An Australian friend on his way back to Australia was worried about his flight arriving on time so that he could participate in the mandatory vote —for which ejection I don’t remember but it was last year.
We have open primaries here in Michigan. All I have to do is tell the poll worker I want a dem or rep ballot.
Toni is neither judge, jury or prosecutor. Not even sure she's a lawyer. So having an opinion based on context is definitely legit.
There was the Federal Election. And if they lived in New South Wales or Victoria it could have been the state one as well.
As I remember it, that law was passed to stop Nixon from running for a third term. He was looking a little power hungry.
I don't remember where that quote is from.
I'm not saying it's a bad idea; I'm saying that it's antidemocratic. Because it is.
Nope. The 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951. It was inspired by FDR's 4 term streak.
If you think that, you haven't understood anything I have posted here.
Then you don't understand what "democracy" is.
Being outside the country is considered a valid excuse not to vote - if you're not in Australia, you are eligible to vote, but not required to.
I think we’re talking past each other somewhat. I agree that it is a compromise of pure democratic process. I just consider it more important to preserve that process, imperfect as it is, than to eliminate imperfections when doing so could (would) imperil it in its entirety.
Here’s where term limits give me pause: there is an enormous cadre of civil servants who do almost all of the work necessary to keep the country functioning. Elected officials pontificate, take up a lot of news time and make lots of noise—occasionally passing a piece of legislation and the civil employees not only carry out most of the functioning but are also responsible for generating reports containing g information pertinent to legislation as various agencies’ workings. It’s an enormous amount of power. If we gave a perpetual cycle of newbie legislators, it’s hard to see how any of them can accumulate sufficient understanding of the various wheels at play.
No: I DO have a very good understanding of democracy. Hint: a democracy does not have a king or queen.
Because even members of minority parties have a vested interest in who rules the polity they are a part of. I've voted on the Republican ticket on multiple occasions, as a vaguely Left person in a strongly Democrat-controlled state. Not out of a desire to "game the system", but because I genuinely felt that the Republican race was the more critical. I knew, for instance, that my state would be re-electing Obama. Foregone conclusion. There were no other serious candidates. But it was less clear whether Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum would be occupying the Republican seat. And I truly believed that I had a dog in that fight. Romney and I aren't on the same team, but he's nothing compared what a Santorum presidency would have been like. As, I believe, subsequent events bore out.
I see that as a problem, but mostly on the right side of the aisle, where narcissism and egotism dictate that lowly pages, interns and career people only exist to serve the elected [trumpsucking moron] elites’ capricious and often idiotic whims.
I spent 6 years of my youth working in Washington DC. You know all those comedy bits about IT treating office workers with disdain?
It occurred to me that compulsory voting could very possibly be a great thing for America, especially black urban areas. If people have to vote, the resources have to exist to enable it. Huge lines in urban centers would need to disappear, else lawsuits. (well... until the rabid right-wing SCOTUS rules voting is unconstitutional).
How has that worked with compulsory education? By which I mean: excellent idea but as always, resources to make it a high quality and useful resource have depended very much upon socioeconomic class and skin color. It should NOT be that way.
I has actually worked quite well. So well in fact, that the rabid right wants to de-fund it.
That’s a good reason to not subject their jobs to term limits. Not a good reason to oppose term limits for elected officials.
Oops.
No prob. I'm far from the last person to make a mistake.
