How can the US improve the election process for 2022 and 2024? Can it be done bi-partisanly?

[Jonathan20022]

Then at the heart of the conversation you're simply for a raw popular vote, no need to delegate it as an Electoral Vote per individual vote. I however wasn't making that point, just because the electoral voting structure has flaws doesn't mean it cannot be balanced in a way that makes it work more fairly, but if the bar is "There should never be a use case where the popular vote doesn't dictate the end result" then it's just not going to happen.

I don't see how the House Commons applies here? I highly doubt the House of Lords would let a national election go unnoticed but if that has happened please let me know. But I know you were comparing it to our Senate and the process of passing new legislature.

I don't think the 67 votes to pass/51 to stop is necessarily stupid. Considering swaying power of corporations and how DC flirts with major businesses, being able to talk to a single Senator and flipping their vote is way too powerful. I don't agree with this, nor do I think that's how it should be but again the reality is usually far more gut wrenching when you have to consider a higher majority to enact new changes to our country so flippantly would be downright chaotic.

 

[narad]

Then at the heart of the conversation you're simply for a raw popular vote, no need to delegate it as an Electoral Vote per individual vote. I however wasn't making that point, just because the electoral voting structure has flaws doesn't mean it cannot be balanced in a way that makes it work more fairly, but if the bar is "There should never be a use case where the popular vote doesn't dictate the end result" then it's just not going to happen.

I don't see how the House Commons applies here? I highly doubt the House of Lords would let a national election go unnoticed but if that has happened please let me know. But I know you were comparing it to our Senate and the process of passing new legislature.

I don't think the 67 votes to pass/51 to stop is necessarily stupid. Considering swaying power of corporations and how DC flirts with major businesses, being able to talk to a single Senator and flipping their vote is way too powerful. I don't agree with this, nor do I think that's how it should be but again the reality is usually far more gut wrenching when you have to consider a higher majority to enact new changes to our country so flippantly would be downright chaotic.

Even if it were to work more fairly, it is difficult to justify a system that would give one American's vote 20x more effective power in determining the outcome of the election than another's. The nice thing about a popular vote is you don't have to weasel along this grey area to determine how much more or less each American's vote should weigh in the totals.

Otherwise it's basically there with the 3/5ths compromise in trying to rate people against each other, this time by location instead of race, but why should either matter?

 

[Jonathan20022]

Even if it were to work more fairly, it is difficult to justify a system that would give one American's vote 20x more effective power in determining the outcome of the election than another's. The nice thing about a popular vote is you don't have to weasel along this grey area to determine how much more or less each American's vote should weigh in the totals.

Otherwise it's basically there with the 3/5ths compromise in trying to rate people against each other, this time by location instead of race, but why should either matter?

No qualms with an election via Popular Vote from me,

My initial post in this thread was to secure the process and actually innovating on the space, while also utilizing tools like Voter ID financially backed to provide all qualifying Americans the tools they need to then place their verified vote.

With the countless dollars spent looking for election fraud in both 2016/2020, I find it null that we can't pursue systems and fund it with all of that money used in wasted efforts trying to overturn election results.

 

[StevenC]

Then at the heart of the conversation you're simply for a raw popular vote, no need to delegate it as an Electoral Vote per individual vote. I however wasn't making that point, just because the electoral voting structure has flaws doesn't mean it cannot be balanced in a way that makes it work more fairly, but if the bar is "There should never be a use case where the popular vote doesn't dictate the end result" then it's just not going to happen.

I don't see how the House Commons applies here? I highly doubt the House of Lords would let a national election go unnoticed but if that has happened please let me know. But I know you were comparing it to our Senate and the process of passing new legislature.

I don't think the 67 votes to pass/51 to stop is necessarily stupid. Considering swaying power of corporations and how DC flirts with major businesses, being able to talk to a single Senator and flipping their vote is way too powerful. I don't agree with this, nor do I think that's how it should be but again the reality is usually far more gut wrenching when you have to consider a higher majority to enact new changes to our country so flippantly would be downright chaotic.

