Our Voting System Sucks, What Else Can We Try?

Ah, yes. The voters are too stupid to know anything. They are too easily swayed. Let the elites rule us. Let's set up a parlimentary type of system to elect a party of elites. That way there would be no confusing plurality of choice.

Liberals are so arrogant.

I know that I get frustrated with the current two party system and would like to vote for a 3rd party candidate but then feel like I'm potentially throwing my vote away and may end up with the choice I'd hate more between the two major parties. The Instant Run Off, Range Voting or Approval Voting all sounded intriguing to me.

Yes, I feel we are held hostage by our current system. Each president and congress is worse than the one before.

Interesting discussion starter.

We knew long ago that the people on average would vote for some things that may not be the best (like I bet we could vote slavery back in today, or the death penalty for being an illegal immigrant), so we decided democracy would not work...in it's stead we use the republican system where you vote for people to make your laws in stead of the alws themselves, the idea being that we will vote in sound minded individuals that can see through the smoke and mirrors.

How much more can we back off, are we tending towards electing fewer people that decide on more appointees that make our laws.

Perhaps if we collectively decide that reducing our rights bit by bit each year does not make us better, the government can back off to a support role, that does not involve increasing its duties and budgets each year.

I think there is a perspective that our voting system sucks because people don't always get what they want...but on average, the most people do get what they want. I think we say our voting system sucks when in Park County the people that are vocal on here don't want more spending and big local govt, but on average most of the people do want more out of their govt and are willing to spend more for it.

So how to we separate "our voting system sucks" from....I just was not in the majority, so now I am sad that I have to pay or do what the majority wanted.....or more accurately, what the person that the majority voted in wanted.

Perhaps this is a time to be thankful that we only have a two party system in most parts of the country. People in Maine drive around with bumber stickers that say 38%...because that is the % of people that voted for the governor. How would you feel about your voting system if 1/3 of the people got what they wanted and most did not, vs. just under 50% now?

This is a big govt problem. We are in a situation where we debate how much of a bribe we are going to get from our govt, but they are taking the bribe money from our parents and neighbors to pay us, and often they don't have enough, so we allow them to borrow the bribe money. I think we simply need to get by with less spending, services and servants and there will be less to vote on...and we can focus on our own lives in stead of getting what we think we deserve from others.

We need a "none-of-the-above" option. If no one else gets 51%, its a do-over with new candidates.

Maybe just my contrarian nature, but I think the current system of checks and balances is working. Obama ran against Bush's foreign policy but once in office and seeing the gravity of the situation he has pretty much extended the Bush doctrine and increased it in some ways like drone use.
To a certain extent, large corporations do have a lot of power, but shouldn't they? They represent a lot of jobs and if you create a enviroment hostile to American job creation, even more jobs will go overseas.

Science Chic wrote: Hey Arlen, I know you've been going back and forth with Kate this evening so you're probably frustrated, but there's nothing in this article that's partisan, and I only asked 2 questions asking for everyone's opinions, no judgement or proclamations made by me.

I certainly have never said anything to the effect that voters are stupid, that I want "elites" (whoever that is) to rule us, or that a parliamentary system is the way to go, nor do I recall any other liberals on this board saying such things. Nor does this article. This merely presents information that would benefit us all, conservative, liberal, independent, and every other party alike, to consider.

MJ: Briefly summarize the pros and cons of the various voting methods you cover in your book. Let's start with our current system.

I like the approval voting method; the range method sounds good too (a more complicated version of approval voting), but I'm hesitant to say go for it when it's only got one paper backing it up. Other thoughts?

You keep mentioning "independent" in a lot of your post. I believe you even said that you were registered as an "independent". Do you mean you belong to the Independent Party? Otherwise, there is no such voter designation as "independent" in the state of Colorado... the designation is "Unaffiliated". And if that's so, an Unaffiliated designation actually takes away some of your voting right, since you cannot vote in the primaries. If you are really "Unaffiliated" what is your reasoning for minimizing your voting powers?

Science Chic wrote: Hey Arlen, I know you've been going back and forth with Kate this evening so you're probably frustrated, but there's nothing in this article that's partisan, and I only asked 2 questions asking for everyone's opinions, no judgement or proclamations made by me.

I certainly have never said anything to the effect that voters are stupid, that I want "elites" (whoever that is) to rule us, or that a parliamentary system is the way to go, nor do I recall any other liberals on this board saying such things. Nor does this article. This merely presents information that would benefit us all, conservative, liberal, independent, and every other party alike, to consider.

MJ: Briefly summarize the pros and cons of the various voting methods you cover in your book. Let's start with our current system.

I like the approval voting method; the range method sounds good too (a more complicated version of approval voting), but I'm hesitant to say go for it when it's only got one paper backing it up. Other thoughts?

Please pardon me. I was interpreting the article and its gist. Sorry that I did not make that perfectly clear. Please repair your impression of my ill composed post.