questionshave you heard of americans elect?

vote-for17vote-against
vote-for3vote-against

I also do not like the idea of second place being VP because of the president-as-target aspect.

However, it is clearly time to scrap the electoral college and have a national primary day. While the intent of the electoral college is admirable, even ignoring the possibility of the candidate with fewer votes still winning the presidency, it ends up having the candidates ignoring those states which they have either have guaranteed victories or guaranteed losses. The candidates should have to campaign across the entire country, not just battleground states.

Also, the primaries need to be held all on one day. While it's not going to happen with the GOP this year, often times if a candidate has a big lead then others will drop out prior to the primaries or at least stop actively campaigning rendering states with later-scheduled primaries meaningless.

Bottom line: The Presidency is a national office and should be decided with a national election, not the local patchwork in place now.

vote-for3vote-against

Heard of it and registered as what they're calling a "delegate". I think it's a great idea, except for three facts: 1. I don't think enough people will hear about it/get involved with it for it to make a difference. The bar is actually pretty high for support on the site to get a draft candidate onto the AE "primary" ballot. 2. There was a great article out a few weeks ago (actually specifically about Ron Paul) that stated that one of the interesting things we're learning is that the internet doesn't necessarily translate well into IRL effects. The example used was the near-rabid support for Ron Paul online, but his low levels of IRL support. 3. People don't trust it. People that are Democrats or lean Democratic are currently pretty okay with sticking with voting for the incumbent, and people that are Republicans or lean Republican are afraid that any votes siphoned off from whoever the nominee is will weaken them vs. the incumbent. That leaves very few true independents.

vote-for3vote-against

@atd15: What you said, plus line item veto.

vote-for3vote-against

This, of course, leads to the real question...who will Chuck Norris choose as the VP?

vote-for3vote-against

Wasn't our system setup originally to have the runner up in a presidential election become the vice president? If so, we should move back to that. It would be interesting to see the president constantly watching his back. Of course, any assasination attempt would lead to congressional testimony from the vice president and most people assuming it was a conspiracy.

vote-for4vote-against

I seem to remember that concept floating around 4 years ago. I was seriously hoping Obama would have picked a republican as his running mate with all that talk about not being a traditional candidate. I think this is a great idea but I don't think we are getting rid of the traditional two-party system any time soon.

vote-for8vote-against

I think that we need major election reform: Campaign Finance, Electoral College, Term Limitations, Shortening of Campaign Time, Fairness in Media Coverage, the list is endless.