America's main issue with voter fraud comes from non-paper ballots. Because voting machines are the least secure means of voting. Every other country has basically figured this out: pencil and paper.

Most places don't require voted IDs because it doesn't really help prevent fraud. It's not a thing in the UK, for example, except Northern Ireland (because of course) where we can use driver's license, passport, bus passes or electoral cards that everyone gets if they were in school at 18.

Once again, this is just a case of America inventing a problem and throwing money at not fixing it because even $1 would prove it's not a problem anyone else has. See: education, healthcare etc.

Commons/Lords example was that if the Senate followed the same rules as Lords "the people" would get the policies they want through or the Senate would have to vote on things and recommend changes. As it is now, the Senate can just obstruct popular things endlessly. Merely having a majority allows you to halt all progress, but you need 2/3 to seriously fix things. Which is dumb.

 

[bostjan]

I'd suggest re-engineering congressional terms. Make representatives eligible for one four-year term and senators eligible for one eight-year term. And make it so that no representative can be elected to the Senate over a four-year cool-down period. That way nobody is campaigning while they are supposed to be legislating. The nation has nearly 330 million people, so it's not like we will run out of people to run for congress.

But, because of the 2/3 thing you are discussing, along with the fact that no congress members will vote to fire themselves, it'll never ever happen.

 

[Rock4ever]

As it is now, the Senate can just obstruct popular things endlessly. Merely having a majority allows you to halt all progress, but you need 2/3 to seriously fix things. Which is dumb.

You only need 41 to halt things endlessly.

Edit for clarity- the 41 I state is for invoking cloture on legislative items.

The majority you state applies to executive and judicial nominations.

 

[Rock4ever]

Ahhh...

So I guess 2a was only meant for the people at the time of its creation. That solves a lot of arguing.

Steven specifically referred to those 1st 3 words.

Boiled down- The preamble goes like this

We the people, for reasons, do ordain and establish this Constitution....

Future people will not be ordaining and establishing the constitution. Existing sections are grandfathered in unless being repealed by amendment eg Amendments 18, 21

 

[ResistentialAssultSquadron]

Voting algorithm developed by Entertainment Tonight producers.
Congress remodeled by producers of Hollywood Squares. And senate, brought to you by the producers of Hee-Haw and Duck Dynasty. Probably wouldn't even notice the differences.

 

[Rock4ever]

You only need 41 to halt things endlessly.

Edit for clarity- the 41 I state is for invoking cloture on legislative items.

The majority you state applies to executive and judicial nominations.

Also, Harry Reid deserves credit for the latter.

 

[Rock4ever]

I literally live in a part of my own country that has no sway over the rest, but because we're an insignificant population, how much catering should we really get? They have a lower population because people leave because there's nothing there. They have higher birth rates than pupulous blue states and all of those kids leave for actual pastures. Their outsized representation gets them absolutely nothing positive but gets everyone in the country a lot of negative.

Land shouldn't vote.

I'm not going to claim to know the situation in Northern Ireland. I'm just going to stick to my experience.

Like you I'm from the middle of nowhere. The town I grew up in, Murphysboro IL(funny I know. folks over here in WA try to spell it like an Irishman's donkey) had a population of 10k. When I left in 2005 it was 9200 and since I've left it's gone down to 7200 I think. It's also the county seat and there are some low level government jobs there. Going back it feels like I'm travelling in time as very little has changed. A town surrounded by forest and agriculture. A uni in another town 10 miles away. It has an engineering college but its focus is clearly Liberal arts...basket weaving, woke studies, etc.

I feel like this is also political- as in steering people out of these places and into more urban locations whose news media is entirely different slant, which usually means a heavy dose of editorializing at the local level-we know it's there at MSNBC/CNN/FNC ETC. We live in a time where work can literally be sent anywhere. There are some educationed professionals in the town I grew up in but for the most part everyone with a brain just gets out. The area stagnates at best....otherwise it regresses. What's left behind are the those few professionals, people who peaked in high school and an aged population. Technology has advanced faster than these people keep up. Media/news outlets do have an impact on people's views that I think is underestimated.

