5 ms·

What percentage of California voters do you believe read that language?

by mewse 5y ago

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
actually_a_dog 5y ago
100% of them had the chance. If they didn’t read it and voted on it anyway, they should have to live with the consequences.
bpodgursky 5y ago
What percentage of California voters do you believe care about the repeal mechanics of an initiative they are voting for? Seriously, it's completely implausible that 1/6 of the voters voting for an initiative would change their mind because it's hard for the legislature to override their vote later.
michaelt 5y ago
To me it seems absurd to grant a person the power to pass laws, then to ignore those laws on the assumption the person didn't read them? I mean, that's the same as abolishing ballot initiatives. And abolishing ballot initiatives may well be a fine thing to do! But it needs a constitutional amendment to do it.
- xwolfi 5y ago
  It seems therefore absurd to grant a person the power to pass laws. Democracy is a compromise, not a good or even a working system. To avoid a riot of the idiots, you tell them "ok so do it yourself then, here take it and vote yes or no". Ofc, they're still emotional idiots who vote to stick it to Uber without caring what is written. I would suggest we reduce people's decision to representative selection, and let the representatives work without too much hindrance. You must publish the law, but as a European, hearing my dad he didn't want to vote for the European Constitution because he didn't want muslim Turkish to become Europeans (which was what everyone resisting European construction pretended the law was about), it convinced me democracy is not a good system. I live in China now, I'm in paradise I guess :D
- paulddraper 5y ago
  > it seems absurd to grant a person the power to pass laws Indeed. Constitutional democracy is a flawed system. But all the other systems are even worse.
justinzollars 5y ago
> What percentage of California voters do you believe read that language? It's not possible, by design, to read any proposition or ballot measure in the State of California while voting. You must do so prior to voting - and I might add its not even easy to do that. Typically a voter will read a summary, and confuse it with legal text. Again this is all by system design. The system is designed with summaries and titles which are created by a committee, and in my opinion to mislead the public. It would be far better to have titles such as "Measure 1", and a complete legal text as your question implies. But it is not possible with what voters are provided.
- mewse 5y ago
  I guess I was just confused about why you would jump in to declare that 60% of California votes "approved this language" when you knew full well that the vast majority of voters had never even seen the language.
  - justinzollars 5y ago
    You got me.

What percentage of California voters do you believe read that language?

by mewse 5y ago

What percentage of California voters do you believe read that language?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

actually_a_dog 5y ago

100% of them had the chance. If they didn’t read it and voted on it anyway, they should have to live with the consequences.

bpodgursky 5y ago

What percentage of California voters do you believe care about the repeal mechanics of an initiative they are voting for? Seriously, it's completely implausible that 1/6 of the voters voting for an initiative would change their mind because it's hard for the legislature to override their vote later.

michaelt 5y ago

To me it seems absurd to grant a person the power to pass laws, then to ignore those laws on the assumption the person didn't read them? I mean, that's the same as abolishing ballot initiatives. And abolishing ballot initiatives may well be a fine thing to do! But it needs a constitutional amendment to do it.

xwolfi 5y ago
It seems therefore absurd to grant a person the power to pass laws. Democracy is a compromise, not a good or even a working system. To avoid a riot of the idiots, you tell them "ok so do it yourself then, here take it and vote yes or no". Ofc, they're still emotional idiots who vote to stick it to Uber without caring what is written. I would suggest we reduce people's decision to representative selection, and let the representatives work without too much hindrance. You must publish the law, but as a European, hearing my dad he didn't want to vote for the European Constitution because he didn't want muslim Turkish to become Europeans (which was what everyone resisting European construction pretended the law was about), it convinced me democracy is not a good system. I live in China now, I'm in paradise I guess :D
paulddraper 5y ago
> it seems absurd to grant a person the power to pass laws Indeed. Constitutional democracy is a flawed system. But all the other systems are even worse.

justinzollars 5y ago

> What percentage of California voters do you believe read that language? It's not possible, by design, to read any proposition or ballot measure in the State of California while voting. You must do so prior to voting - and I might add its not even easy to do that. Typically a voter will read a summary, and confuse it with legal text. Again this is all by system design. The system is designed with summaries and titles which are created by a committee, and in my opinion to mislead the public. It would be far better to have titles such as "Measure 1", and a complete legal text as your question implies. But it is not possible with what voters are provided.

mewse 5y ago
I guess I was just confused about why you would jump in to declare that 60% of California votes "approved this language" when you knew full well that the vast majority of voters had never even seen the language.
- justinzollars 5y ago
  You got me.