Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Thunder

  • Rank
    Political Hack
  1. Thunder

    Forum Amendments for Article 2

    Sorting out winners and tied ones (as of publication): Winners (9 votes): 2/3rds of the Senate must approve for a treaty to be approved (note unicameral change from the previous article) Abolish the electoral college with a top-two runoff. Tied (8 votes): The president must fill all vacancies, the Congress has 90 days to deny. Remove "natural born citizen" from the qualifications for the presidency. Instant runoff voting.
  2. Independent judiciaries work better when not elected by polarized politicians (or when the balance of the court isn't dependent on conveniently timed resignations or deaths). Essentially, take the argument for an independent redistricting commission and replace "gerrymandering" with "appointing activist judges", "districts" with "judges", and "House" with "Court."
  3. Make sure to propose it as an amendment so it doesn't get missed like some of my suggestions to your amendments.
  4. Add (disclaimer on how these may not be things I'm committed to, but things I'm not against): A nationwide ban on the death penalty. Independent judiciary commission (similar to independent redistricting commissions, but for the appointment of judges)
  5. Thunder

    Forum Amendments for Article 2

    So basically a parliamentary democracy? Or more like voting on cabinet members directly, or a council of governors? Or do some or all of these fit what you're talking about? And on a completely unrelated note, what are the post counts for the "Political _____" titles?
  6. Thunder

    Forum Amendments for Article 2

    Is this sarcasm? This seems mostly like Condorcet's jury theorem, to be honest.
  7. The six-year one-consecutive-term amendment is the one I’m confused about. Article 2’s more appropriate mostly since the main things would be dealing with how a president is elected, and new elections.
  8. Thunder

    Forum Amendments to Article 1

    @jnewtCan you subtract a vote from splitline and eliminate vetos and move it to independent commission and line-item veto? The first two don’t look like they will succeed so I’ll move it over to proposals with a change of victory.
  9. Agree more with Patine's proposal, maybe with Ranked Pairs or Score Voting instant of top-2 runoff. I don't really get the rationale behind this one. The idea of a special election after the death of a president makes sense, which is what it seems you're going after. (All later ones, except for recall [support Patine's change]) Support. I'll like to add a parliamentary system amendment (similar to the Westminister system, but only with the parts relevant for addition to the article), if that's OK. I'm ambiguous on this, but I feel this might give some discussion value and be a potentially useful change.
  10. Thunder

    Forum Amendments to Article 1

    Thank you for clarifying some details. In Maine (where I live), I don't see much of that except when the legislature refuses to accept the result of referendums. Also, what would be an example of an issue so pressing that it must be felt but with no symptoms affecting the general populace? It does set a precedent of voting nationwide on an issue. It stops at voting nationwide on issues passed by the legislature, which would not really affect the bill of rights, and still leave jurisdiction for the courts. Additionally, it appears mostly that after civil rights are integrated, a majority generally doesn't want to remove established rights (of course, I may be wrong about this, and am open to new information). The second example is of a sales tax increase, which primarily affects the poor.
  11. Thunder

    Forum Amendments to Article 1

    Referendums can pass increasing taxes in states (Maine 2016, Williamson County 2018 from a quick google), and state budgets don't collapse overnight when veto referendums are allowed. Additionally, at least one party with substantial support in the United States supports raising taxes on at least some people, who would likely support bills like what you might be suggesting.
  12. Thunder

    Forum Amendments to Article 1

    It seems to go OK in the states, why wouldn't it work well nationwide? Also, the government resisting doesn't mean it's bad, and appeal to tradition is not a full argument. I also don't think we should have to wait 2 or 6 years to try to get a representative who wrote a bad law out, for that matter (especially if large political changes happen in that time), or to have to elect someone that disagrees with us in every other way to overturn one law. And yes, term limits are rather misguided in my opinion.
  13. Thunder

    Forum Amendments to Article 1

    I'm curious what the dangerous precedent would be, or some more clear details of this. I'm not the most informed on political science, so I'm not sure what you're referring to there. Additionally, "voting your representative out" only works if the bill passed by a one-vote margin, and also would require delays of years to fix an issue with a bill.
  14. Thunder

    Endorsement error?

    So the issue is that cross-party endorsements don't really make sense?
  15. Ah, sorry for missing the proposal session. Support. Multiparty systems are better for democracy. Perhaps also a minimum parliament size would be good to add on. Support. Voting rights should be supported for an unbiased view of the population. Support. People should be allowed to elect who they want, and slavery is bad. Oppose. People should be allowed to vote for who they want. Support. Voters should be allowed to vote for what they want if their representative is not what they thought. Perhaps also adding a right of recall would be good to add on. Oppose. See second-to-last point. Oppose. See below. Support. Taking districting out of human hands is the most foolproof solution. Oppose if amendable, else support. I feel Condorcet or Range or some other method might be better (also, RCV technically refers to a range of methods). Support. Democracy, yay! Perhaps allow a member to choose a substitute (that can be recalled) to fill a vacancy during the 6-month period Support. A group is more likely to find the best solution than an individual. Support. 50 years should be enough to incentivize new work, and allow more freedom of thought. Not too experienced with this stuff, but here's what I came up with.