• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the US election process too long?

Is the election process too long?

  • Yes its far too long!

    Votes: 18 78.3%

  • Nope I love the build up, if anything its not long enough!

    Votes: 5 21.7%
  • Total voters
    23
samsmart said:
That the politician can't do campaign ads? Well, okay then. That just means some other group will do the campaign ads for him. Going to try to restrict that? Well, that's an infringement of free speech.
Click to expand...

Even a law saying a candidate can't run ads would be an infringement on free speech.

That media outlets can't report on politicians speaking out against others or for certain policy positions? Well, it's not the news channel's fault that this is what the politicians are talking about. They're just reporting the news. And news outlets don't need to be censored in that way.
Click to expand...

And can't be.

Regulating the media of political campaigns will be too complicated and litigious to be worth the trouble. Better for the lesser number of people who are annoyed to just exercise their choice not to watch something and instead watch something that doesn't annoy them.
Click to expand...

Tada!
 
DiAnna said:
The election process has been dragged out so damned long that government doesn't even try to pretend that it's doing "the people's business" because all they have time for is preparing for the next election.
Click to expand...

Doesn't getting elected mean you get the most votes from the people, which means they like what you're doing, which means you are doing the people's business?
 
The ever-lengthening run up to the general election is one of several factors that has made campaigning so costly - and has helped make the wealthy more powerful in our system as a result.

I would favor not only a shorter run up to the general elections, but limits on the amount of TV and radio ads, newspaper ads and billboards candidates are allowed to use. Every election cycle leaves the majority of the voting public sick of hearing about the election. Cycles with a lot of mud-slinging anger the voters. Enough already.
 
Juiposa said:
YES. Having four year terms, but the president have to worry about an election for half of it is stupid. Do like we do, 36 days, that's all there is to campaign. Gives Everyone a better chance and makes it more fair, and cheaper. There are spending limits here also, which help with fairness. Also the candidates a chosen by the members of the respective parties way in advance.

Yes the American electoral process is way too long.
Click to expand...
These details I did not know..
Another area where Canada is more advanced than us !
IMO, 20 days in November is long enough.
Right now, Obama is begging for money, and I'm sure that the 7 clowns are doing the same.
 
Juiposa said:
Here, NONE of that is restricted. What is restricted is that 36 prior to an election is the only time a candidate can formally campaign. Meaning doing tours of the country preaching their platform, running ads and the such. They cannot say "Vote for me and..." 2 years in advance. Then can express their opinion, everyone can, but not in campaigning attitude.
Click to expand...

1) That's still restriction of free speech. People at any time should be allowed to say to vote for anybody.

2) That won't solve the problem. Politicians will continue speaking out and raising money and speaking out against their opponents. They'll just omit, "Vote for me and..." and replace it with, "If I were President..."
 
Cephus said:
I'm not worried about what they talk about, but that they aren't doing the job they are elected to do because they are too busy trying to get re-elected.
Click to expand...

That will happen anyways. And it could be argued that every politician makes every political act they do in order to get re-elected. After all, that is the pressure their constituents have to be a representative of their collective will. So I think that's a price we pay for living in a democratic republic. And I don't think that's a very high price.
 
I think it is fine. It is just that the media penetrates your soul too early.
 
I have officially become disgusted with American politics. The campaigns last far too long and cost way too much money and accomplish very little. Coupld that with other issues like lobbying, the Electoral College and the fact that we only really get two candidates that really are never that different? It is utter bull****.
 
From where I'm sitting, elections have gotten to the point where they seem to be more about entertainment than about politics/what's good for the country.
 
Agreed. And we have entire networks devoted to harping on every single moment of the event... mostly Fox.
 
StillBallin75 said:
From where I'm sitting, elections have gotten to the point where they seem to be more about entertainment than about politics/what's good for the country.
Click to expand...

That's true.

But limiting campaigning isn't going to change that either.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Agreed. And we have entire networks devoted to harping on every single moment of the event... mostly Fox.
Click to expand...


too be fair all the American networks are just as bad as each other. Last week I stuggled to find reporting on the EU summit or the Russsian protests on most networks.
 
Higgins86 said:
too be fair all the American networks are just as bad as each other. Last week I stuggled to find reporting on the EU summit or the Russsian protests on most networks.
Click to expand...

just use the internet. Cable news is a waste of time.
 
I propose a new Federal law:

no one can declare their candidacy for President, until January 1st of the year of the election. No primaries can begin until February 1st of that same year.
 
a lot of it could be solved by consolidating primaries. we should absolutely do this. at the very most, two super Tuesday primaries in the spring before the election. ideally, a national primary day.
 
Thunder said:
I propose a new Federal law:

no one can declare their candidacy for President, until January 1st of the year of the election. No primaries can begin until February 1st of that same year.
Click to expand...

Which won't stop politicians from talking about the issues they'll campaign on when they get ready to declare their candidacy. Which won't really stop anything.
 
Thunder said:
I propose a new Federal law:

no one can declare their candidacy for President, until January 1st of the year of the election. No primaries can begin until February 1st of that same year.
Click to expand...

1st one violates the first amendment. Second one makes sense, and actually it ought to be later than Feb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom