To tweak our caucus-convention system, elect more delegates to the convention. I've expressed concern that the same delegates often are elected time and time again. One way to neutralize their dominance is to expand the field. They will be a little less influential if others are elected to also go to convention alongside them. And, if you are electing, say, the top four vote-getters, that fourth-place person might be getting enough votes even though he or she is vehemently opposed by the power brokers who have been roosting at the top of the precinct for all these years.
You are more likely to have diversity.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
Trump and the Kick in His Rump He is Receiving
Is this the Trump stumble that finally trips him up? I find myself somewhat understanding of him. If he is saying Judge Gonzalo Curiel definitely cannot fairly preside over the Trump University case because of his race, that is wrong. But, if he were limiting his assessment to saying sometimes people do let their race affect their judgments, I would say he's right.
There is that danger.
Most of us do have biases based from the groups we are in. I think of my own self, and often wonder how much my backing of Mitt Romney is because he is of my faith.
Ahem, I also think of the support of the Donald, himself, by Republicans, simply because he is a republican. That is a bias.
I wonder but what we all have biases. If so, judges are required to put theirs aside. I don't know that Judge Curiel has any bias to begin with, on this matter, but, if he does, my guess is, he is putting it aside. I consider that he ruled to postpone the case until after the election. That sounds like a favorable ruling for Trump. He didn't need to do that. If he were biased, he could have taken glee in having the case unfold, with all its negative publicity, during the campaign.
There is that danger.
Most of us do have biases based from the groups we are in. I think of my own self, and often wonder how much my backing of Mitt Romney is because he is of my faith.
Ahem, I also think of the support of the Donald, himself, by Republicans, simply because he is a republican. That is a bias.
I wonder but what we all have biases. If so, judges are required to put theirs aside. I don't know that Judge Curiel has any bias to begin with, on this matter, but, if he does, my guess is, he is putting it aside. I consider that he ruled to postpone the case until after the election. That sounds like a favorable ruling for Trump. He didn't need to do that. If he were biased, he could have taken glee in having the case unfold, with all its negative publicity, during the campaign.
I Should Sit Down and Study Hillary
Should come a day when I sit down and study Hillary -- Hillary, of the Benghazi mess, Hillary of the email debacle.
I do not like it that I should hold her in ill regard without studying the accusations. I do not like it that I should be a bandwagon despiser, I do not believe we should so easily take accusations against others and accept them. I believe another person's good name is not to be dismissed just because everyone piles on.
I do not like it that I should hold her in ill regard without studying the accusations. I do not like it that I should be a bandwagon despiser, I do not believe we should so easily take accusations against others and accept them. I believe another person's good name is not to be dismissed just because everyone piles on.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
This is as Different of an Idea as has Ever been Had, for Elections
Let all comers, be goers. Let everyone who wants to be a delegate, go to the party's convention. I wonder what would happen if we tried this approach with our party conventions.
Of course, that would render the caucus meetings rather meaningless. Electing delegates is pretty much what the precinct caucus meetings are about.
As I set here, typing, another thought occurs to me, as novel of an idea as there could be. So, I turn this blog in a different direction. How about every candidate being allowed a delegate from the precinct caucus? Off top, this might seem meaningless. If every candidate has a delegate, that doesn't lend toward solving an election.
But, I notice this: Many times, those who show up at caucus get there and become excited about becoming involved. For one thing, there is a neatness about being elected to something. So, the more positions you have available, the more people you can involve.
This, though, would be a novel position. Never in our election system have we had the likes. My reason for liking this position, is that these delegates would be advocates. It would be their responsibility to learn about their candidate and be ready to tell the others all the good points come convention time.
I've long thought, we should be more concerned about having an educated voting body than we are about how many who show up to vote even though they don't know a dime about who they are voting for. This, puts education in the election. This provides a mechanism that brings about education on each of the candidates.
