Ideas on how to achieve 90%+ voter turnout rate

M

max420thc

Well-Known Member
Isnt that the guy who wanted one example of voter fraud, well I give it to him and sees me a ACORN and raises 4 dead Americans, and one felony by destroying government records
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Yes it does. It's all you seem to think about. You're completely fucking jealous of my Veteran's disability.
Click to expand...

When you fantasize about being a "real anarchist" do you also imagine that the money you live on doesn't come from the curtailment of others choices?

I have nothing to be jealous about son, my life is full of adventure and intrigue.

 
TBoneJack

TBoneJack

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
I thought this was an idea worth discussing here;

"You want ideas? I could, for just a billion dollars, change politics forever, and for the better, and put the country on the right track, but my idea would never be backed by Big Money because it would be political suicide for them.

my plan:

Make voting mandatory.

Give everyone the day off to vote (replace presidents day with election day)

Make voting easy, safe and secure (if you can pay your taxes online, you should be able to vote online as well)

Make it a national lottery - 1,000 American voters will win a million USD.

99% voter turnout guaranteed

republic saved from oligarchical state of plutonomy™

and USA lived happily ever after

will never happen, of course"

Coming from a thread on Reddit: "In the last 5 years, the 200 most politically active companies in the US spent $5.8 billion influencing our government with lobbying and campaign contributions. Those same companies got $4.4 trillion in taxpayer support -- earning a return of 750 times their investment."

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/32owtd/in_the_last_5_years_the_200_most_politically/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/taxation-without-represen_1_b_7069384.html

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
No Pada, not a good idea. Because that would get maybe millions more people to the polls who have no fucking clue who to vote for or why. Just voting to fulfill their obligation. Or to have a chance to win money. And a vote shouldn't be cast under those circumstances.

I like it the way it is now - voting takes effort, and the only reward is that you exercised your right to vote. So we're assured that, by and large, voters are informed, thinking people who reasonably give a shit.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
TBoneJack said:
No Pada, not a good idea. Because that would get maybe millions more people to the polls who have no fucking clue who to vote for or why. Just voting to fulfill their obligation. Or to have a chance to win money. And a vote shouldn't be cast under those circumstances.

I like it the way it is now - voting takes effort, and the only reward is that you exercised your right to vote. So we're assured that, by and large, voters are informed, thinking people who reasonably give a shit.
Click to expand...
That assumes people who choose not to vote don't vote because they're ignorant. I'd say there are a lot of reasons why people choose not to vote, apathy for the system imo is no. 1. Congress currently has an 18% approval rating, Supreme Court 44%, and Obama 48%, so the majority of Americans don't approve of the government.

You're comically misinformed if you think "voters are informed, thinking people who reasonably give a shit.", and I don't think implementing changes like the ones suggested in the OP would affect that
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Most voters aren't informed, just team members that vote for either team red or team blue, no matter how terrible the choice.

You want massive voter turnout? Start government programs that cull the population by the most violent means.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
TBoneJack said:
I like it the way it is now - voting takes effort, and the only reward is that you exercised your right to vote. So we're assured that, by and large, voters are informed, thinking people who reasonably give a shit.
Click to expand...
yet republicans still get elected. that refutes everything you have to say.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
I have never heard of anyone making fun of your mental condition.
Click to expand...
Do you just not know how to read? You have this tendency to miss the meaning of my posts by wide margins. You keep replying to posts directed at other people with comments that not only don't have anything to do with the meaning but belie a need for attention. I kinda just pity you.
 
sheskunk

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Do you just not know how to read? You have this tendency to miss the meaning of my posts by wide margins. You keep replying to posts directed at other people with comments that not only don't have anything to do with the meaning but belie a need for attention. I kinda just pity you.
Click to expand...

Not since yesterday, but before that it had been over 3 months.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
Voting online is a bad idea fraught with security problems. Electronic voting in general is something with no purpose. The least problematic elections are those where multiple parties from all aisles participate in observing, with paper ballots in a box with a pen/pencil. Even then ballot stuffing can happen, but outright manipulation is so much more difficult than a centralized electronic effort (which has obviously happened in literally all recent US elections).
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
TBoneJack said:
No Pada, not a good idea. Because that would get maybe millions more people to the polls who have no fucking clue who to vote for or why. Just voting to fulfill their obligation. Or to have a chance to win money. And a vote shouldn't be cast under those circumstances.

I like it the way it is now - voting takes effort, and the only reward is that you exercised your right to vote. So we're assured that, by and large, voters are informed, thinking people who reasonably give a shit.
Click to expand...
Oregon has been voting by mail for quite a while now. NONE of the issues raised by the opposition has turned out to be true. No issues with fraud, turnout is better (but not great on non-presidential election years) and its easier to sit down with a cup of coffee and cast your vote while at home with information available for double checking. Easier and better at the same time. You are living in the past, use today's tech and make it easier to vote.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
OGEvilgenius said:
Voting online is a bad idea fraught with security problems. Electronic voting in general is something with no purpose. The least problematic elections are those where multiple parties from all aisles participate in observing, with paper ballots in a box with a pen/pencil. Even then ballot stuffing can happen, but outright manipulation is so much more difficult than a centralized electronic effort (which has obviously happened in literally all recent US elections).
Click to expand...
What I said to tbone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top