My real voting views

Voting

"Since the United States Supreme Court’s disastrous Shelby County v. Holder decision in 2013, states across the country have been actively working to reverse the hard-fought protections for voting rights secured during the civil rights movement. Fair and equal access to the ballot is essential to our ability to uphold and protect our nation’s democracy. Every American citizen is entitled to vote, and we will work to secure voting rights and end racist gerrymandering." Justice Democrats

Over 70% of congressional districts in America are deemed “safely Republican or safely Democrat” and do not have competitive general elections. We support bold reforms to provide voters an equal say in our democracy. This includes efforts to expand the House of Representatives and the Fair Representation Act to create multi-member districts and ranked-choice voting.

The US should at the very least implement direct democracy so women, immigrants, BIPOC people (including Indigenous communities), LGTBQ+ people, and other diverse groups are not only recognized, but become championed as key protagonists in the growing calls for social, economic, and political reform. 

“ If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal” Emma Goldman

Both parties serve bourgeois interests and that is the story in a nutshell. The RNC push us further rightward while the DNC normalizes it. It's good cop bad cop with scraps occasionally thrown to us plebs to give us the illusion of change. Electorialism in bourgeois democracy is a sham particularly during the presidency. At best voting local is your best bet for change. 

Americans don’t trust the voting process

Good article on voting in the US here

I believe that more Americans need to be politically active. 

I am against banning people from voting due to their political views and only allowing them to vote after they have been re educated

That is voter disenfranchisement, restrictive and goes against our democracy and founding principals and is wrong on every level. That is something you'd see in a literal fascist country or meme Joseph Stalinesque USSR not in a free country like the US. It is against our rights and freedom to require people to be re educated to vote and I won't allow this country to enact such totalitarian, anti human policies. Freedom means freedom ya'll 

Not voting Democrat is not a threat go our Democracy, anyone who claims that it is is being totalitarian

Voting for political Republican candidates or not voting at all is NOT VIOLENCE and only mentally ill people would say that it is violence

I believe that limiting voting for people is pretty bad .I believe that both sides increasing voter turn out is the best way to make voting for more fair.

I support sort of photo or non photo ID for people to vote  

I typically more often than not, oppose electoral voting and political reform and I instead stress the importance of alternative strategies outside political systems to achieve a free society. 

Ideally we should vote like on Wikipedia during Arbcom elections, everyone votes as many times as they want

People should be required to register before they vote (except in voter reform 2 in which case I don’t want voter registration requirements), including showing id when they register

At minimum and the furthest left I will go on this is the following:

First time voters should to provide id to vote if they registered by mail and didn't provide the correct id to register and should show their voter registration card each time they vote and if they do not consistently vote, they should re register before the next election. 

If they do consistently vote, they shouldn't have to re register before the next election except to update information (which wouldn't be a bad idea every now and again) . There should also be a strict, obsessive and thorough reading and checking of voter rolls by poll workers in this at minimum scenario 

As it is now, I am very open minded/open hearted to Joe Manchin's mid 2021 compromise on voting laws which would include a flexible national voter ID mandate. 

This would require voter ID nation wide to vote with allowable alternatives (like utility bill) to prove identity to vote. Washington Post stated here https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/21/democrats-voter-id: "There is an emerging school of thought that even stricter voter ID rules may not be as suppressive as many Democrats once warned"  I support non strict photo ids being required to vote. I also feel Stacy Abrams has some good views on voting rights that I agree with including her suggestions for this Joe Manchin compromise.

I have three different voting reform ideas of my own that I support

Voter reform 1.  Either non strict non photo id (like in Colorado) should be required to vote when people go to the polls,  or strict non photo id should be required to vote when people go to the polls. Voters who have a reasonable impediment to getting an id should be able to vote. 

