Elections and voting (in general) ...

[raif71]

In the US, it seems that the underdog usually wins or the person who plays the underdog well

 

[scott wurcer]

I do think ownership of real property should be a requirement to vote. Having some skin in the game to my way of thinking.

Seriously, that's disappointing. All the adult children forced to live with their parents should have no say?

 

[scott wurcer]

Right to repair got on a ballot? Amazing. No politician wants to take it forward from what I hear.

This is MA the opposite side ran some adds claiming that independent repair shops would use the dongle in your car to steal your identity.

 

[Wombat]

The USA is a Republic with a Constitution that avoided 'pure democracy', extolling the virtues of human nature whilst restraining the excesses of factional interests.

Let's not get too idealistic in applying the democracy term on the USA or anywhere else for that matter.

 

[RayDunzl]

I do think ownership of real property should be a requirement to vote. Having some skin in the game to my way of thinking.

The Swiss wouldn't be pleased...

I'm a bit surprised by the rankings...

Only 53 countries listed, though...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate

 

[RayDunzl]

700 point swing in Dow Futures since the Polls started to close

 

[Blumlein 88]

Seriously, that's disappointing. All the adult children forced to live with their parents should have no say?

While on can imagine wrongs and rights with the idea, I think it is more right than not. So yes, adult children don't yet have enough skin in the game.

 

[Blumlein 88]

The USA is a Republic with a Constitution that avoided 'pure democracy', extolling the virtues of human nature whilst restraining the excesses of factional interests.

Let's not get too idealistic in applying the democracy term on the USA or anywhere else for that matter.

View attachment 91384

Joseph Tainter in "the Collapse of Complex Societies" said, bad government is the PRICE of government. While sometimes high it is a price well worth paying to maintain a complex society.

 

[AudioJester]

Ok, I got to ask - how is that the US government can thinks its own electoral process is not robust and secure??

There is no side within Australian elections that would consider the process not fair.

 

[Asylum Seeker]

Is voter apathy and abstentionism the cause or a symptom of the problem? What is the problem?

 

[Frank Dernie]

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.” Alexander Fraser Tytler (often attributed to de toqueville)

This is oft quoted but studying the different governments worldwide shows it to be an opinion without supporting evidence, whoever said it.

 

[Sukie]

The USA is a Republic with a Constitution that avoided 'pure democracy', extolling the virtues of human nature whilst restraining the excesses of factional interests.

Let's not get too idealistic in applying the democracy term on the USA or anywhere else for that matter.

View attachment 91384

Agree. Often when people talk about democracy they mean majoritarianism. Democracy sees the need for multiple checks and balances in order for society to peacefully reproduce itself. Once the "will of the people" becomes an ideological statement, we have moved away from democratic principles.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Indeed there are several interpretations of "democracy".
I like the reality that it does not guarantee getting a good government in but it gives a method of getting a bad one out.

Some democracies are pretty "pure" with each vote counting equally, and whilst that is fair and real democracy it usually results in complex coalitions which are unable to agree on substantial subjects, so are a bit wooly.
Ours here in the UK usually ends up with 2 possibilities but due to the way the constituencies are divided all votes are not equal, and the Upper House is totally non-democratic, which was OK by me when the people in it were older experts in various fields who could add knowledge to political debate now it is mainly political appointees and mates that welcome filter has been lost and it is just undemocratic.
The US system is similar, since it was originally based on the UK system, but probably even more skewed in terms of each vote not being equal because the electoral college system is even more unequal than our constituency system.
Then the Supreme Court which is non-democratic and job for life.
So one person one vote is different in different countries and pretty far from the case in the UK and USA.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I do think ownership of real property should be a requirement to vote. Having some skin in the game to my way of thinking.

100 years ago that was pretty well how it was in England. 200 years ago it was pretty well only aristocrats and clergy, about 3% of the population had voting rights.
The changes were slow but came about without revolution, unlike some countries.

 

[Willem]

100 years ago that was pretty well how it was in England. 200 years ago it was pretty well only aristocrats and clergy, about 3% of the population had voting rights.
The changes were slow but came about without revolution, unlike some countries.

Indeed, with that idea we go back to the nineteenth century . Mind you, it is not clear that 'those with a stake' would be less inclined to benefit themselves rather than society at large.

 

[Wombat]

Maine and Nebraska use a representive consideration rather than 'winner takes all' approach in allocating Electoral College votes. Just seems more democratic to me.

 

[Wombat]

100 years ago that was pretty well how it was in England. 200 years ago it was pretty well only aristocrats and clergy, about 3% of the population had voting rights.
The changes were slow but came about without revolution, unlike some countries.

I think that we have been regressing to a pre WW2 situation where governments and moguls totally ruled a population that 'knew their place' and were kept there.

Control of society has been gradually restored, beginning in the eighties.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I think that we have been regressing to a pre WW2 situation where governments and moguls totally ruled a population that 'knew their place' and were kept there.

Control of society has been gradually restored, beginning in the eighties.

History shows that in the absence of a strong rule of law inequality grows. In the Dark Ages here a tiny number of families had titles and power and everybody else was grovelling in the dirt, which the families owned, and suffering horrendous punishments for tiny misdemeanours.

The fact is all humans are greedy selfish and ruthless, they only vary in degree, and in a free system the most ruthless of the greedy selfish people end up with everything.

Strong long lived democracies have support for a well developed legal framework that seems to the populace to be fair for everybody. If that fails mayhem ensues.

 

[Willem]

Acemoglu and Robinson, Why Nations Fail is required reading. On inequality see the work by Branko Milanovic.

 

[RayDunzl]

What happens after Election Day

Electoral College overview...

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/04/politics/how-long-states-have-to-count-votes/index.html