Hold one election. Use Instant Runoff Voting. It is being suggested that each (major?) political party nominate a candidate of their choice, and on the ballot, it would receive an "*" by it. There would be multiple people from each major political party.
The star indicates the party, the members of that organization, i.e. the party, has voted on who to officially nominate, but that doesn't stop others calling themselves Democrats, Republicans, etc from running. Then we implement Instant Runoff Voting, to find the one that 50% supposedly agree with.
I agree. An earlier primary. Sending out absentee ballots earlier. Perhaps requiring a postmark date on ballots one week earlier, except for those in the military (as things may come up.)
New idea: Blank absentee ballots. Military people would receive blank absentee ballots, without the candidates written on them. Then there's be a bubble thing (like standardized testing uses) to fill in the name of the candidates. That way, they could receive the blank ballot months in advance, and fill it out when they know whom they wish to vote for, and mail it in.
E-voting is a good idea, provided we do have a paper trail.
What about i-voting? Internet voting. Where we could log on to a secure server, vote, and be done with it? Of course, I don't know how we would set up a paper trail for that. Perhaps having the ability to print out a receipt, and mail that in?
The problem with a top two primary is that although we get to vote on the person, not the party, each party has a right to be represented in the general election.
And if by some weird happening, two Democrats or two Republicans went onto the general election for a given race, I'm a bit curious about campaign money and issues like that.
Also, for the primary, what prevents vote splitting? Hypothetically speaking, let's say 15 Democrats run for a given race. If we use the plurality system, they may as well have a worse chance at advancing than a total of 3 Republicans running.
Some people are sick of hearing about this on t.v., and won't want a run-off vote.
If we were to have a run-off vote, it's like saying that the first election was botched, that we messed up and didn't fix it. That when we went out to vote, our vote didn't count, cause now we have to re-vote.
If we were to have something like Instant Runoff Voting, would it make a different when the other 2.2585% votes get transferred to the remaining candidates? Would the margin between the top two be big enough to have a clear winner?
If we have a re-vote, who should pay for it? Should we really make the taxpayers pay for it?
I would think the hand recount would make a clear winner, with a Democrat, Republican, and neutral party, looking over each ballot. Or was there voter fraud somehow?
Anyone have any ideas on solutions to make sure this doesn't happen again?
Electronic paper, if we can ever get it into high quality, and I do mean high quality, that would be pretty cool for digital picture frames. But I'm assuming electronic paper uses less electricity than a monitor does. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Here's one simple way to help offset the poverty level.
Raise the state sales tax by 3 cents. That will generate $3 billion in revenue. Among 6.1 million Washingtonians, we could give each person a check for $491.80.
A family of one would have to spend over $16,393.44 per year on taxable goods to have a net loss. A family of four would have to spend over $65,573.77. This specifically concerns a net gain or loss for the new tax.
I remember Governor Locke saying an one cent increase in state sales tax would generate $1 billion, in his proposal to help education or something. That initiative failed.
Right now, a senior citizen could go to a nursing home, leaving their house occupied by the rest of the extended family. The government would put a lein on the house, if I'm not mistaken, thus making the family homeless when it comes time to collect and auction.
I believe it's safe to say that no one likes filling out forms, whether paying taxes, filing for government assistance, or just general business stuff.
I believe it's safe to say that no one likes being forced to pay taxes on business income.
I believe it's safe to say that no one likes being poor.
I believe a compromise is this...
Keep taxes as is, just do a few slight modifications. We have 6.5 state sales tax (then localities add on more). Raise the state sales tax by 1-3 cents on the dollar, and give univeral rebates to all 6.1 million Washingtonians. That will help the poor some. I figured if 1 cent equals $1 billion in revenue, then this could very well work.
I wish our future governor would do this. As the executive of the state, the one who carries out the laws, he or she could one, halt the death penalty citing that it's cruel and unusual, especially with the chance someone may be innocent. And two, halt foreclosures on homes based on government leans due to medicare/medicaid/whatever. Instead they could just take the house when it's unoccupied by anyone.
Election reform. I would think it would be a good idea to fix our system by doing this...
1. Implement Instant Runoff Voting. 2. Whether or not we implement IRV, write this into law. "Anytime there is an one percent difference between the top two candidates in a plurality race, there will be a run-off election. Additionally, in the run-off election, a machine count would be forbidden, just skipping down to a hand recount, no matter what the cost is to tax payers."
We knew about this one back in the 1997 I believe. I'm a bit curious if it's really taken this long to get to the media.
