Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

the question is again unanswered



What particular policies does it inspire you to support or advocate?

Thanx so it's just not me

Well, the article might have missed the forest, but you may have missed the trees.
The point is that the parties have lost their ability to pick reasonable, electable candidates for whom the parties can reasonably be held responsible.  The bad old days of smoke-filled rooms and handshakes and deals may have been a better system than letting the most angry and energized fragment of the party membership pick the candidates.
In general, I think we should be very modest when we talk about making big changes in a very complex system that has more or less served us well for 230+ years.  We should understand very thoroughly why something was designed the way it was before we start thinking about eliminating it or radically changing it.
I think the 17th Amendment changing the election of U.S. Senators is an example of failing to be careful.  It fundamentally changed the relationship between the House and the Senate and between the states and the federal government.  And not for the best, IMO.
Was it intended to do that?  I don't know for sure, but those Progressives were pretty clever, and they wanted more federal power at the expense of the states, so I know how I would bet if my life depended on it.

I mean, yes, there is no question that the representative government has given way to more people voting directly. It's also irrelevant to my point, which is that our current system is undemocratic because it ensures largess swathes of the population are irrelevant, and makes large swathes of the population have votes that count more than others. If we implemented a system where, say, a black persons vote counts double, I imagine a lot of you would be apoplectic. But that's the system were have now, except substitute voters in random close states for black people.

all votes matter

if the presidential election was to swing on those 2 electoral votes from Montana - they would hotly contested

or those 180,000 popular votes from Montana

swing states are always the key 

all votes matter

if the presidential election was to swing on those 2 electoral votes from Montana - they would hotly contested

or those 180,000 popular votes from Montana

swing states are always the key

All votes are equal but some votes are more equal than others

I could not agree more.

I still believe the 17th amendment to be the worst thing legislatively ever done in this country. For years, I have advocated repealing the 17th amendment. Unfortunately, our educational system in this country is brainwashing our youth to the point where they don't even understand the basics of the founding of this great nation.

The appeal of repealing the 17th amendment is making state's units more powerful/influential?

Maybe the competent person wouldn't do a better job than the incompetent one. How could we ever know really?

The push for a popular vote is a move by the left to ensure that there is never another president from the right. It's a move that would give the power of elections to Chicago, New York, LA, Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, Milwaukee, Philly, etc.

Those cities are disaster areas in almost all areas of concern.

I do not want THAT choosing my president, thank you.

My votes should count double because no one wants to live near me