• toothpaste_sandwich@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Hot take: I also think that such a list is not something a president should have.

    Then again I think having a president with so much power is a silly idea in the first place.

        • MagicShel
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          33
          ·
          6 months ago

          Even if he doesn’t, if there isn’t a massive landslide for Democrats, it’s still looking shaky.

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Honestly with the internet, we might be able to live in the first technologically viable direct democracy. I’d be curious to see a proposal for how that could be implemented.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Direct democracy sounds like a horrible system for national governance, though. The average person has nowhere near the capacity to be informed enough on a wide range of issues to make good decisions. You need specialists with deep domain knowledge to guide policy decisions, not lots of laypersons.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Our elected representatives aren’t specialists with deep domain knowledge either. Ideally you have specialists in a specific role as drafters of legislation, administrative people appointed to filter through the bills, but the final vote goes to the people instead of Congress. That way you don’t get fiascos like abortion rights where you have a small group of people controlling us despite overwhelming support.

          • enkers@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            No they aren’t, but at least they’ll typically be working with and advised by people who do have that domain knowledge. And yeah, I could see a system working where there’s basically a veto vote for the people.

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yeah I’m not pretending I’ve thought deeply about my proposed system. But the people at very least deserve the ability to have a direct hand in legislation. Politicians are not scared enough of their electorate.

              • tacosplease@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I used to agree that people should be able to vote directly on issues. Not sure where I land anymore. We seem way more vulnerable to propaganda than one would have expected.

                If the status quo somehow carries on for another decade I wouldn’t be surprised if the 20% to 30% of extremist nuts becomes 50% or higher.

                Wish I had a solution.

                • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Unfortunately, all the problems that exist in the population also exist for legislators. Turns out they are extremely vulnerable as well!

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t know if I would trust an internet where a guy played a long con with xz Utils development to engineer a back door into Linux systems with accurately tabulating votes.