Voting: Part Two
Concerning presidential elections in the United States, from 1952 to 2012, while a minor majority of registered voters had voted in the presidential election, except for 1996 where the turn-out was a mere 49.1%. Now, in general, the presidential elections are the “most popular” elections, and the non-presidential elections have a much less turn-out. Since 1952, the presidential elections ranged from 49.1% (in 1996) to 63.1% (in 1920).
Why are elections not so popular?
Now, I have not voted since 1997. My reasons were that I do agree fully with any politician. And more recently, while I still do not fully agree with any politician, since I accept money from the federal, state, and county government, I view that as a conflict of interest if I were to vote. Even some people who are on the dole vote in elections, I do not.
I have no idea why so many people don’t care enough to vote, but, nevertheless, I have a suggestion or two to present to you. In addition, you must realize that no presidential candidate has ever garnered a vote as high as the none of the above candidate.
I think this non-voting position may because people have no choice in any real candidate. Let’s face it, the difference between a Democrat and a Republican, the difference between Trump and Hillary, wouldn’t be enough to buy a cup of coffee at 7-11. In other words, the two candidates are essentially the same damn candidate.
Now, how do I suggest that we fix the dreadfully broken elections in the United States?
We view people that do not vote to be a legitimate none of the above vote. Thus, in all elections since, say, 1952, the “none of the above” vote would have “won” the elections. We have two mutually choices with which to choose.
The first is that we scrap all the candidates and start anew with another election. But, since politicians generally waste time with campaigning and crap like that, we would already have cause all politicians to campaign for ONLY TWO MONTHS. One month for the primary elections followed immediately one month for the general election. Thus there is only two months of campaigning prior to an election. PERIOD.
The former president/senator/whatever position is vacated and remain open until the next legitimate election cycle. No bills are passed, no new rules are made, the vacated seats are vacant, so it would be harder to get a quorum in the legislature. No executive order could be written, as the president is a vacant position for the next four years. The budget will not increase nor decrease, and the budget items would remain until there is a legitimate president, again.
Think about it.
Wouldn’t that sound like a good idea?
Now, these suggestions are merely suggestions, I haven’t worked anything as to how it would work. But, what is so wrong without a president? In addition, since the United States would be a little vulnerable internationally, the military might want to stop dicking around with other countries as we have been doing since just after World War 2.
In addition, we need some more legitimate parties in our elections, we need some real choice. Thus, it would probably be a good idea to make it easier to run for a president/senator/whatever. Now, we would not lower the age to run for president, however, we should not require all the paperwork to be put on the ballot. I would rather have a choice between fifteen to twenty candidates rather than two or three candidates. Choice is good. More choices is better.
Just think about my suggestions.