- Shorten the campaign season: Mid-term elections aren't for 16 months, yet already I'm hearing all kinds of ass-smooching and mudslinging as people start to gear up for the next election. Here in Michigan there have already been polls as to whom people would vote for Governor (with the inherent mudslinging as well). There are already groups paying for ads based on who MIGHT be selected for the Supreme Court. Now, I realize the last one I mentioned doesn’t really fall into the normal campaign season type stuff, but how soon before we see our first campaign ad? Not long. Tell you what: let’s save some money and cut down on the bullshit by shortening the entire campaign season down to six weeks. At the end of September the candidates are off to the races and if they can’t manage to get their message across in six weeks that’sjust fine, especially if people can…
- Vote for “none of the above”: I think it is ironic to take cues from Russia, but they have a nifty idea when it comes to elections. Parties put their candidates on the ballets but voters have the option for voting for “none of the above.” If “none of the above” gets more votes than any of the candidates the election is scrapped and in six weeks there’s a new election with different candidates.
Now, right away I know some people might say “well what happens if after the first election no one is elected, and the same with the second, we have to have a President come January!!!!”
Dude, chill. If it has to be done, we can move elections back six weeks. I realize that the Constitution says that we have to have elections at such and such a time. We can either change the Constitution, or easier yet, we can delay the start of the next Presidential term. The latter really isn’t such a big deal.
If I remember correctly the Presidential term used to start in March (or something) but was moved to its current date.
Besides, a President can be President for up to 10 years, so unless there was an extensive delay there wouldn’t be a problem. Even if there was an extensive delay, there’s always the Vice President, so again no problem.
Any thoughts?
2 comments:
Mr. NOTA might have received my vote in the last two Presidential elections.
I agree about the campaigning. People want to know how to curb campaign finance, simple, make it so their is less campaigning.
I agree. Considering my options the last time around NOTA would have gotten my vote.
I think NOTA would be a real wake-up call to BOTH parties, preventing the side that won with a 1% margin from declaring a "mandate of the people."
Now, campaign reform: how do we get it changed when the people that would do the changing are the ones that would be affected? Can we do a national referendum?
Post a Comment