This also sets well with the republican form of government. I think of our Electoral College, and how I suppose those electors were elected to study the candidates on behalf of everyone. Even so, these delegates would study their candidate on behalf of everyone.
This is as different of an idea as has ever been had -- I would guess -- as far as elections go. Alas, no time to consider it more this night, for it is past bedtime.
Of course, that would render the caucus meetings rather meaningless. Electing delegates is pretty much what the precinct caucus meetings are about.
As I set here, typing, another thought occurs to me, as novel of an idea as there could be. So, I turn this blog in a different direction. How about every candidate being allowed a delegate from the precinct caucus? Off top, this might seem meaningless. If every candidate has a delegate, that doesn't lend toward solving an election.
But, I notice this: Many times, those who show up at caucus get there and become excited about becoming involved. For one thing, there is a neatness about being elected to something. So, the more positions you have available, the more people you can involve.
This, though, would be a novel position. Never in our election system have we had the likes. My reason for liking this position, is that these delegates would be advocates. It would be their responsibility to learn about their candidate and be ready to tell the others all the good points come convention time.
I've long thought, we should be more concerned about having an educated voting body than we are about how many who show up to vote even though they don't know a dime about who they are voting for. This, puts education in the election. This provides a mechanism that brings about education on each of the candidates.
This also sets well with the republican form of government. I think of our Electoral College, and how I suppose those electors were elected to study the candidates on behalf of everyone. Even so, these delegates would study their candidate on behalf of everyone.
This is as different of an idea as has ever been had -- I would guess -- as far as elections go. Alas, no time to consider it more this night, for it is past bedtime.
Monday, June 6, 2016
Comfort is Key, so Let Them Sidestep Disagreements with Friends
Okay, comfort is key. If folks don't feel comfortable coming to your meeting, they won't even show up.
If we have wrung our hands over how ensure good attendance at our party caucus meetings, we would be wise to wonder if there is anything about the meetings that is making attendees uncomfortable. I say, there is. Often, if you go, you will be forced to face good friends who you know and love and don't want to disagree with . . .
But, who you do, indeed, disagree with.
That's not comfortable.
One solution would be to let the caucus-goers go to the precinct meeting of their choice. Have, say, four caucus meetings to choose from. If you are in precincts 1 through 4, then you can go to any of the four.
Those not wanting to run into friends they disagree with will be comforted knowing the odds are only one-in-four of running into them.
Another benefit of a go-to-your-choice-of-four meetings is that, through the years, people with similar viewpoints will gravitate to the same meeting. As you are more comfortable when with others who agree with you, this also will lend to encouraging more people to attend the caucus meetings.
If we have wrung our hands over how ensure good attendance at our party caucus meetings, we would be wise to wonder if there is anything about the meetings that is making attendees uncomfortable. I say, there is. Often, if you go, you will be forced to face good friends who you know and love and don't want to disagree with . . .
But, who you do, indeed, disagree with.
That's not comfortable.
One solution would be to let the caucus-goers go to the precinct meeting of their choice. Have, say, four caucus meetings to choose from. If you are in precincts 1 through 4, then you can go to any of the four.
Those not wanting to run into friends they disagree with will be comforted knowing the odds are only one-in-four of running into them.
Another benefit of a go-to-your-choice-of-four meetings is that, through the years, people with similar viewpoints will gravitate to the same meeting. As you are more comfortable when with others who agree with you, this also will lend to encouraging more people to attend the caucus meetings.
Term Limits on Delegates Will Help Restore Respect for System
If you would reinvigorate our state's political process, place term limits on party convention delegates. This, as much as anything -- and maybe more -- could make a difference.
We've tweaked the caucus-convention system, by providing an alternate way of getting on the primary ballot. Some like the change, others do not.
But, placing term limits on convention delegates might be a bigger reform. I do not know how much impact the move would have on increasing voter turnout, but I believe it would have an impact on caucus attendance. And, it should help restore respect to the caucus-convention system. Many of those displeased with it right now, would find it more acceptable.
