2008-08-27, 12:43 PM
explodingbbq Wrote:This is a very lulzy thread. It hardly seems to merit discussion. All I'm going to say about the topic is that you're going the wrong way. We've been expanding the number of people who can vote since the beginning, and you want to make it so most people can't vote? Also, I doubt you'd be very pleased with the outcome - if I had to guess, I'd guess that all the presidents elected with that system would be Republicans. (That just made me think of Hillary's voting base and how she would have a snowflake's chance in hell if we had that system. That brings a smile to my face.)I know it probably wouldn't work out, but if it did it would be a very good system imo...
This is a bit more interesting. I don't think it would work out though, because then the candidates would just do a lot of polls and say they want to do what the majority of the people want. Also, I believe more in voting on a president based on your perception of his judgment and character than on what he (in the gender-neutral sense) claims his policy positions are. Situations change and presidents go back on their promises (or pandering, whichever) once they get into office. In my opinion, that's usually a good thing. You don't want a president who gives out all the corn subsidies in the world because he had to win the Iowa primary.
Also, it annoys me when people hate on charisma. That's actually one of the most important qualities in a president. Their job is basically to convince everyone to agree with them, and the way to do that is to be a good speaker. In case nobody's told you yet, presidents don't make laws.

