feel we're all in.
We live in a Constitutional, representative republic. It's not a democracy, and we won't agree with every vote that our representative makes. We generally want to know their positions before we vote for them because we don't want big surprises, but we generally know what we're getting.
We are supposed to have checks and balances. It is NOT supposed to be easy for laws to pass; legislative efficiency is not what this country is about. This is by design, and is supposed to give us more stability as a country, and more freedoms as a people.
What is it that you're trying to achieve? A Democratic candidate more aligned with you? A third-party candidate more aligned with your views?
Dr. Paul, if you just take your medication, you will feel much better.
you can see the anti-gerrymandered districts.
We’re far beyond having polite rational conversations with the left. You’re parasites on the nation and we are the cure. Go back to DU you effing parasite.
[ Maybe they could make every district a rectangle, with allowances for coastlines and other non rectangular features.]
Agreed, or some other system of redistricting that uses an IMMUTABLE mathematical formula that gets the same result every single time based on the input information from the last census with no room for “massaging” the data.
I Like the fact that they follow existing county lines!
While voter fraud is a terible injustice to the principles of our system of government, the Constitution defines treason as an overt act to aid an enemy. Agian, while voter fraud does have a negative affect on this country, it is not an overt act of aiding an enemy, ie aiding foreign communism, Al-Qaeda, Iran, North Korea, etc. Now, whether the president has committed an overt act of treason is a different story. Specifically, broadcasting our war timeline to our enemy is certainly an act that will aid the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and any other enemy who will benefit from the United States leaving the Middle East (iran).
Lead the way. Socialists could keep the Democratic Party, and all the militant groups that define it, while less radical socialists could form a progressive left party, each with its own candidates and platforms. Since there is already little difference from the Communist Party platform and the Democratic Party platform, the commies could continue doing what they always do, vote Democrat. The latter might be interested in enlisting Romney, and we have some media mutts you can have with him. The thrust could be progressive tax reform, redistribution of wealth and centralized control of the economy and banking. ...There is certainly a crossover aspect to this that could help both of us. Sounds good, but it is probably too late to get into this cycle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.