[baron816]

How many people here can name their state senator or representative?

Of the hundreds of people who might read this, I'm sure only a small handful could do it without looking it up. It's a serious problem that people don't follow state politics at all, and it's not a problem with the people themselves. We need a system that doesn't require people to follow what their president, senator, congressman, governor, state senator, mayor, and city councilman, along with dozens of other elected officials, are doing while in office.

If you're going to promote change, don't just promote a change in who we elect, because there's a Nash equilibrium that leads them to behave as all politicians have. Promote a change in HOW we elect them. Change the rules of the game and a different game will be played.

[unityByFreedom]

> We need a system that doesn't require people to follow what their president, senator, congressman, governor, state senator, mayor, and city councilman, along with dozens of other elected officials, are doing while in office.

... so you don't want a representative government? Couldn't disagree more. Sure it's tough to keep up with everything they're doing. But I like being able to look into it at my leisure, and I trust my community to bring important issues to my attention. Just because I don't know exactly how my representative has voted doesn't mean I'm unaware of how government is changing things that impact my life.

Really unclear to me how you would accomplish your goals without eliminating democracy as we know it.

[baron816]

> ... so you don't want a representative government?

No, that's not what I'm saying.

> Really unclear to me how you would accomplish your goals without eliminating democracy as we know it.

Then you should study other electoral systems.

At the state level, you could have proportional representation and then just vote for the party you want. That would allow for multiple parties, and it's much easier to follow what a party supports and does than it is to follow an individual.

[unityByFreedom]

> At the state level, you could have proportional representation and then just vote for the party you want. That would allow for multiple parties, and it's much easier to follow what a party supports and does than it is to follow an individual.

So, give even more power to parties? No thanks. Independent should always be an option. It isn't under your system.

[audi100quattro]

The opposite of everything you just said. People need to be fucking responsible and learn what is right, if you need to experiment, make mistakes, fine. You are personally responsible for the government you get. You can learn before an election, take the day off if you can. There should be a national holiday. Go to meet your congressman once, like you would go to a PTA meeting if you had a child. None of this is hard. If you voted for a 3rd party candidate in FL in 2000 and MI, PA, WI in 2016, it is your fault Bush/Trump are in office. You didn't vote tactically. The rules of democracy are working just fine. We can bring about a constitutional amendment for citizens united, and abolish the electoral college. If people believe those are the right things to be doing, they will happen. If we start educating people now, maybe change will happen in years or decades.

Engineers can be impatient if there aren't quick technical answers. Engineers can also believe the latest research will give them answers, also not true. Quite a few startup founders I've heard have some absolute shit theories about politics. I can understand being a technologist, but a technologist who doesn't take the time to understand politics, or has no experience in politics needs to take the time to listen and learn before trying to impose anything on anyone.

Politics at it's root is civic engagement and it should be back to basics, just like it has been for journalism over the last yr or two.