 

[Rock4ever]

I'm not going to claim to know the situation in Northern Ireland. I'm just going to stick to my experience.

Like you I'm from the middle of nowhere. The town I grew up in, Murphysboro IL(funny I know. folks over here in WA try to spell it like an Irishman's donkey) had a population of 10k. When I left in 2005 it was 9200 and since I've left it's gone down to 7200 I think. It's also the county seat and there are some low level government jobs there. Going back it feels like I'm travelling in time as very little has changed. A town surrounded by forest and agriculture. A uni in another town 10 miles away. It has an engineering college but its focus is clearly Liberal arts...basket weaving, woke studies, etc.

I feel like this is also political- as in steering people out of these places and into more urban locations whose news media is entirely different slant, which usually means a heavy dose of editorializing at the local level-we know it's there at MSNBC/CNN/FNC ETC. We live in a time where work can literally be sent anywhere. There are some educationed professionals in the town I grew up in but for the most part everyone with a brain just gets out. The area stagnates at best....otherwise it regresses. What's left behind are the those few professionals, people who peaked in high school and an aged population. Technology has advanced faster than these people keep up. Media/news outlets do have an impact on people's views that I think is underestimated.

Is there a fucking edit button?! I find one when I'm on my phone/ipad do not one when on pc.

EDIT and then the edit button presents when I quote myself as I did in the above but not regularly?!

 

[Yul Brynner]

Is there a fucking edit button?! I find one when I'm on my phone/ipad do not one when on pc.

EDIT and then the edit button presents when I quote myself as I did in the above but not regularly?!

It's got a timer so people can't say a bunch of stupid shit and then go back later and pretend they didn't.

 

[Masoo2]

I'm not going to claim to know the situation in Northern Ireland. I'm just going to stick to my experience.

Like you I'm from the middle of nowhere. The town I grew up in, Murphysboro IL(funny I know. folks over here in WA try to spell it like an Irishman's donkey) had a population of 10k. When I left in 2005 it was 9200 and since I've left it's gone down to 7200 I think. It's also the county seat and there are some low level government jobs there. Going back it feels like I'm travelling in time as very little has changed. A town surrounded by forest and agriculture. A uni in another town 10 miles away. It has an engineering college but its focus is clearly Liberal arts...basket weaving, woke studies, etc.

I feel like this is also political- as in steering people out of these places and into more urban locations whose news media is entirely different slant, which usually means a heavy dose of editorializing at the local level-we know it's there at MSNBC/CNN/FNC ETC. We live in a time where work can literally be sent anywhere. There are some educationed professionals in the town I grew up in but for the most part everyone with a brain just gets out. The area stagnates at best....otherwise it regresses. What's left behind are the those few professionals, people who peaked in high school and an aged population. Technology has advanced faster than these people keep up. Media/news outlets do have an impact on people's views that I think is underestimated.

I too grew up in the same kind of town, the one where the few that remain either work unskilled manual labor (fast food, Walmart, lawncare) or occupy one of the few skilled labor/professional slots that a town this small could handle (one dentist, one pediatrician, a plumber or two, one electrician, etc). It's not even like the unskilled manual labor is factory work, the majority of those factory jobs are long gone. Everyone I knew who had the opportunity to leave, whether to go to college in any capacity (not just STEM) or enlist in the military, did so and never returned, myself included. Technology and education truly has advanced faster than these small towns are able to keep up with, but is that not the case everywhere? How can you prevent the ever-growing urban-rural divide when that's been the reality of the developed world for hundreds of years?

Also why the liberal arts hate, it's not like people don't get jobs with those degrees lol. I expected you to drop a "Gender Studies" in with the basket weaving and woke studies when in reality it's a fantastic interdisciplinary field with tons of job opportunities in HR, NGOs/non-profits/IGOs, federal/state jobs, or being used to go to law school with.

America's main issue with voter fraud comes from non-paper ballots. Because voting machines are the least secure means of voting. Every other country has basically figured this out: pencil and paper.

