Representitive government is so antiqated

100 Senator and 435 is U.S. House of Representatives....

Great Idea in the 1700s elect some people to represent you and these people vote and decide things but now we could easily mass vote on things ourselves with modern technology. Back then what was everyone going to ride a horse to Washington and vote on each thing? Impossible but now for example Youtube likes and dislikes became almost voting before they got rid of dislikes to make it easier for MSM to lie about public opinion.

Imagine if we got to vote on bills in congress directly and they had to convince us to vote yes or no we would probably have much better outcomes.

I guess 100 Senator and 435 is U.S. House of Representatives would be in charge of the convincing or something we could keep that.

I once came up with the idea that I should run for maybe senate and if elected I would set up a voting system where everyone in my state decides what my vote on bill is with a state wide online voting referendum.

That's all my job would be to just vote the way the majority in my state wants on bills in Washington no red team vs blue team nonsense instead one issue or bill at a time all the people decide.

 

In many ways, this is how government in the UK works.
Every region elects their local representative, then the party with the most representatives elect our prime minister.
If that party has a narrow majority, it only needs a few members to defect of abstain at the division for a bill to be defeated.
That is why a narrow majority government (less than 10) ends up forming a coalition with one of the other parties.

The regional system works quite well, particularly on local matters, since the elected representative has local powers. This avoids the bankers in London passing laws on how the farmers milk the cows.
Needless to say, the farmers spell Banker with a 'W' and we see plenty of jokes about them trying to milk the bull.

 

I would question how secure an election like that could be all electronically I would be interested in more direct democracy tho

 

Terrible idea! You're apparently channeling the ghost of the late demagogue Ross Perot, who ran on a similar proposal. The Founding Fathers thought that direct democracy, as practiced in ancient Athens, was a prescription for mob rule and would be impractical on a national scale. They understood that sound government requires informed decision-making based deliberation. Most people, absorbed with making a living, getting ahead, watching game shows, etc., have little time or interest in staying abreast of complex issues of foreign policy, economic policy, etc. They're easily led by demagogues and fake news. "Ratiional ignorance", the economists and opinion experts call it. Today, in the age of the internet and TV, it's even worse. For examples (not mentioning posts on this forum): two-thirds of Americans can't name the three branches of government, a majority don't know which party controls Congress, and most can't name a single congressional candidate in their district. A quarter don't know that the earth orbits the sun, and 80 % favor mandatory labeling of food containing DNA. Ilya Smolin, Democracy and Political Ignorance; Bryan Caplan,The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies. They're suckers for conspiracy theories. The Founding Fathers realized they had to have a voice in their own governance, but thought they'd do a better job deciding which politicians could better represent their views than to make issue-by-issue decisions on policy matters. I agree, as the lesser of evils.

 

The Military's Main Mission is to uphold Democracy and Defend the Constitution from Enemies Foreign and Domestic.

Since many Guardians of Plutocracy/ MAGA Idiots in Congress / Senate and the US Supreme Court are Accomplices and accomedating to Trump's anti Constitutional Crimes .... Miltary Rule is better than Trump Rule.

At least the Military stands up for Democracy, the Constitution and Rule of Law.... Trump doesn't.

 

Not necessarily. Many of the "stand up" guys in the top echelons of the military have been weeded out and replaced with lackeys. And many of the rank and file may have been infected with Christian nationalist ideology.
Armed, Angry and Apocalyptic: Christian Nationalism and the U.S. Military - Bucks County Beacon
How Christian Nationalism Spread In The US Military
Is There a Christian Nationalism Problem in the US Military?

 

A military takeover is not the answer that’s insane protect democracy by ending it that’s stupid. Vote the dick heads out it’s simple if they dont allow that then we can start talking rebellion or revolution

 

Yes, there was an issue w the chest tattoo of former Fox Newsee and current Def. Sec. Pete Hegseth. a Greek Cross it was said.

Is the cross a deal killer?

 

Apparently not. Hegseth is still Secretary of Defense. I remember the cross becoming an issue in the confirmation hearings. One Senator proudly proclaimed it was a Jerusalem Cross--insinuating it was a religious instead of a political symbol. Right.

 

Pfft. I don't expect any help from the military. They're happy to go stick their noses in any other country's business, but when it comes to protecting their own country from actual threats, many of them can't be bothered.