Would the country be better with a truer democracy?

I'm wondering why there isn't a popular vote for major major bills that affect the entire country. The easy answer is it isn't in the constitution I suppose. However, why do we allow a handfull of people, relative to the countries population, to decide our futures?

"Well you elected them." Fuck that, my guy didn't win.

I'm thinking major things like Obamacare should be passed based on a popular vote. If it passes through that then go for it. I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly.

Hey dum dum - Romney ran on the platform of repealing Obamacare and he lost

take your ball and go home

We get shit voter turnout for the Presidential election as it is already. Why give people another reason to be apathetic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrigan

Hey dum dum - Romney ran on the platform of repealing Obamacare and he lost

take your ball and go home

---

This has nothing to do with Romney or being a sore loser. This isn't only about Obamacare. This is about all those assholes who fucked this country. I'm rich remember?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly.

---

Why do people throw out random stats that have no basis in reality to support their argument? 55% of this country voted for Obama. Do you think they didn't know about Obamacare when they voted for him? Where on earth did you get the 75% figure? You simply pulled it out of your ass, which makes this entire thread completely useless. If 75% of the population were against Obamacare, he NEVER would have been reelected. If you wanna make the case that 75% of the population doesn't understand what Obamacare is, and what the ramifications may be, fine. But stop making up random stats, that is what 6TP does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LLL

We get shit voter turnout for the Presidential election as it is already. Why give people another reason to be apathetic?

---

If they don't care enough about the issue then don't vote. But at least those that do can have their voices heard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly.

---

Why do people throw out random stats that have no basis in reality to support their argument? 55% of this country voted for Obama. Do you think they didn't know about Obamacare when they voted for him? Where on earth did you get the 75% figure? You simply pulled it out of your ass, which makes this entire thread completely useless. If 75% of the population were against Obamacare, he NEVER would have been reelected. If you wanna make the case that 75% of the population doesn't understand what Obamacare is, and what the ramifications may be, fine. But stop making up random stats, that is what 6TP does.

---

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ind...6/24/id/443279

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/oba...6/07/id/441518

I was slightly off but you get my point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

Why do people throw out random stats that have no basis in reality to support their argument? 55% of this country voted for Obama. Do you think they didn't know about Obamacare when they voted for him? Where on earth did you get the 75% figure? You simply pulled it out of your ass, which makes this entire thread completely useless. If 75% of the population were against Obamacare, he NEVER would have been reelected. If you wanna make the case that 75% of the population doesn't understand what Obamacare is, and what the ramifications may be, fine. But stop making up random stats, that is what 6TP does.

---

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ind...6/24/id/443279

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/oba...6/07/id/441518

I was slightly off but you get my point.

---

Slightly off? You said, "I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly." Turns out it was "73% of Independents oppose Obamacare." That is more than just being "slightly off." That is basically lying. What I HAVE often wondered, is how a candidate who promised to poll his constituency on major issues and vote accordingly, would fare in a major election. Giving people an actual chance to provide input on specific issues instead of voting based on a candidates general agenda could be a big draw imo.

When you look at reputable pollsters on the issue, it's usually something like:

Should Obamacare be repealed? yes 46 %
no 44 %

Neither side gets > 50% of the vote. When you break down each part and poll it, almost every part has approval in the low-mid 50's. The problem with polling on Obamacare is that many who are against it are against it because they prefer single payer and vote yes. So for a small segment, it isn't a vote for status quo, it's a vote for going more left than Obamacare is. The takeaway when you looked at exit polls is that it's neither popular or unpopular, but that it wasn't a deal breaker for most. The other take away is the average voter doesn't even know what it is at this point, and when asked about specific parts of it, they generally favored it slightly. Once implemented fully, a better appraisal can be made once people start to see the real benefits and real problems with it. Doesn't matter anyway, elections have consequences as they say, and it isn't going anywhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

Slightly off? You said, "I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly." Turns out it was "73% of Independents oppose Obamacare." That is more than just being "slightly off." That is basically lying.

