Real Election Reform

[dtotire]

The ineptness of this Administration shows that we need a better method of electing presidents. The present method is chaotic and costly, and doesn’t get the most qualified candidates. Money rather than merit determines who is elected president. We cannot afford to elect any more mediocrities.
I would suggest that candidates for President be nominated by a committee composed of anyone who is or has been the Governor of a state. As a group, governors would be the best qualified to select the candidates. They would evaluate the various candidates and select several of the best qualified on the basis of experience, intelligence, and communications skills who would then be placed on the ballot. They would make their selections four months before the general election, during which time the general public could familiarize themselves with the candidates. Voters would make the final decision, by selecting all those who they found approvable. This would be more in line with what the writers of the Constitution had in mind when they specified that the President be selected by an elite body of electors. Unfortunately they did not specify how the electors would be chosen, and eventually they were chosen by popular vote. This method has proven to be chaotic and costly.
In the approvable system the voter may choose more than one person from a slate of several possibilities. The candidate with the most approvable votes would become the President. If no one received a majority, there would be a runoff election. The winner would be a consensus President, who would be able to unite the country. This method would end the long and drawn-out process we have today, and be far less costly. There would be few, if any negative campaign ads which turn off the public and may be responsible for the low turnout at the polls.

[mikelewis]

1. One major reason...

It's not constitutional. To take the selection of President totally out of the hands of the people would be opposite of what the framers had in mind.

[librechik]

5. yeah, they dropped this idea early on (founding fathers)

in favor of a more representative democracy and 2 houses.

[Peace Patriot]

2. Sorry, I don't want Arnold Schwarzenegger or Jeb Bush picking presidential

candidates, any more than they already do by way of collusion with Diebold and ES&S and other election theft corporations.

The Electoral Vote system (the Constitutional one) is clunky and outdated, but it is not the problem. The problem is that BUSHITE CORPORATIONS OWN AND CONTROL THE ELECTION *SYSTEM* WITH "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY PROGRAMMING CODE IN THE NEW ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES AND TABULATORS, WITH VIRTUALLY NO AUDIT/RECOUNT CONTROLS.

I mean, it's a no-brainer.

And after we've fixed THAT--that is, after we've RESTORED our right to vote--THEN we can ban all private money from political campaigns and institute public financing.

Don't need anything fancy or new. Just the basics. 1. Count all the votes. 2. Get money out of it.

You'd be amazed what TRANSPARENT elections can do for democracy.

[Peace Patriot]

3. I do sympathize with where I think you're coming from, dtotire--and

welcome to DU! It seems to me that what you want is WISDOM (kind of like Plato's idea of philosopher kings running governments). But I assure you that, in this case, the people are not the problem. I think the problem is very simple, and is twofold, as outlined above: 1) Bushites control the vote tabulation (which Democrats have insanely, or corruptly, gone along with), and 2) Money.

These two items do not directly impact the mechanics of the primary and convention system, but fixing them will profoundly change the dynamics of all elections, including presidential elections. Can you just imagine going into an election in which Republicans are not given an automatic 5% to 10% advantage by their buds at Diebold and ES&S, and, in addition, cannot buy elections; and also going into an election in which no incumbent has spent 90% of his/her previous time in office at fundraising sessions with fat corporate lobbyists, and no candidate can out-buy another in slick TV ads.

We hardly know what democracy looks like any more. We've lost the fundamental IDEA of elections--open, transparent vote counting, after an honest and FAIR exchange of ideas, with all candidates on an equal footing.

Virtually ALL polls over the last two years--on ALL issues, and on Bush/Cheney approval ratings--show a 60/40 majority in this country that is progressive and anti-Bush. The fact that this great progressive majority is NOT represented in Washington DC is NOT the fault of the primary election/convention system or the Electoral College system. It is the fault of, a) non-transparent elections, and b) money buying politicians.

I trust that majority. I think that majority has been systematically disenfranchised--and I think if it was RE-enfranchised, and was able to vote in CLEAN (non-money influenced) elections, it would make good choices.

I'm a real democrat with a small d. I believe in the wisdom of the people. The corporatists and war profiteers who are running this country do not--and THAT is the problem.

[texastoast]

4. Get the whoredom out of politics

You have to follow the money now. If campaign finance reform was meaningful, you would have more candidates who actually had the intelligence to face the issues available for office.

Most smart people with a modicum of decency don't want to sell their souls for office.