Our Flawed Voting system

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » June 11, 2004, 4:49 pm

I have been thinking about a new voting system...

The ballot should look like:

o FOR Kerry
o FOR Bush
o AGAINST Kerry
o AGAINST Bush

The "AGAINST" votes should be taken as negative votes. If the winning candidate does not have some above some certain positive number (TBD), he should be accepted as president but with limited capacity to (a) go to war, (b) submit bills to Congress, (c) appoint high court judges (Federal and Supreme), etc...

Thoughts?

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » June 11, 2004, 4:50 pm

Sound great.
Add in a fifth option - against both.
I'd rather not see Bush serve a second term, nor do I wish to see Kerry serve one.

XunilTlatoani · Post by **XunilTlatoani** » June 11, 2004, 4:58 pm

The president is already limited in a, b, and c by seperation of powers. You can submit a bill to congress, but it won't necessarily pass. You can appoint a supreme court justice, but congress can shoot him/her down regardless. The only problem with "a" is that there are usually loopholes to get around a congressional or UN resolution for war, but I don't see how you can limit the president from going to "war" without taking away his title of commander-in-chief completely (which would beg the question...who would be in charge?).

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » June 11, 2004, 5:07 pm

XunilTlatoani wrote:The president is already limited in a, b, and c by seperation of powers. You can submit a bill to congress, but it won't necessarily pass. You can appoint a supreme court justice, but congress can shoot him/her down regardless. The only problem with "a" is that there are usually loopholes to get around a congressional or UN resolution for war, but I don't see how you can limit the president from going to "war" without taking away his title of commander-in-chief completely (which would beg the question...who would be in charge?).

Go join a serious thread; this one is for levity.

XunilTlatoani · Post by **XunilTlatoani** » June 11, 2004, 6:31 pm

You didn't put enough smilies in it

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » June 11, 2004, 7:58 pm

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9892

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » June 11, 2004, 8:13 pm

Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9892

Good work, Holmes, you have unraveled my train of thought!

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » June 11, 2004, 10:56 pm

that sounds pretty pointless to me, and unconstitutional.

A vote for kerry or against bush would have the same exact effect mathimatically. So, the same canidate would get elected as by a "for kerry" "for bush" system