---

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrigan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

Slightly off? You said, "I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly." Turns out it was "73% of Independents oppose Obamacare." That is more than just being "slightly off." That is basically lying.

---

:lol

---

Try the second one cumquat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrigan

:lol

---

Try the second one cumquat.

---

Yeah. It was a link to a random poll from 6 months ago. Very compelling evidence. I'm convinced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

I'm thinking major things like Obamacare should be passed based on a popular vote. If it passes through that then go for it. I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly.

---

I agree that something that has the scope to take over roughly 1/6 of our economy should get voted on nationally. I also think that the populous should also have the right to vote on foreign treaties that have the possibility of usurping our constitutional rights or economic interests in order to "be fair" to less developed countries. I don't think that the US public pays enough attention to vote on any basis other than partisanship and talking points though.

Agent Smith pretty much hit the nail on the head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxKYfTvZFb8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

Try the second one cumquat.

---

I mean I know you want to live in your own delusional world and all, but read BCR's post. Then read it again if you don't understand it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrigan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

Try the second one cumquat.

---

I mean I know you want to live in your own delusional world and all, but read BCR's post. Then read it again if you don't understand it.

---

Yeah no shit you canadian fuck. His post proves why a popular vote is needed for major issues. You're a jealous idiot who despises success. I should post a snap shot of my bank account for your enjoyment. Probably cause you to go Jovan on your miserable family then yourself so I'll spare them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

I'm wondering why there isn't a popular vote for major major bills that affect the entire country. The easy answer is it isn't in the constitution I suppose. However, why do we allow a handfull of people, relative to the countries population, to decide our futures?

"Well you elected them." Fuck that, my guy didn't win.

I'm thinking major things like Obamacare should be passed based on a popular vote. If it passes through that then go for it. I bet 75% of the country is against it yet it will be implemented shortly.

---

I actually wrote a highschool paper about this in 1995. I thought I had soem genious idea about using the internet to vote on a wide variety of issues on a national level. I got an F LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pooh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrigan

I mean I know you want to live in your own delusional world and all, but read BCR's post. Then read it again if you don't understand it.

---

Yeah no shit you canadian fuck. His post proves why a popular vote is needed for major issues. You're a jealous idiot who despises success. I should post a snap shot of my bank account for your enjoyment. Probably cause you to go Jovan on your miserable family then yourself so I'll spare them.

---

I'm not Canadian.

There are too many issues to be decided by a popular vote.

Also many of them would end up being influenced by propaganda by the side with the most money.

This happens all the time in California, where each election features various "propositions" regarding various law changes. Some of them are actually pretty major. Often the best-bankrolled side wins.

An example of this was this year's Prop 30. Governor Brown and the well-bankrolled supporters of the proposition successfully scared Californians into passing an increase of both state sales taxes and state income tax for the rich. The premise was that the money would go to schools (and that the schools would go broke if this wasn't passed), but in reality, there is no requirement that Prop 30 money actually end up in the classroom. It could be diverted to the state general fund if "needed". This passed despite the fact that state sales tax in California is already the highest in the nation, and state income tax is second highest.

The barrage of pro-30 commercials (along with legitimacy from the governor) convinced people that California children would suffer without passing it, so it won easily.

Also, I am not completely against Obamacare. Health care needs major reform in this country. Obamacare attempts to fix some of the problems, but in my opinion, fails to solve the biggest issues.

Yes, Obamacare solved some minor problems (such as removing the lifetime benefit cap), and it is going to allow everyone to get insured, but it is creating a huge level of unnecessary bureaucracy, and the costs of the whole thing are going to be unnecessarily high.

Unfortunately, Republicans haven't been very good at offering viable alternatives to Obamacare. Simply opposing it and saying "We don't need this" isn't going to work. We do need some kind of reform. We just don't need this particular attempt at reform.

Still trying to figure out why every single bill that goes through the Senate doesn't get insta-shipped to the Supreme Court to be verified as Constitutional before it goes live?