But voters who can’t meet these requirements should then be required to provide identification (which can be a written or verbal confirmation of name, address and date of birth) and sign a poll book in order to vote. The request for identification is suspended if lines are longer than 45 minutes

Voter reform 2:  The same exact voter system that North Dakota has used for decades

There would be no require voter registration required to vote. In general, any person over the age of 18 who has lived in a precinct for three or more months would be able to vote without registration. 

In order to vote, however, a person would have to provide identification approved by the North Dakota Secretary of State as well as proof of entitlement to vote at the polling place before being permitted to vote..The acceptable forms of identification would include a driver's license, non-driver's id card, tribal government issued id card, or an id card provided by a state long-term care facility. Neither a US Passport or a College- or University-issued id card would be accepted forms of id.

Voter reform 3  The US creates a national photo id for Americans. Then they require the use of non strict, national photo id (like in Montana, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Rhode Island, and South Dakota) for voting (but no id requirement for registering to vote or mail in voting). 

It would be much easier for poor people to get said national photo id than it is to get current types of photo ids . 

People who can't provide that non strict, national photo id, but meet photo id exceptions like being victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault or stalking and have a "confidential listing" or have religious objections to being photographed (though it would be much much easier for them to meet these exceptions than it is for them to meet them now), they can either sign an affidavit when they vote each time along with being required to provide their signature to verify with a signature kept on file when they vote each time thus being able to vote or vote via trading at the polling place or a federal location

This vote trading means someone votes on their behalf for the candidate of their choice in the current election that they can't vote in or can. In turn, in the future when the ineligible voter can meet non strict photo id requirements they can then vote for the candidate of the person who they vote traded with in the previous election, along with voting whoever they want to vote for in that future election too.

If people can't provide that non strict, national photo id and don’t meet the exceptions above, if they can provide their voter registration card and either a Municipal Id (for people who can't get ids) or if they don’t have a Municipal Id, state their current name and residential address (and party affiliation in a primary election) along with signing voter authorization document and poll book they can then vote 

People need photo ids and non photo ids to do a lot of things like to fly on an airplane, buy Alcohol, etc it is not unreasonable that they should also need them to vote for no other reason as to give the appearance of a fair election even if its already fair without that requirement.  

If the majority of Democrats are against requiring ids to vote then that sounds a bit off to me and a bit fishy.

It is very hard to confirm voter fraud in elections so saying there are barely any voting fraud cases to justify voter id doesn’t take that into account

Democrats want people to show id when they buy guns but not when they vote? Why one and not the other?

I support a participatory democracy

I defend democracy in its republican tradition where the common good prevails and not the imposition of particular interests. 

The majorities should express themselves and decide and the minorities must be respected as such, only in this particular way will participatory democracy enable identities to be constructed in a respectable and tolerant manner. The citizens role is not just the subject of human rights but also of responsibilities within the community

A participatory democracy is good because it revitalizes citizens and thus restores dignity and legitimacy to social and political action . 

A democracy which is constitutionally republiced capable of guaranteeing universal basic human rights, respect for minorities, and groups who were historicsl,y excluded represented under a transparent ethical outline with instances of direct representation and binding participation. 

Permanent sovereignty is the basis for the construction of citizenry which exercises this right in all spheres of social life, shooting for the development of a democratic culture through all training and educational and instances; formal and informal.

We all form and build the state which is for all of us. I support the creation of an inclusive and citizen state as the main guarantor of the common good and assurance of universality and decommodification of social rights at both a cultural level and institutional level. The link between the state and citizenship is a powerful tool for the conflict between our current neoliberal model and a society that guarantees effective social rights

The combo of a strengthened state and expanded social and political citizenship must work with feedback between the two . The more democratic and inclusive the state is, the better the state will collect the citizens will and the more effective it will be in its role (or maybe even paternalistic role) as guarantor. 

