View Poll Results: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    5 15.63%
  • No.

    25 78.13%
  • Other.

    2 6.25%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Melbourne Florida
    Last Seen
    04-18-17 @ 03:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    16,763

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    No. I don't want people who don't care enough to get out on their own influencing policy. We have too many uninformed voters already. If a person doesn't care enough to go vote I'm fine with that, but I won't listen to their complaints later.

    I also do not support "get out the vote" campaigns for this same reason.
    If we keep our voting rate at about 30% on average, we will continue to get the same problems. Over and over and over.

  2. #22
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:00 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,397

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by CRUE CAB View Post
    If we keep our voting rate at about 30% on average, we will continue to get the same problems. Over and over and over.
    I don't think the voting rate/percentage is relevant. It's the (political) education and interest of those who do vote. That would apply at 30% or 60% or 100%. Right now we have a roughly 90% disapproval rate of Congress in general and a roughly 90% re-election rate for Congress. THAT's the problem, the disconnect.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  3. #23
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    I don't think the voting rate/percentage is relevant. It's the (political) education and interest of those who do vote. That would apply at 30% or 60% or 100%. Right now we have a roughly 90% disapproval rate of Congress in general and a roughly 90% re-election rate for Congress. THAT's the problem, the disconnect.
    The problem is gerrymandering. People tend to love their personal representative.

    I say we come up with some sort of randomized algorithm that only responds to roughly equal population sizes and one approved by all parties with at least 2% of the national vote (that should include libertarians, maybe 1% or something) and the justice department. That code should also be the subject of state public referendums to ensure its nonbias.

  4. #24
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:00 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,397

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by tacomancer View Post
    The problem is gerrymandering. People tend to love their personal representative.

    I say we come up with some sort of randomized algorithm that only responds to roughly equal population sizes and one approved by all parties with at least 2% of the national vote (that should include libertarians, maybe 1% or something) and the justice department. That code should also be the subject of state public referendums to ensure its nonbias.
    Gerrymandering is a HUGE problem, I agree, and it needs to be addressed. Problem is, the people who would address it are the ones benefiting from it.

    People do vote their interests. And that's not automatically wrong, but people also need to understand that their interests lie beyond their own front door. You can't like what your representative is doing because he "brings home jobs" to your area then criticize other people's representatives for doing the same thing. For all the whining and complaining, people's votes indicate that they are just fine with pork and earmarks and bloated government spending.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all political parties from running for any federal or state political position. No more Democrats, no more Republicans, no more Green Party or Libertarian or Socialist or any of the other myriad other parties that are out there. You could be a part of a party, but you cannot run based on that party. IE: No D or R next to the name on a ballot. The person would also be denied any sponsership of a political party by disallowing them to even speak of any political parties what so ever in any capacity or situation.

    Please note that these are not the exact words to be used obviously. This is just a gist.
    I would have no issue with not allowing "Democrat" or "Republican" to appear on the ballot next to them.

    I would have significant issue with passing an amendment that directly limits an individuals speech. It's similar to my issue with banning gay marriage. It's a limitation of a right that does not directly protect another persons right in the process; that is not the type of thing I believe the constitution should be used for.

    I would vote against said amendment

  6. #26
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Why is it that only Republican-type voters come up with these ideas?
    Especially when they're out of power?
    Just like with term limits in 1994 and 2010?
    Ring a bell?
    The two times the House changed hands !
    I don't vote for any republican or democrat. Nice try though.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  7. #27
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,762

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    I never say "nice try though", since I usually don't mean it.
    I will continue to maintain that "term-limits" has always been a part of the GOP agenda since Gingrich's contract ON America in 1994.

    Most GOPs in Illinois started using "BLUE" signs last decade and removing the word Republican.
    I'm proud to be a Democrat and don't understand GOP voters running from their brand .

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    I don't vote for any republican or democrat. Nice try though.
    Physics is Phun

  8. #28
    Guru
    tlmorg02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Louisville, Ky
    Last Seen
    07-23-15 @ 11:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,347

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all political parties from running for any federal or state political position. No more Democrats, no more Republicans, no more Green Party or Libertarian or Socialist or any of the other myriad other parties that are out there. You could be a part of a party, but you cannot run based on that party. IE: No D or R next to the name on a ballot. The person would also be denied any sponsership of a political party by disallowing them to even speak of any political parties what so ever in any capacity or situation.

    Please note that these are not the exact words to be used obviously. This is just a gist.

    While I understand the point you are making, I feel that such a construct would ultimately fail. Human nature is to group together, herd if you will. And to ban humans from banning together in the us versus them framework work never last.

    From football, and other sports, to school cliques, to politics... Humans have the mental need to feel like a part of a group and they need their group to have an enemy. It just makes society function as it is all apart of their nature.

  9. #29
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    I like the computer redraws the political districts every 10 years but ... even then we'll have bias come into play with those who program the computers. While it may help the situation it won't solve the problem of gerrymandering. I would however, vote for the 28th Amendment to put term limits on Congress such that, no Senator or Representative of any party can serve Congress for more than 12 years, in any one or both houses. They could still run for President, be nominated by the Executive, Judicial or Legislative branch as a bureaucrat, or become a lobbyist. As part of this amendment I would also state that Congresspeople could no longer use insider information to benefit their own personal wealth - so purchases of land, stocks, bonds with insider information would be illegal and congress would be subject to the same laws as the rest of America.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  10. #30
    Sage
    Kreton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Last Seen
    11-13-17 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,118

    Re: Would you vote for this type of Amendment to the Constitution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Why? Are parties really needed that bad?
    Thats just it. Its easier to control people if you give them "2" choices that are the same thing. It keeps people in office and it keeps the same people in office or at least the same minded people so that no matter who wins big businesses and the people who put these guys in office are always protected.

    I think something like this would actually make people think
    Politicians dont want that.
    Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.
    Stephen R. Covey


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •