I'm a strong believer in pluralism. I believe politics is a great part luck and I desire more power to multinational organisations, provided they are no monopoly power like the WHO. I wonder if the election process is a weak point of democracies.
https://youtu.be/OXPOzRjslIw

Good article, use Google translate:
https://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Die-neu ... 91428.html

Should elections without paper trail be allowed?

International observers are part of the US election process and have been for many years.

Most of which are currently saying Trump is the one currently tarnishing the process.

https://www.google.com/search?q=interna ... s+election

There are already international observers. Just as there are US observers at elections all over the world.
But just like with the US observers abroad... they are pretty much ignored by all.

But for argument's sake, let's throw in an international organisation to manage the US election. Who would you propose to do that?

Most democracies lean (significantly) left, by US standards anyway. So anything the organisation says will immediately be dismissed by republicans for being socialist/communist/liberal/mainstream or whatever their insult of choise happens to be at that moment. You could I suppose throw in a organisation without democratic values or history... not sure that's a bright idea.

petertenthije wrote:

You could I suppose throw in a organisation without democratic values or history... not sure that's a bright idea.

Do you refer to the Supreme Court?

Sokes wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

You could I suppose throw in a organisation without democratic values or history... not sure that's a bright idea.

Do you refer to the Supreme Court?

As per the thread title, I meant an international organisation without democratic values.
North korea and Russia seem to be in vogue at the white house at the moment.

The supreme court, especially with the controversial appointment of ACB just weeks ago, would perhaps not be considered neutral by democrats. Giving the same (perception of a) conflict of interest mentioned earlier. Except from the democrats instead of the republicans.

There are no easy solutions here. The polarization has gone too far and too deep for that I suspect. But that's just me, an outsider looking at USA politics.

petertenthije wrote:

As per the thread title, I meant an international organisation without democratic values.
North korea and Russia seem to be in vogue at the white house at the moment.

I made a joke. It refers to the Supreme Court stopping the recounting of votes in Florida 2000.

No. Let sovereign nations be sovereign nations.

Sounds hypocritical coming from an American but I didn't make those decisions.

TWA772LR wrote:

No. Let sovereign nations be sovereign nations.

Sounds hypocritical coming from an American but I didn't make those decisions.

Not hypocritical at all.
While today's system carries the risk that elections in one or another country are manipulated, what if the UN would be in charge of all elections?

I'm looking for a division of power solution. The topic is a serious question. I try to figure a system that has more safety and less risk than today.

Sokes wrote:

what if the UN would be in charge of all elections?

Brilliant idea. Let the UN Human Rights Council handle all elections worldwide. What could possibly go wrong?

I don’t know why people aren’t more aware of this, but yes, there are several internationaly organized «missions» to conteol and watch each others elections. The OSCE made it’s preliminary report a couple of days ago.
These are heavy hitters in international politics, diplomacy, election and democracy-experts on the highest level. These 24 pages are very informative and well written and it is a completely external and neutral audit that should be read by every american.

https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/9/6/469437.pdf

For all the spotlights currently shining on the American election process (mostly all turned on by one certain individual), it has once again proven to be quite effective, fair and transparent.
It may not be perfect - none are - but it appears so far to be one of the few US institutions which has stood the test of repeated attacks in recent years. No fraud, no foul play, no tricks, and the courts will prove this once again.

Now, the political process leading up to the actual voting, the EC system, the gerrymandering, the attempts at voter suppression etc., that's a different debate...

Indeed ! I am quite impressed! Trump is already marginalized just by the pure power of due process. He started with the Supreme Court, The Senate a gigantic propaganda industry and his presidential powers on his side, and he had nothing compared to pure democracy power.

Francoflier wrote:

For all the spotlights currently shining on the American election process (mostly all turned on by one certain individual), it has once again proven to be quite effective, fair and transparent.
It may not be perfect - none are - but it appears so far to be one of the few US institutions which has stood the test of repeated attacks in recent years. No fraud, no foul play, no tricks, and the courts will prove this once again.

Now, the political process leading up to the actual voting, the EC system, the gerrymandering, the attempts at voter suppression etc., that's a different debate...

M564038 wrote:

I don’t know why people aren’t more aware of this, but yes, there are several internationaly organized «missions» to conteol and watch each others elections. The OSCE made it’s preliminary report a couple of days ago.
These are heavy hitters in international politics, diplomacy, election and democracy-experts on the highest level. These 24 pages are very informative and well written and it is a completely external and neutral audit that should be read by every american.

https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/9/6/469437.pdf

Amazing information/ document

Thank You so very much.

L410Turbolet wrote:

Sokes wrote:

what if the UN would be in charge of all elections?

Brilliant idea. Let the UN Human Rights Council handle all elections worldwide. What could possibly go wrong?

My question already implied your answer. That's why I spoke of division of power.

After reading the first twelve pages of the OSCE document:
-Worst point: partisan voting by judges. Are judges for lifetime? Do they depend on politicians for their future career?
-Eight states still use voting machines. After Florida 2000 that is plain outrageous.
-Some sates don't demand ID with photo? Strange.
-I generally have a problem with voting by post.
At least the process should stop three days before election.

But I'm rather not concerned with this year's election. How comes that Trump is criticised so much for his "dictatorial qualities" while Bush was reelected, even though the 2000 elections were possibly really stolen?
I often feel Trump is judged more for his appearance and stupid talk than his deeds.

In 2000:
Should there have been an international organisation with power to object to the US Supreme Court ruling?