Plus, I believe there are very methods to delay asteroids (whether we're at that technology advantage yet, I don't know). Such as putting white paint on one side to push it off course.
I voted for Bennett. I would have voted for Gregoire second, if we had IRV. I wouldn't vote for Locke, he doesn't seem to care much about our broken tax system.
I also heard that Rossi wants to have Creationism taught in school, and Roe vs. Wade overturned. Not sure if it's true, but if it is, that's really extremist unlike the moderate-conservative stance I heard he is.
Let us say that someone plays 2 hours weekdays, 4 hour weekends. That's 18 hours per week. That would be 72 hours per month. We'll use 72 hours per month to figure this out...
Charge like an initial fee for just having the account. Like $5 per month. Then charge like 5 cents per hour. Have roll over plans too, when unused hours will roll over to the next month for up to 12 months.
I see two main choices. Either we evolve and adapt to the changes to come, or do what the article says, and become extinct. I personally think that we'll end up evolving to whatever conditions may arise.
Boycotting based on one day of the week doesn't do much. It just shifts the gas need to the other six days. I guess an extreme and unlikely result could be having less employees work on Mondays, and hiring more workers during the rest of the week.
If someone is sick of advertisements, whether in theatres or in DVDs (which may prevent fast-forwarding), try this...
Write down all the ads/sponsors, and boycott every one of them while encouraging friends to do the same. I'd think I'd rather pay more than sit through non-fast-forwardable commercials on a DVD. But a great time to use the bathroom nonetheless.
I wonder if those Ionic Breeze Quadras by Shaper Image actually work. That would solve the smoking problem I would think. All we need next is a device to block sound.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you think elections should be held in Washington State?
If you're calling Instant Runoff Voting undemocratic, it's like calling Australia, Fiji, Nauru, and San Francisco-CA undemocratic.
What's undemocratic?
Do you agree with this idea?
Hold one election.
Use Instant Runoff Voting.
It is being suggested that each (major?) political party nominate a candidate of their choice, and on the ballot, it would receive an "*" by it.
There would be multiple people from each major political party.
Example...
Candidate 1 Democrat
Candidate 2 Democrat *
Candidate 3 Democrat
Candidate 4 Democrat
Candidate 1 Republican *
Candidate 2 Republican
Candidate 1 Libertarian
Candidate 2 Libertarian *
Candidate 1 Green
Candidate 1 Constitution
The star indicates the party, the members of that organization, i.e. the party, has voted on who to officially nominate, but that doesn't stop others calling themselves Democrats, Republicans, etc from running. Then we implement Instant Runoff Voting, to find the one that 50% supposedly agree with.
I agree. An earlier primary. Sending out absentee ballots earlier. Perhaps requiring a postmark date on ballots one week earlier, except for those in the military (as things may come up.)
New idea: Blank absentee ballots. Military people would receive blank absentee ballots, without the candidates written on them. Then there's be a bubble thing (like standardized testing uses) to fill in the name of the candidates. That way, they could receive the blank ballot months in advance, and fill it out when they know whom they wish to vote for, and mail it in.
E-voting is a good idea, provided we do have a paper trail.
What about i-voting? Internet voting. Where we could log on to a secure server, vote, and be done with it? Of course, I don't know how we would set up a paper trail for that. Perhaps having the ability to print out a receipt, and mail that in?
The problem with a top two primary is that although we get to vote on the person, not the party, each party has a right to be represented in the general election.
And if by some weird happening, two Democrats or two Republicans went onto the general election for a given race, I'm a bit curious about campaign money and issues like that.
Also, for the primary, what prevents vote splitting? Hypothetically speaking, let's say 15 Democrats run for a given race. If we use the plurality system, they may as well have a worse chance at advancing than a total of 3 Republicans running.
Some people are sick of hearing about this on t.v., and won't want a run-off vote.
If we were to have a run-off vote, it's like saying that the first election was botched, that we messed up and didn't fix it. That when we went out to vote, our vote didn't count, cause now we have to re-vote.
If we were to have something like Instant Runoff Voting, would it make a different when the other 2.2585% votes get transferred to the remaining candidates? Would the margin between the top two be big enough to have a clear winner?
If we have a re-vote, who should pay for it? Should we really make the taxpayers pay for it?
I would think the hand recount would make a clear winner, with a Democrat, Republican, and neutral party, looking over each ballot. Or was there voter fraud somehow?
Anyone have any ideas on solutions to make sure this doesn't happen again?
Electronic paper, if we can ever get it into high quality, and I do mean high quality, that would be pretty cool for digital picture frames. But I'm assuming electronic paper uses less electricity than a monitor does. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Here's one simple way to help offset the poverty level.
