Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
digitaldemocracy.us
Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
1–10 of 76 posts
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#2This is precisely the direction I would love to see politics go. Cut out the middle-people layer!
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#3Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea? Normal people don't have the time to vote on every single issue; we have our own jobs to do. A system like this just means he'll be voting with the loudest minority for everything that comes up.
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#4Sounds like a great idea. The senators wouldn't be forced to vote based on the population's "feedback" in all cases, so you'd still have a republic, not a real "direct democracy", and in the same time they'd get much better and more accurate information about what their constituents really want, compared to how they get it now through the "experts" (lobbyists).
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#5Direct democracy enables citizens to vote for every service imaginable and vote to pay no taxes for them.
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#6Well this is just polling, it still is a stupid idea even from just poling point of view.
To tell the truth I would like to see the 17th Amendment repealed, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...
if there is interest I am willing to write up why, but now I need to make coffee
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#7Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea? Normal people don't have the time to vote on every single issue; we have our own jobs to do. A system like this just means he'll be voting with the loudest minority for everything that comes up.
It seems to me that this may already be the case?
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#8Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea? Normal people don't have the time to vote on every single issue; we have our own jobs to do. A system like this just means he'll be voting with the loudest minority for everything that comes up.
Ideally that wouldn't matter. People who care about an issue would vote on it.
That opens another can of worms, though - not enough people know or care about issues that will directly or indirectly affect them. People who do usually have some vested interest at stake.
The key to success IMO for a system like this is preventing the real-world equivalent of bots and voting rings. Bots are one thing, but I'd imagine voting rings would be very difficult to mitigate in a system like this. I guess it depends on the parties involved raising awareness effectively.
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#9Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea? Normal people don't have the time to vote on every single issue; we have our own jobs to do. A system like this just means he'll be voting with the loudest minority for everything that comes up.
It's not ideal (what is?!) but I'd take that over deciding based on what their richest donors want - which is how most people in Congress vote these days.
Besides, voting based on what most vocal/active constituents want is usually a pretty good idea, because they are the ones who usually research the topic the most, and have good solutions, and want their voices heard. And a senator would still have to make a judgement call and think about the whole population he's representing.
Re: Hollingsworth for US Senate 2014, implementing direct democracy
#10Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea? Normal people don't have the time to vote on every single issue; we have our own jobs to do. A system like this just means he'll be voting with the loudest minority for everything that comes up.
Ideally that wouldn't matter. People who care about an issue would vote on it. That opens another can of worms, though - not enough people know or care about issues that will directly or indirectly affect them. People who do usually have some vested interest at stake. The key to success IMO for a system like this is preventing the real-world equivalent of bots and voting rings. Bots are one thing, but I'd imagine vot…
> People who care about an issue would vote on it.
That's a bad idea too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_benefits_and_diffu...