What Changes Could The U S Make To Their System......

[ToraToraTora]

......so that their people get a decent choice?
This question was prompted by Err indoors, she suggested a maximum age, say 60? I suggest a funding limit, apparently they spent $14bn this time! so Max $500m each?? Anyway what other suggestions do you have? Not that they'll change anything, as TGM once said, "you can always rely on the Americans to do the right thing, ...once they've exhausted every other possibility"

[Zacs-Master]

Limiting the campaign spend would be a bit anti-capitalist. Limiting the age would be ageist.

[ichkeria]

To answer that question properly you have to identify what you think are the things that need improving and why.

What for example do you mean by “choice”?
I assume you don't mean quantity.
Quality? How do you stop someone like Trump getting a major party nomination for example? Would that be “undemocratic”

[ToraToraTora]

"To answer that question properly you have to identify what you think are the things that need improving and why." - yes ich, well look at the choice for a start! then there is the whole campaigning charade. They'll still be counting a fortnight after the voting. There are TPLACs peacing themselves!
Here's what I'd do
1) max age 60
2) max spend $500m
3) simple 1 elector 1 vote who gets the most wins, abolish the college system totally pointless.
4) Introduce a secure online voting system that people can use from any computer, so they get the result within the next few days rather than this shambles

[ToraToraTora]

by "choice" - I mean create the conditions for decent candidates to emerge, not just the ones who have big business backing them.

[Zacs-Master]

The American public have gotten used to the razzmatazz and visits to anywhere and everywhere, which, together with other campaign costs makes it very expensive. I think a less showey’event’ would generate far less interest and result in a much lower turnout, possibly favouring ‘fringe’ candidates.

[ToraToraTora]

ZM: "possibly favouring ‘fringe’ candidates. " - ....and that's bad because?

[Zacs-Master]

I was thinking they may be far right, Tora.

[ToraToraTora]

no doubt some weirdo's will emerge but also some decent candidates. I'm just looking for ideas really. The no1 nation often gets presented with a choice dictated by the shenanigans of 2 huge organisations, there must be a better way. I feel sorry for the people, often when interviewed they say things like they are voting for the lesser of 2 evils. The campaigning is primarily negative, just looks like an unhealthy fait accompli to me.

[Zacs-Master]

I think it is a fait-accompli. It has snowballed in the C20th due to better communications tech and I don’t see any way to change it. The majority of the American people are just too enmeshed in the system.

[Ken4155]

Perhaps their campaigns could be a little less 'personal'. There is far too much vitriol allowed between candidates running for the Presidency. In 2016, Trump said Hilary Clinton was a criminal who ought to be locked up. This time around it was Biden on the end of the same message. Biden, in turn, has called Trump a clown and the worst POTUS the country ever had. The words 'liar' and criminal' are used over and over again.
Between them, the candidates whip up such frenzy that their supporters are ready to go to war on the other side for them.
Then, when elected, they claim to serve all citizens of the US and pledge to unite the country. Good luck with that one:-/
In this country, if someone in the 'house' utters the word "scum", they are given the 'hard stare' and apologies are demanded.

[ToraToraTora]

ooo forgot 5) stop the TV "debates" - totally pointless

[bhg481]

Am I right in thinking there is no Slander law in the USA; this allows you to call someone a thief with no evidence and no come-back.

[Zacs-Master]

‘ Biden, in turn, has called Trump a clown and the worst POTUS the country ever had.’

I really don’t see anything inaccurate there.

[Ken4155]

There are slander laws in most states, from what i can gather with a quick Google.

[ichkeria]

A lot of the changes you suggest Tora are things most countries could benefit by.
Ultimately what counts are freedom and fairness and a messy but free and fair system beats an efficient but unfair one every time.
I heard an official in Georgia this morning saying that she wasn’t “proud” of their system in that state but she was “confident” of it and that matters more.
You have Maduro in Venezuela scoffing that in his country the results are always known on the day. I’m sure they are. Probably locked in a safe for weeks before just to be sure.
I know it’s easy to scoff back in return at Venezuela, but the nuts and bolts matter as much as things like spending, ease of voting etc.
The US system seems very transparent and was praised as such by the OSCE. What they criticised was the polarised campaigning. I’m not sure how you address that

[ichkeria]

Actually echoing Ken’s point

[gulliver1]

How about ,Get your own Country in order first, before criticising others.

[ToraToraTora]

have you got any suggestions gulliver? Ever thought of trying to not make everything a fight? I'm looking for ideas, even you could pitch in rather than spouting your usual anti British tripe.

[Peter Pedant]

Nixon spent $56 m in 1970

/ In 2016, Trump said Hilary Clinton was a criminal who ought to be locked up. //

Hillary was particularly personally unpopular ( sort of female alex salmond - or wayne rooney ( voted along with the neville brothers, the least likely a girl wd choose to go out on a date with)

and surprise for Trump he tried the same on Hunna Biden
lock him up etc
and it didnt work !

[Peter Pedant]

// than spouting your usual anti British tripe.// he's baaaaack !
( opening lines of Poltergeist)

Mrs Mopp darn Hackey Caff n Donut shop
suggests ways to improve the american elections ( yes well)
for a consumer in Londons east end I imagine

unify voting patterns in the various states ( difficult as this is a state right and not a federal one)