Raise the state sales tax by 3 cents. That will generate $3 billion in revenue. Among 6.1 million Washingtonians, we could give each person a check for $491.80.
A family of one would have to spend over $16,393.44 per year on taxable goods to have a net loss. A family of four would have to spend over $65,573.77. This specifically concerns a net gain or loss for the new tax.
I remember Governor Locke saying an one cent increase in state sales tax would generate $1 billion, in his proposal to help education or something. That initiative failed.
Right now, a senior citizen could go to a nursing home, leaving their house occupied by the rest of the extended family. The government would put a lein on the house, if I'm not mistaken, thus making the family homeless when it comes time to collect and auction.
It was known about back in 1997 though.
I believe it's safe to say that no one likes filling out forms, whether paying taxes, filing for government assistance, or just general business stuff.
I believe it's safe to say that no one likes being forced to pay taxes on business income.
I believe it's safe to say that no one likes being poor.
I believe a compromise is this...
Keep taxes as is, just do a few slight modifications. We have 6.5 state sales tax (then localities add on more). Raise the state sales tax by 1-3 cents on the dollar, and give univeral rebates to all 6.1 million Washingtonians. That will help the poor some. I figured if 1 cent equals $1 billion in revenue, then this could very well work.
I wish our future governor would do this. As the executive of the state, the one who carries out the laws, he or she could one, halt the death penalty citing that it's cruel and unusual, especially with the chance someone may be innocent. And two, halt foreclosures on homes based on government leans due to medicare/medicaid/whatever. Instead they could just take the house when it's unoccupied by anyone.
Election reform. I would think it would be a good idea to fix our system by doing this...
1. Implement Instant Runoff Voting.
2. Whether or not we implement IRV, write this into law. "Anytime there is an one percent difference between the top two candidates in a plurality race, there will be a run-off election. Additionally, in the run-off election, a machine count would be forbidden, just skipping down to a hand recount, no matter what the cost is to tax payers."
We knew about this one back in the 1997 I believe. I'm a bit curious if it's really taken this long to get to the media.
Plus, I believe there are very methods to delay asteroids (whether we're at that technology advantage yet, I don't know). Such as putting white paint on one side to push it off course.
Entered in wrong article obviously.
I voted for Bennett. I would have voted for Gregoire second, if we had IRV. I wouldn't vote for Locke, he doesn't seem to care much about our broken tax system.
I also heard that Rossi wants to have Creationism taught in school, and Roe vs. Wade overturned. Not sure if it's true, but if it is, that's really extremist unlike the moderate-conservative stance I heard he is.
It's a problem when some votes are double counted in the machine count, or not counted at all due to mechanical error.
It's a problem when voters who followed the rules when voting, don't have their vote counted due to officials messing up.
It's a problem when both sides can't agree to simply have every vote count.
Personally, I'd prefer Gregoire to win over Rossi. But still, no matter the results, I'd rather have a run-off when the election is this close.
He stole a list of e-mail addresses. Isn't that theft? Even if he doesn't get charged with sending out spam, he did commit other crimes, right?
Things would be a lot more boring and uninteresting if we went to simple standards. And why bother fixing something that's not broken?
Perhaps they could sell it on an hourly basis.
Let us say that someone plays 2 hours weekdays, 4 hour weekends. That's 18 hours per week. That would be 72 hours per month. We'll use 72 hours per month to figure this out...
Charge like an initial fee for just having the account. Like $5 per month. Then charge like 5 cents per hour. Have roll over plans too, when unused hours will roll over to the next month for up to 12 months.
I see two main choices. Either we evolve and adapt to the changes to come, or do what the article says, and become extinct. I personally think that we'll end up evolving to whatever conditions may arise.
It affects anyone sending data over there as it would log the incoming stuff too. I hope that makes sense.
Boycotting based on one day of the week doesn't do much. It just shifts the gas need to the other six days. I guess an extreme and unlikely result could be having less employees work on Mondays, and hiring more workers during the rest of the week.
Get enough people to boycott, and it might make a nice little dent.
If someone is sick of advertisements, whether in theatres or in DVDs (which may prevent fast-forwarding), try this...
Write down all the ads/sponsors, and boycott every one of them while encouraging friends to do the same. I'd think I'd rather pay more than sit through non-fast-forwardable commercials on a DVD. But a great time to use the bathroom nonetheless.
Have two pools.
(Not a sarcastic reply.)
I wonder if those Ionic Breeze Quadras by Shaper Image actually work. That would solve the smoking problem I would think. All we need next is a device to block sound.