0%, representatives should be chosen at random like jury duty. No one who is prepared to run for office should be considered.
-
-
-
Sortition. The Athenians did that. Senate should be selected by sortition. "Representatives" should be elected, obviously.
-
Agree. Lords here in the UK and Senate in the USA should be replaced by people's legislators selected by sortition.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I've no problem with everyone voting: should a population chose to be uninformed or misinformed then that should be reflected on in the election results. You'll find out quickly if a society has given up on itself by those election results.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Picked 51-75, which is close to what we have now in Fed generals. US would be greatly improved if we had more turn out in PRIMARIES. It's just party activists voting, maybe 15% if lucky. Gives illusion of "popular will" but is just party hack choices. More voting in primaries!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Any restrictions, however well intended, would eventually be gamed.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Love this poll. I truly only think it's less than 25% but I thought small #'s could form their own little in-group leading to tyranny. So I went with 25-50%. Think about how many uninformed votes there are!? So many. What's the best way measure proficiency?
@davidowen_sd -
I can’t say. Too many subjects. Take something like nuclear energy or obesity.. how many people, even with PhDs in STEM, can speak with authority on these issues? The best we can hope for is good schools and meritocracy
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That's an interesting question and I have some opinions on it, but given the limited nature of the poll itself I'm gonna have to vote 75%+.
-
It's a nuanced question. If you vote 75%+ you're advocating for uninformed voters. Any other vote is a personal estimate as to the % of rational, informed Americans.
-
I am, I think, in favor of some sort of earning the right to vote. I think there needs to be some "skin in the game" factor to voting. I hesitate to make a simple % statement, though.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Results are skewed. Pro-voters are more likely to vote, in your vote.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The polity is not well served simply by having more people vote. It is served when informed, knowledgeable people vote. Voting is a right, not a responsibility. We are ill served when large numbers of un/misinformed, apathetic people vote — or when illegals & dead people vote.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Active military, veterans, and property owners ought to be able to vote.
-
I think I see where you’re going here, however I think this is Better idea: citizenship should be earned, citizenship shouldn’t be a birth right, especially with all the privilege being born in a western country gives you.
-
But, property ownership is a good way to show you've earned the right to vote (maturity, stake in country's future, etc.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Who decides what’s rational?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
If we had the kind of society where government was limited in its scope over what it could do to citizens, the above would probably be irrelevant.
-
I don’t wan’t to limit our governments’s ability to provide health care and a full education.
-
I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe government can “provide” generally. Government cannot really create anything, only redistribute.
-
Not really, they provide healthcare through redistributed money. I’m down for that.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.