Problem solved

[elwood127]

I came up with a brilliant thought. Let's remove the "D" and "R" and "I" suffix from all candidates names so that morons that vote for the "R" for the sake of the "R" and so on, have to actually look into the beliefs of the person running. I'm sure turnout would be single digit. Last nights turnout proves that the last election was about being part of the herd and not about politics. Very few young or blacks bothered to show up. What do you think?

[merrylander]

Virginia has been a red state for a long time, no surprise and Deed ran a negative campaign so lost the independents. NJ was over the corruption more than anything. New York was the telling result, Beck and Limbaugh are pushing the party so far right that they will likely spend the next forty years wandering in the wilderness.

But yeah, remove all party affiliation from the ballots, in fact remove it from the voter regiistration. Hell even the dog catcher is identified as R or D.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by elwood127

I came up with a brilliant thought. Let's remove the "D" and "R" and "I" suffix from all candidates names so that morons that vote for the "R" for the sake of the "R" and so on, have to actually look into the beliefs of the person running. I'm sure turnout would be single digit. Last nights turnout proves that the last election was about being part of the herd and not about politics. Very few young or blacks bothered to show up. What do you think?

I think removing the party labels would reduce turnout. Frankly, the labels are what a lot of folks use to decide who they're going to vote for. Remove them and some people will find it too hard to figure out who to vote for.

Last nights turnout proves that the last election was about being part of the herd and not about politics. Very few young or blacks bothered to show up. What do you think?

First, it's only the two governor's races. Nationwide the score is Dems 8, Reps 2 and Ind 1. The only races the media are talking about are the two Republican wins. They're spinning it into a "sea change" in favor of the Republicans. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

I think the turnout says more about a lack of organization for the Dems. Hell, the DNC Chairman is Tim Kaine. He's the outgoing governor in Virginia and he couldn't even deliver his own state and his own job.

Also there were a hell of a lot of newly minted Independents, all those folks who won't call themselves Republican any more.

I want Howard Dean back!

John

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I think removing the party labels would reduce turnout. Frankly, the labels are what a lot of folks use to decide who they're going to vote for. Remove them and some people will find it too hard to figure out who to vote for.

John

Are they not the very people we want to stay home?

[BlueStreak]

The wingnuts at work were gloating last night.
One of them said,
"Now I don't have to worry about any of MY money going to pay for some other assholes health problems."
I asked, "You have insurance?"
Him, "Yeah."
Me, "Dumbass."
Him, (Insert blank stare.)

Dave

[BlueStreak]

However, I do think Elwood has a gem of an idea. No more political parties. Every candidate must run solely on their own merits, by their own means.
It would be a very interesting experiment.

Dave

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Are they not the very people we want to stay home?

Well, yes. I thought about that as I wrote but one of Ellwood's concerns was low turnout. I was addressing only that.

John

[d-ray657]

I'm afaraid that eliminating party affiliation would make it even more of a money game. The indiidual with the best finances will be able to contol the agenda, label the opponent, and not be subject to effective rebuttal. At least with party affiliation there is some sort of brand identification. The GOP is becoming more and more of a fast-food chain store where the party tastes and looks the same wherever they are found. I would like to be aware of that brand when I vote, because I don't like that flavor.

Regards,

D-Ray

[merrylander]

One thing that probably affects turnout is that AFAIK there is no law stating that employees must be given XX hours in which to vote while the polls are open. In Canada people had to get a 3 hour window in which to vote.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by merrylander

One thing that probably affects turnout is that AFAIK there is no law stating that employees must be given XX hours in which to vote while the polls are open. In Canada people had to get a 3 hour window in which to vote.

There are some countries where national elections are held on Sundays. That way people's work schedules present less of an obstacle to voting. I suppose the Fundies would scream bloody murder if we tried to do that here. Observing the Sabbath and all that.

John