Basically, citizens through the internet can directly vote for who they want to be on the ballot in addition to the D and R that is elected. They've spent a lot of money to ensure that this future candidate will be on the ballot in all 50 states. They'll have debates and the like (through delegates and online members.) The candidate can be either D or R, but can be independent or 3rd party.
I'll have to see where this goes, but they have my support. More than anything, I want to see the gridlock in DC stopped and to throw the 2 party status quo off balance.
Spreading democracy through the internet. What do yall think? Good idea? Good intentions, not gonna work? Terrible concept?
srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16221 posts, RR: 57 Reply 1, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 535 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to third party candidates is ballot access. The ballot access laws vary from state to state and in some states it is easy to get on the ballot and others extremely difficult. In some states, third parties like the Libertarians already have ballot access for their candidates based on prior Presidential elections, while in others they have to submit petitions with a minimum number of signatures by a certain date. The problem with the petitions is that a number of the signatures get invalidated so they usually try to get well over the minimum in order to hopefully make the minimum even with invalidated signatures.
If a group like Americans Elect can make it easier for a viable third candidate to get on the ballot nationwide (as in every state and territory), that does help the democratic process. The ballot access laws are artificial barriers designed to maintain the status quo as much as possible by keeping the two dominant parties in power by making it hard for other parties to challenge for offices. In many states, third parties have managed to gain automatic ballot access for some offices due to their showings in prior elections while others they have not been able to do so. If this country was a true democracy, every political party would be given equal access to the ballot box and not have to jump through hoops in a sometimes vain attempt to get a candidate on the ballot.
Hello Airplanes? Yeah, it's Blimps. You win, bye....
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 2, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 527 times:
On a different note, I've already spotted some problems with AE:
If someone like Ron Paul (who I obviously like) makes the 3rd ballot, wouldn't this be only a spoiler? He is running for the GOP and will probably lose. As much as that upsets me, the voters have spoken. So putting him on the ballot against Obama and Mitt or Newt is kind of pointless since Mitt or Newt already beat him.
Another scenario, kind of close to the previous one, is what if Mitt wins and Newt wins this AE thing? Then it'll basically split the vote for the GOP making Obama automatically win.
I think it would work well if someone like Gary Johnson made it on. He'll already be on many/most/all(?) states if he makes the Libertarian nominee, and he is different enough from Obama and Mitt/Newt to be a viable 3rd choice, and although he is very similar to Paul, he is more moderate and would probably attract more voters from the other 2 parties (I'm sure most of Paul supporters would go to Johnson as the 2 candidates are alike.)
We'll have to see. I really want third parties/candidates viable in the future. Most people are either not concerned or too busy trying to have the other side not elected, which I can hardly blame
Problem is: It only works when the far right wing does it. Look at the tea people. They organized through the internet and everyone thinks they are the greatest thing since sliced bread. But, when Occupy organized through the internet and recall Scott Walker organize on the net, they are evil.
Also, since every foreign corporation and government can give as much money as they want to any candidate they want with no disclosure, we have no democracy anymore. This idea of "Americans Elect" is too little, too late. It won't be long before we are taken over by Chinese and OPEC.
Wheel of morality turn, turn, turn. Tell us the lesson that we should learn
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 502 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): Problem is: It only works when the far right wing does it. Look at the tea people. They organized through the internet and everyone thinks they are the greatest thing since sliced bread. But, when Occupy organized through the internet and recall Scott Walker organize on the net, they are evil.
Well that is assuming that the TP and OWS are the same movements. And then to go further, look at the difference between what these ideas started out as and where they are today
Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): Also, since every foreign corporation and government can give as much money as they want to any candidate they want with no disclosure, we have no democracy anymore.
Yes, and Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart really did outline the problems with Super PACs. It's a funny watch if you have the time. I think/hope we're just in a slump now, but I think the internet will spread new ideas around. It sometimes takes a while and there are some failures, but the internet has proven to be a very powerful tool in spreading democracy
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 8614 posts, RR: 19 Reply 5, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 443 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 4): And then to go further, look at the difference between what these ideas started out as and where they are today
TP actually had some good ideas at the very beginning. But, they were soon taken over by the multi-national corporations. OWS tries so hard not to be taken over by corporations and are, therefore, hated. Makes a person think...
Wheel of morality turn, turn, turn. Tell us the lesson that we should learn
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 6, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 438 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 5): Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 4):
And then to go further, look at the difference between what these ideas started out as and where they are today
TP actually had some good ideas at the very beginning. But, they were soon taken over by the multi-national corporations. OWS tries so hard not to be taken over by corporations and are, therefore, hated. Makes a person think...
I think a lot of things went wrong with the TP. It's message of small government, less taxes, and less spending have been buried in the usual anti-gay marriage garbage.
OWS, on the other hand, is just too broad in my opinion. I think they really should've honed in on a few defined topics. I, and many others, would be able to relate to that. I cannot relate to their whole broad, unorganized movement. That is for another thread I guess.
Interestingly enough, if AE takes off and does well, maybe we'd see a OWS-sympathetic candidate on the ballot (bonus points for me tying this caveat that back on topic )
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 36437 posts, RR: 86 Reply 7, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 434 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter): What do yall think? Good idea? Good intentions, not gonna work? Terrible concept?
I suppose it could work.
We would need to get rid of the winner take all election and eliminate the electoral college. The problem is that a candidate can win with as little as 34% of the vote. That makes it a lot easier for a fringe candidate to win.
AE takes off everyday in China and is doing well with their Embraer 190AR.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6): maybe we'd see a OWS-sympathetic candidate on the ballot
President Obama already indicated that he sympathizes with them. "You are the reason I ran for office."
President Obama Nov. 2011
I find his comments ironic considering most of Wall Streets financial donations went to Obama's campaign. I of course don't expect the average un-showered Occupier in a sleeping bag to understand that.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6): OWS, on the other hand, is just too broad in my opinion.
They turned people off with the traffic congestion, littering, public defecation, expecting local businesses to give them free access to their restrooms and the vandalism and the raping that took place.
That turned off a lot of sane-minded people.
If President Obama wants to be the voice of these criminals, then more power to him.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (3 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 345 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 8): Do they talk about changing the election system, with several turns for example ? Or a Condorcet system ?
No, they would just run in conjunction with the Democrats and Republicans. Basically they do their own thing but in theory, AE would pony up the money to get _______ on the ballot on all 50 states, and the nomination process would be different. Based online, not favoring early states, can be a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Soviet, etc. Basically an aid for a third party candidate. The site doesn't campaign, it just tries to level the playing field a bit. I can only hope it'll help break the current duopoly
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, 
)
From Thailand, joined May 2000, 36437 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2009, 3001 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