This is MUCH better than Liberal 2.0 and big brotherism of bureaucrats who pass laws they they think people want, independent of input from them

I support a state where power is distributed equally for the promotion and development of territorial and or national identities ,structuring itself in a way to generate real local governments thus being able toreaffirm territorial autonomy as a fundamental part of democracy .I support reshaping political parties like this https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/Navegar?idNorma=1089164

Since the state is a political expression of organized society , it should not be a neutral agent but instead through a variety of creative and common sense, bipartisan methods,  not just economic but the distribution and the democratization of political, productive, gender, informational along with cultural territorial power and other spheres with inequalities exist . 

The state must manage and regulate (aligning with my economic views) the economical system (until we abolish the state) , being the owner and protector of strategic resources and the enviornmentand being able bodied to participate in economic production . 

I support political management with higher levels of transparency, participation, closeness (to the citizens), along with non SJW digital activism (like Xenofeminism), citizen campaigns, public accounts done periodically etc

In addition, its management was characterized by raising the levels of transparency, participation, closeness to citizens and digital activism, reporting in different parts of the District with different platforms the details of his parliamentary work, through citizen campaigns, periodic public accounts

Congress should adopt a series of measurements and goals that can be modified and reexamined over time. Representatives should select from these measures based on what they believe their constituents would care about then suggest how the laws they are passing will improve them.

I feel these measurements such as, but not limited to should be used to measure our GDP: Poverty rates, Life expectancy, Rates of Business formation, Clean Water, Crime Rates, Overdose deaths, Government Efficiency, Mental Health, Income Growth & Average Incomes, Affordability, Environmental Sustainability, Recidivism, Labor-force participation Rate, Military Readiness, Marriage Rates, Quality of Infrastructure, Rehabilitation Rates, Civic Engagement, Education Rates

I support direct democracy replacing representive democracy and giving people a more clear picture of political things that represents the interests of all citizens equally regardless of identity

We have to become direct and participatory democracy structures to empower everyone to equal sovereignty and also so the electorate decides on policy initiatives without elected representatives as proxies and which citizens participate individually and directly in political decisions and policies that affect their lives. 

This will make the need or desire to protest almost non existent as people will cause most of their political needs and wants implemented through direct and participatory democracy. (about BLM protests without saying it).  

I support citizen participation toward popular unity to aspire toward recovering politics to serve people.

I support using democracy to convert privileges of a few into rights of the majority thus I support the direct democratic participation of all persons in the areas of political decision making, as well as in the execution of public policies.

I support the direct and equal participation all citizens in the decision making process i.e in the execution of public policies

I am fine with practical and pragmatic decentralization

Decision making should be decentralized. I support decentralization. People should be able to fully participate in shaping decisions that are relevant to their lives. But this should only occur via secure pre political rights, all associations should be consensual . Decision makers who use a forcible top down approach are likely to have their decisions tainted by their fallibility due to their self interest motives at the expense of the public.

This is why small sized political units (maybe even radically localized ones), are humanizing but decentralization here means localized down to the level of the individual person

I put an emphasis on decentralized structures of political organization,and I assert hat a society based on freedom and justice could be achieved through abolishing authoritarian institutions that control certain means of production and subordinate the majority to an owning class or political and economic elite.

Politicians need to have a presence in social organizations and be among the people

Our political parties should attend to the conciliation needs of each person who participates in our political parties that is based on the commitment of the political parties’ regulations and protocols to attend to those needs and also when appropriate in the exercise of his public function.

We should ensure free, voluntary and open participation in our political parties to all people of all backgrounds, share the defense of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the democratic method of citizen participation and direct. We should also honestly discuss and respect all opinions, an objective for which we’ll always attempt to promote dialogue and the search for consensus.

Our political ideologies should be rooted in protocols of loyalty, respect, and understanding. This should management should have a necessary and fundamental that had a clear feminist focus

This will prevent African Americans in particular from defecting to the Republican side via Blexit. 

There is nothing wrong with African Americans not being Democrats as long as they belong to a political party to the Left of the Democrat Party (or even a party like the Forward Party , Serve America Party and possibly the Libertarian Party). 

