Our Presidential Election process has become a joke. How do we begin to fix it?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Ok, I don't want to turn this into an Obama vs. Romney discussion. If that's what you want, please find another thread to comment on!
I could go on and on about the horrors of this election cycle, but we all know what the problems are. So, what changes need to happen in order to make this a respectable process again? I really think that high school and college students should begin learning how to get real news. They need to learn how to cut through the BS and know how to get to the facts. There are WAAAAY too many people who read or hear something - no matter how outrageous - and believe it without question. And they repeat it, repost it, and the cycle continues. Many times, they simply don't know that their source is not credible. If we begin teaching high school and college kids NOW how to fact-check, then the 18-25 demographic will have these skills by the next presidential election. I honestly think this could make a difference over time. Eventually, it would force journalists to become reporters of cold, hard facts again instead of the shock jocks that they've all become. It used to be that a journalist would be fired after one false report. And if you added another one or two, their career would be over for good. Now it is all about ratings, and the journalist's job is to throw noodles at the wall until something sticks. |
Anonymous
|
How exactly do you "teach" someone to get "real" news and what constitutes "real news" to begin with?
For some Fox is real news just like MSNBC is for others. I get where you are tying to go but you are only opening up more discussion on who gets to inform students on the sources to go seek said news. I think what really needs to be taught is critical thinking. I can say more but Ill stop there. |
Anonymous
|
1. Campaign finance reform. Again.
2. Shorten the length of the election cycle. Primaries should not be held until August at the earliest. 3. Extend voting times--or move it to a weekend to increase voter turnout. |
Anonymous
Just want to point out how hilariously off-base such comparisons are. When Fox has a far-left ex-Congressman as the host of a four hour morning news program every day, then we can talk about how Fox and MSNBC are two sides of the same coin. http://mediamatters.org/embed/static/clips/2012/11/05/27478/msnbc-morningjoe-20121105-floridavoting |
Anonymous
| Eliminate the electoral college. |
Anonymous
None of this will happen because one of the two main parties has a serious vested interest in it not happening. Or as "Voting inconveniences aren't really just a technical problem. There are partisan implications to making voting logistically difficult—Republicans think it helps them win elections—so there's little effort put into finding ways to make it easier. After all, you can also eliminate line waiting with a low-tech vote-by-mail system but few places do that." Bottom line is that the GOP base thinks that Democratic votes are illegitimate because they're Democratic votes. They'll do anything they can to reduce them. Doesn't work the other way. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/11/05/voting_lines_there_should_be_an_app_for_that.html |
Anonymous
|
I guess this makes me socialist but I want our electoral process to look like France -
* Lasts a short few months * Totally financed with public money - instead of this years long mudslinging game it's become now. I am so effing over it, and I am an involved giving money type. I've been deleting all the emails though for the past week. Come on, November 7th! |
Anonymous
OP here. Re-read your post. You are saying that real news does not exist. This is the problem, and this is why students need to be taught a better way. I wonder how old you are. I am in my late thirties, and if you are younger than me, you've likely never known what real news is. When I was growing up, my parents watched news programs which were anchored by people who had one goal - to be CORRECT! they also read the newspaper, and the articles were written by reporters with that same goal. Then they used their very own brains to figure out where they stood. You know, the evening news still exists, and it's still pretty accurate. There are other credible sources, but you have to dig so deep to find them. So if students were taught how to do this, it would eventually be a game changer. NONE of us should consider FOX or MSNBC to be news. This mentality is the root of the problem. |
Anonymous
| Eliminate the electoral college. Get rid of winner take all elections and have proportional representation instead. If the Rs and Ds and other parties are forced to share power they will have to find a way to get along. |
Anonymous
| The primaries have become increasingly problematic. 2008 was bad enough, but this one was a four-ring circus. In order to survive the primary, the candidate has to go so far to the right or left. Then, once they become the candidate, they have to make their way to the middle. How does one do this without losing all credibility? Perhaps we should all be allowed to vote in the primaries. So, dems and independents can vote in the republican primaries, and vice versa. I realize that the problem here is that some would vote for the one who would be easier to beat. Too bad we couldn't count on people to realize that this person could become their president, so they should vote for the best choice. |
Anonymous
I'm afraid this doesn't follow from the premise. Rs and Ds are currently forced to share power and it doesn't result in any cooperation. Adding more, weaker, parties is unlikely to fix anything. |
Anonymous
Actually, I have my list of the problems, but it might not be the same as your list. Are you just unhappy with mudslinging? Because that's unlikely to change ever. Don't know how you can have a discussion about solutions without agreeing on the problems. |
Anonymous
Proportional systems have some really bad side effects. For example, none of Israel's major parties can form a government on their own. But do they form a consensus government? No, most of the time they align with a group of radical religious parties and make promises to them so tht they can get a prime minister. This radicalized. |
Anonymous
I agree. As a Democrat, I would LOVE LOVE a candidate that was fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I love some things Obama has done but others, ick, not-so-much. But I just wish we could have a moderate, logical candidate!! |
Anonymous
Unfortunately, your point is absurd. I'm sure Fox news can (and they have) defend the fact they are not all right leaning by pointing out all of the democrats/left leaning hosts and or commentators just the same. You will next tell me that having SE Cupp surrounded by 3 liberals on MSNBC is also "fair" in some way. I am by no means a fan of Fox but to even attempt to suggest that MSNBC isnt the lefts answer to Fox news is absurd and an insult to my intelligence. 4 hours of Scarborough some how gives MSNBC that "fair" title just as much as Fox tried to do the same by saying Alan Colmes having a show with Hannity, disproved the notion that Fox wasnt some right leaning station. |