Year after year (or election year after election year, more correctly), many of the same people are elected as delegates to the conventions. (Ironically, some of them see it as their imperative to not let the same people remain in public office year after year.)
When I bring up this idea of placing term limits on delegates, I'm sometimes told that the reason many of the same people are elected delegates repeatedly, is that no one else wants the job.
True.
But, let's do the best we can to encourage them to be involved. Let's make it as comfortable as we can for them to go to those meetings. I fear that one reason some do not attend caucus, is that they don't want to have to disagree with their good neighbors. They don't agree with everything their neighbors (who are the same people elected as delegates year after year) want to do. In fact, they sometimes strongly disagree. But, these are their friends, and they don't want to upset them or don't want to oppose them.
So, they take the path of least resistance, and just steer clear. They choose not to go the caucus meeting to avoid a confrontation with their friends.
Instituting term limits will help. Those shying away from the meetings to avoid confrontations with friends, will be more likely to go if they know their friends are no longer so much in charge. They can go to the meetings with more hope of being elected, themselves. It won't be perfect, for they will still be placed in position where they were facing friends they disagreed with, but it will be a big step in the right direction.
Tomorrow, I'll propose at another change to go hand-in-hand with this one, It would also be a significant improvement. Then, I will still have at least one more idea, which I will publish yet the next day. I believe these ideas would restore respect for the caucus-convention system.
(Edited June 6)
We've tweaked the caucus-convention system, by providing an alternate way of getting on the primary ballot. Some like the change, others do not.
But, placing term limits on convention delegates might be a bigger reform. I do not know how much impact the move would have on increasing voter turnout, but I believe it would have an impact on caucus attendance. And, it should help restore respect to the caucus-convention system. Many of those displeased with it right now, would find it more acceptable.
Year after year (or election year after election year, more correctly), many of the same people are elected as delegates to the conventions. (Ironically, some of them see it as their imperative to not let the same people remain in public office year after year.)
When I bring up this idea of placing term limits on delegates, I'm sometimes told that the reason many of the same people are elected delegates repeatedly, is that no one else wants the job.
True.
But, let's do the best we can to encourage them to be involved. Let's make it as comfortable as we can for them to go to those meetings. I fear that one reason some do not attend caucus, is that they don't want to have to disagree with their good neighbors. They don't agree with everything their neighbors (who are the same people elected as delegates year after year) want to do. In fact, they sometimes strongly disagree. But, these are their friends, and they don't want to upset them or don't want to oppose them.
So, they take the path of least resistance, and just steer clear. They choose not to go the caucus meeting to avoid a confrontation with their friends.
Instituting term limits will help. Those shying away from the meetings to avoid confrontations with friends, will be more likely to go if they know their friends are no longer so much in charge. They can go to the meetings with more hope of being elected, themselves. It won't be perfect, for they will still be placed in position where they were facing friends they disagreed with, but it will be a big step in the right direction.
Tomorrow, I'll propose at another change to go hand-in-hand with this one, It would also be a significant improvement. Then, I will still have at least one more idea, which I will publish yet the next day. I believe these ideas would restore respect for the caucus-convention system.
(Edited June 6)
Sunday, June 5, 2016
'The Greatest' was a Great Philosopher
In addition to the other ways he was great, Muhammad Ali was a great philosopher. His quotes are as good as you will find, and as plentiful as you find from most any other person. We have lost a great philosopher. And, as a society, we have lost a friend, for he was a friend to humanity.
"Don’t count the days; make the days count."
"Service to others is the rent you pay for your room here on earth."
"Friendship is not something you learn in school. But if you haven’t learned the meaning of friendship, you really haven’t learned anything."
"It isn’t the mountains ahead that wear you down. It’s the pebble in your shoe."
"A man who has no imagination has no wings."
A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)