cnalicea, chill and give Max a break.
The US polical system is full of examples with ambiguities and uncertainities. The correction was made if you read the complete transcript of this blog topic. How do you think native americans and Mexican citizens that lived in what is now Texas, NewMexico, Arizona, and California feel?
The border moved on them!
So let take a more instructional approach in this blog and take the opportunity to share information, rather trying to instigate a fight.
What is holding back Puerto Ricans accepting been a USA state?
Please tell us how come the voting right is been witheld?, just a comment not a critic ;-)
It is amazing that a respectable publication like EE Times will allow this comment, "The strange thing to me is that they even hold a primary in Puerto Rico, since the folks in this territory aren’t US citizens and therefore cannot vote in the main election, but what do I know?", in one of it's articles.
Puerto Ricans have been US citizens since 1917. The Jones–Shafroth Act of May 1917 granted Puerto Ricans US citizenship which allow Puerto Ricans to be drafted into the US Army. Puerto Ricans have fought bravely in every US war since 1917. They have paid for their citizenship with their blood.
It amazes me that there people in this country that don't know who is a US citizens or who is not and that an editor would allow such bigotry to be published.
Puerto Ricans are due an apology from EE Times.
What we really need is to get rid of the primary elections and just have one ballot for one election, but very important, also the option:NONE OF THE ABOVE, so that we can demand that there be somebody else available. Really, in the last election we certainly did not have an adequate selection of candidates. And until they eliminate primary elections, none of the above should appear on every ballot.
Of course we can't have democratic elections. WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY!
It does matter where the power will lie. As long as the power lies in a central location the common man will have very little *real* influence not matter what rules you use.
When you close the polls doesn't change how the votes add up. If you are arguing that you can't have fair election because people don't believe something or another then you are arguing that you *can't* have fair election.
masher, don't forget that like OR, AZ has very accessible initiative, referendum and recall processes.
The recall process in particular was used last year to oust the guy who sponsored that controversial immigration law. Apparently the voters in his district felt there were other issues he should pay attention to, and they let him know their dissatisfaction by firing him before his term was finished.
Sometimes voting matters.
No No NO!! By Financial, I meant that any government proposal (to build something, to tax someone,to spend money on something, etc) that involves over a certain amount of money, would have to be subject to a referendum. For example, the NSW govt are in the process of selling off most of our power generator utilities to private hands. Most people are opposed to this and I think in a referendum it would be rejected. But the NSW govt, knowing this, would not even think of having a referendum on it.....
I'd also be horrified if you could "buy" a referendum. The super rich have too much influence already.
Oregon normally has a closed primary but I just got an interesting postcard from the elections division. It seems that the state Republican party has decided to allow unaligned voters (I'm registered independent) to participate in the republican primary.
I've never seen that before.
1. Because you can't influence the choice of president beyond two candidates without declaring your party affiliation, voting is not anonymous.
2. Maybe everyone is /supposed/ to have the same voting rights, but not everyone does. The most obvious example is differences in the voting rights for criminals between states.
3. It doesn't matter (for this discussion) whether the power was meant to lie with the states or not - or whether that is a good thing or not. The USA is one country, and much of it is run by federal powers. American citizens in different states do not have the same voting rights and powers. In particular, the timing differences in elections skew the voting wildly - as long as there are people who believe it doesn't matter how they vote, since it will all be decided in Iowa, or Florida, or whatever, then you don't have fair democratic elections.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.