4 ms·

> How is one to vote when neither major party candidate was pro-privacy? That's the heart of the matter. The major parties have a virtual monopoly; we're as t

> How is one to vote when neither major party candidate was pro-privacy? That's the heart of the matter. The major parties have a virtual monopoly; we're as trapped as voters as consumers are in a market monopoly. I think the way we fix this is weaken the monopoly of the major parties, possibly with things like ranked voting: http://www.fairvote.org/ http://www.fairvote.org/ Which Maine is trying to institute: https://ballotpedia.org/Maine_Ranked_Choice_Voting_Initiative,_Question_5_(2016) https://ballotpedia.org/Maine_Ranked_Choice_Voting_Initiativ... Perhaps we should try to institute laws that break up parties if they get too big the same way we can break up corporations that are too big? Monopolies being bad an all.

marcoperaza 10y ago
Beware of blaming the system when the more likely problem is that enough people don't care about the issue.
- joshmarlow 10y ago
  There's definitely something to what you say. At the same time, it's a multi-faceted problem and the two party monopoly is one of them.
petre 10y ago
The problem is career politicians, not necessarily tge system. Public offices should have limited terms.
- joshmarlow 10y ago
  I'm torn on this issue. If they have limited terms, then they can't play long-term political games and that seems like it should simplify the system. But it also means that at the end of the last term they could more easily disregard their constituents in favor of some last minute lobbying-endorsed legislature.
Sacho 10y ago
It's not like the major parties woke up one day and put forth Clinton and Trump and told the plebs "vote one or the other". The US especially has a very extensive election process, with the party primaries and all, plus, there are also minor parties which do get votes. Is it really true that out of all the democratic and republican candidates at the primaries, and out of all the minor party candidates, none of them were pro-privacy? Or more likely, some of them were pro-privacy, but people voted for others because they don't see privacy as the be-all end-all of life issues. I don't think the ~15% of people who are at poverty level care as much about privacy as they do about getting a better job or getting proper healthcare, for example. You'd have to form a pretty strong voting bloc just to offset those votes.

marcoperaza 10y ago

Beware of blaming the system when the more likely problem is that enough people don't care about the issue.

joshmarlow 10y ago
There's definitely something to what you say. At the same time, it's a multi-faceted problem and the two party monopoly is one of them.

petre 10y ago

The problem is career politicians, not necessarily tge system. Public offices should have limited terms.

joshmarlow 10y ago
I'm torn on this issue. If they have limited terms, then they can't play long-term political games and that seems like it should simplify the system. But it also means that at the end of the last term they could more easily disregard their constituents in favor of some last minute lobbying-endorsed legislature.

Sacho 10y ago

It's not like the major parties woke up one day and put forth Clinton and Trump and told the plebs "vote one or the other". The US especially has a very extensive election process, with the party primaries and all, plus, there are also minor parties which do get votes. Is it really true that out of all the democratic and republican candidates at the primaries, and out of all the minor party candidates, none of them were pro-privacy? Or more likely, some of them were pro-privacy, but people voted for others because they don't see privacy as the be-all end-all of life issues. I don't think the ~15% of people who are at poverty level care as much about privacy as they do about getting a better job or getting proper healthcare, for example. You'd have to form a pretty strong voting bloc just to offset those votes.