143

Democracy is when only 14% of voters get to decide an entire election and the other 86% are functionally meaningless (hexbear.net)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by Guamer@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is based on 43 states being considered "non-negotiable" and "set in stone" while only 7 are considered "swing" states

Also consider I specified "voters", who are at best only 2/3 of the total population, which leaves out about 100 million extra people

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] ClimateChangeAnxiety@hexbear.net 41 points 4 months ago

It’s fucking ludicrous to not have all of the primaries on the same date

[-] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 4 months ago

I actually disagree with this. The way it is now is stupid ya but having the primaries be staggered could give the chance for otherwise unknown candidates to gain traction. Since a national campaign is hard to pull off for a small candidate but if they can focus in on 1 state they can actually make an impact and then get national attention by doing well in that single state.

Now in saying that i dont actually think liberal democracies are a good thing. I prefer a model like China has where you have elections in sequential levels with the lower level reps electing the higher level reps. It allows a more close connection to the people representing you and keeps elections small so that small candidates can make their case easily. And prevents sensationalization the way american elections are. I would combine a system like this with the ability to enact direct democratic actions via ballot measures on specific issues that people are really invested in.

[-] ClimateChangeAnxiety@hexbear.net 8 points 4 months ago

Okay that’s a good point actually. Maybe they should just be in order of population from smallest to biggest? That way anyone could win until pretty late in the thing and every state might actually matter

[-] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 4 months ago

I think that still runs into the problem of the first state being like really conservative. I think if ur looking to like change the system as little as possible and improve the primary a bit maybe you could find like a low population state that also leans heavily in your favor typically in the general and start there? That way its a small test run election with your actual base. Or maybe do like city primaries? Like NYC, LA, etc have their own primary elections, party sponsored events where all the candidates get to speak, and then broadcast them nationally. Then do a big national primary a few weeks or months later?

But tbh i think the main issue is that the primaries atleast for the dems are generally just rigged anyway. Youve got like super delegates, and back door deals to stop any left leaning candidates.