politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Making people spend hours assembling in person in the middle of winter, with all of the potential weather catastrophes that time of year can entail, may not be the most democratic way to approach democracy.
But it's the way the founding fathers did it! Surely there haven't been any advances in technology and travel since then to allow for more sane and modern voting systems
Eh… I don’t think the current system is without flaws, but a fully remote digital system would be so much less secure than even our current system.
Even going completely mail in has issues. Especially if someone does something stupid like put someone in charge of the mail system that seems hostile to the idea of… well, mail.
Agreed. There definitely needs to be a balance. But there are, imo, middle ground paths. If we just started with automatic voter registration for all adults, expanded the drop off ballot system, instituted a vote verification system for voters themselves (i.e., I get a slip receipt at my voting place and can verify how it was counted anytime with ability to dispute and challenge), mandated non-political population based districting and poling location placements (vs. allowing politically elected representatives to dictate), made voting day a mandatory holiday where everything shuts down, and got rid of this archaic stand in a group in a church caucus system, I think we'd see public trust in our election systems restored quite a bit. That being said, I recognize that this is, in our current environment, a pipe dream.
This one would enable vote-buying and voter intimidation
I can see that as a valid counter argument. To be honest I'm not informed enough on the data to be able to weigh the two properly against each other personally. Out of curiosity, do you think there could ever be a system (or have any been proposed that you're aware of) that would help provide the transparency but not at the cost of loss of privacy and freedom of vote?
Paper ballots. Counted by hand.