I understand risks associated with electronic voting, whether on physical voting machines at polling locations or on your own device, but I've never understood the argument that paper ballots are any more secure. If you know of any studies or papers published on the topic please send them over because it's something I've long wondered.

On the surface, paper voting to me seems the most vulnerable of all forms. You're trusting that your little slip of paper is actually taken at the polling station, placed into the right shipping box, is actually placed onto the truck, is actually delivered to the counting station, and is counted accurately all the while countless hands could have potentially tampered with the vote along the way with as much as a simple pen. Not to mention that in most US states you aren't able to actually confirm the voting status of your ballot once submitted until after the election, meaning there's no way of knowing if the candidates you marked on your ballot actually received the votes. It just seems that there's so much more room for error.

I've always liked the way Estonia handled voting, similar feelings about how they handle everything else through their e-Estonia system. You're even allowed to change your vote as many times as you want until the voting period has ended, something not possible with a paper ballot.

 

[Millul]

I too grew up in the same kind of town, the one where the few that remain either work unskilled manual labor (fast food, Walmart, lawncare) or occupy one of the few skilled labor/professional slots that a town this small could handle (one dentist, one pediatrician, a plumber or two, one electrician, etc). It's not even like the unskilled manual labor is factory work, the majority of those factory jobs are long gone. Everyone I knew who had the opportunity to leave, whether to go to college in any capacity (not just STEM) or enlist in the military, did so and never returned, myself included. Technology and education truly has advanced faster than these small towns are able to keep up with, but is that not the case everywhere? How can you prevent the ever-growing urban-rural divide when that's been the reality of the developed world for hundreds of years?

Also why the liberal arts hate, it's not like people don't get jobs with those degrees lol. I expected you to drop a "Gender Studies" in with the basket weaving and woke studies when in reality it's a fantastic interdisciplinary field with tons of job opportunities in HR, NGOs/non-profits/IGOs, federal/state jobs, or being used to go to law school with.


I understand risks associated with electronic voting, whether on physical voting machines at polling locations or on your own device, but I've never understood the argument that paper ballots are any more secure. If you know of any studies or papers published on the topic please send them over because it's something I've long wondered.

On the surface, paper voting to me seems the most vulnerable of all forms. You're trusting that your little slip of paper is actually taken at the polling station, placed into the right shipping box, is actually placed onto the truck, is actually delivered to the counting station, and is counted accurately all the while countless hands could have potentially tampered with the vote along the way with as much as a simple pen. Not to mention that in most US states you aren't able to actually confirm the voting status of your ballot once submitted until after the election, meaning there's no way of knowing if the candidates you marked on your ballot actually received the votes. It just seems that there's so much more room for error.

I've always liked the way Estonia handled voting, similar feelings about how they handle everything else through their e-Estonia system. You're even allowed to change your vote as many times as you want until the voting period has ended, something not possible with a paper ballot.

I think in most places, votes are counted locally where they are casted.
No shipping, no manipulations, no sheanigans.

 

[Vyn]

I think it can be done BI-partisanly, where the two parties are the Dems and whatever is left of the Republicans after the Trumpite scum is glassed out of the fucking universe.

It's actually going to take a good couple of generations to fix this

 

[Andromalia]

Fixing the election process in the US is inherently partisan because the GOP have known for decades that voter suppression is their only path to victory.

That is the main issue: the GOP doesn't, in good faith, want the elections to work.

The only way this can work is, one man, one vote, and each vote having equal weight. You don't need state weighting coming in or indirect suffrage when electing a single individual to a federal position.

I think in most places, votes are counted locally where they are casted.

Works that way in France. Ballots are opened in the voting office, with representatives from every political party that wants to attend checking everything is done right.
This the actual safest way, because the more you put technology in, the easier it becomes to tamper with the result. Manually counting sheets of paper works, and changing it will bring no benefit. I do participate in ballot openings from time to time, and it's overall a pretty good experience, you feel you are actually doing something useful.
The only pain is having to deal with the racists checking on me every 5 mn because of the long hair and not very far-right looks I usually have.

 

[Millul]

Yep, it works like that in italy as well, and I've participated into it once - I think it's a reasonably solid system.