We need to get African Americans to stop being supporting Liberalism 2.0 politicians and causes . 

I am pretty open to supporting full and comprehensive E governance/E voting and E government digitization

I support grass-roots empowerment and e-democracy, and direct democracy because the more hands on Americans are with politics, the more this can be realized: “ I believe that the government/state should stay out of enforcing moral changes in most to nearly all situations.  

Moral evolution can happen many times apart of the government/state and relations between people can emerge with freedom from the government/state. Most relationships in life should not be characterized as conflict as the left and right might have it. It's good to have mutual and humane respect for others as individuals.   It's also good to do positive and unselfish things without having to grapple with the political ramifications of doing those positive things.  ”

Representative democracy is bad in part because it is open to abuse by special interests and political influence

I support ranked choices voting

I support non partisan primaries

I am conditionally lean support for instant run off voting

I want first past the post voting to be replaced

I support keeping the electoral college until we are ready to become a direct participatory democracy , see this post I made for another take I make on the electoral college

DC should not become a state but..

I also support the movement to provide city-statehood for Washington D.C. (like Singapore) and a referendum for Puerto Ricans to decide on independence or statehood.   Justice Democrats (except the city-state part that was my twist)

Prison inmates should only vote if they are imprisoned within their voting electorate 

Convinced felons who are released from prison shouldn't be able to vote unless they prove that they are reformed or at absolute minimum will not repeat their crimes again

I try to see how the Georgia voting law is ‘racist’, but I can't understand how the GA voting law is racist. That Georgia voting law was NOT Jim Crow 2.0 and NOT like Jim Crow. And if there really is more voting now under that law as some outlets say (like here and here) then maybe that Georgia voting law isn't as bad as I think

Joe Biden opposed school busing and was too close to segregationists as per herehere and here. I know he wasn’t or isn’t racist but if Joe Biden doing that Jim Crow 2.0 smearing false equivalency rhetoric means he is leaves himself open to such scrutiny  

That Georgia voting law at worst is just an impulsive, not well thought out law that needs to be fixed to say the least. Any damage those type of laws are perceived to do to BIPOC voters is due to carelessness, not intentional disenfranchisement, at least in ways that I can tell. 

The MLB was 100 percent wrong to move the 2021 MLB All Star game out of Atlanta. They hurt small African American business owners with that stunt and hurt fans in Georgia more than they allegedly hurt that voting law supporters. I demand MLB apologize for moving that all star game out of Atlanta. Sports is suppose to unite not divide and MLB divided their fans even more with that evil, twisted stunt

I am stoked that the 2021 World Series had some games played in Atlanta. Hey MLB , karma is a b**ch 

I like this quote on elections

I am ok with Krysten Sinema opposing the Democrats plan to weaken/bypass the filibuster. Here is one way she can still help increase ‘voting rights’ if she feels a need to do so to please her Democrat critics. Remember Democrat Wendy Davis filibustered the controversial Texas pro life law in 2013 by filibustering so filibusters help Democrats too

I am against the abuse Krysten Sinema has gotten from other Democrats due to her vote. The ASU students should have confronted her after she left the bathroom

I understand that Krysten Sinema and Joe Manchin are political minorities in their own parties and thus should never have the ability to block or make change (since they are mavericks in their party for a reason)

But Krysten Sinema and Joe Manchin seems like two of the very few members of Congress that actually believes in what they are doing, and they have straightforward and clear reasoning for their positions.

I would consider being open minded to supporting bringing back the Articles of the Confederation 

Our elections should not allow private election funding or even the appearance of private election funding Our elections should not be for sale. 

Since most Republicans are corporatist, powerful ones especially like Mitt Romney, Larry Hogan, and Donald Trump and other powerful Republicans with ties to private corporations are a threat to buy our elections so we must be vigilant to stop them


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Blog Navigation

Exh app

My real political idpol and idealogue view