I personally can't stomach American Idol and agree with Sting that it's overglorified Karaoke. That being said, I've heard many times over that we wouldn't want to run an election like that show, just as some sort of throw away pocket wisdom, and I've never agreed with that. I believe that is exactly how we should run our elections now, so long as you can safeguard the actual vote count somehow. Others are out there that are thinking along the same lines. It's really just a short blurb near the end, but please watch just the same.
__________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 18 Nov 2009 23:24 Last Edited By: Matches
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
Are you saying we should phone in our votes, or that each candidate should have to demonstrate themsevles being presidential on stage and televised?
Likewise, are we going to have a panel of judges to winnow down the final eight candidates, who should they be?
Personally, I like the idea of no political advertising and just a long series of televised debates and disucssions on policy with candidates from more than just the top two parties, but there are the obvious political speech issues that are then raised.
Just curious if you can clarify your position a little better for me.
My own personal utopian fantasy is that we run elections like we do jury pools. I call it Lotocracy.
Every citizen is put into a pool for their district and is randomly chosen to serve in congress for like six months, once you're chosen you get taken out of the pool for a few years (just like jury duty).
In this way you avoid long term people staying in office for personal gain, and you have people having to live under the laws they create.
You also get the added advantage that the people chosen would likely wind up representing their district much more than the current make up of congress from a socioeconomic/racial/religous background. Likewise, after it's all said and done, you'd have to go back to your neighbors and listen to how they would have voted on this or that idea if they had gotten selected.
It's crazy and utopian I know, but hey it's my utopia.
Posted: 19 Nov 2009 00:56
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
I'm saying we should have more choices to begin with than what our present two party system gives us. Let them use their ideas to win votes instead of who can make the best attack against their opponent. I have no problem with being able to phone it in, as long as that can be secured to one vote per person of legal age-especially when people viewing at home are hearing opposing ideas. Consider also how a show like this will be paid for by advertisers itself but the candidates won't need donations, further cleaning up the overall process of what the winner will do once in office.
Your lotocracy isn't such a bad idea either. Imagine showing people firsthand their actual potential and the effect they can have, maybe the possibilities and options they've been unaware of all this time. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 19 Nov 2009 18:30
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
I believe England has a similar system for the parlimentary elections. The various parties put out their leder who then makes the argument for thier party in a series of televised debate. Publicly funded, non party controlled, and I believe with no actual political advertising.
Unfortunatly, the supreme court has decided money is a form of speech and as such is protected, so for the time being, I think we're going to get a great deal more money thrown at defeating people than arguments for electing people.
Really your problem there is that since the status quo is always better than change for those with money, there is a real incentive to just monkey wrench rather than build anew.
Hence our current health care debate. You could offer new solutions, but instead it's just become a question of blocking the legislation.
Posted: 19 Nov 2009 22:41
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
I just want to say I agree that American Idol sucks! __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 20 Nov 2009 02:25
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
It's always nice when we find common ground Tim. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
