Given that in most places in the US you’re required to have auto and home insurance, somehow I think people would find them. Knowing that some NFL player stans for Progressive doesn’t give me any information on the quality of the company.
So either you really dont get how things work, or you’re kind of racist/xenophobic.
It’s both. It’s always both. People are afraid and angry and hungry, and that brings fascism like flies to shit. I really don’t want to believe that people were always this hateful, and that it’s mostly because times are tough for everyone. Doesn’t help that you have Fox News and their cronies whipping everyone into a frenzy about every little thing.
Oh well. Now we’ll see them put their plan into action and hope that they somehow self-implode before they do too much damage.
I’m not blaming it on cabin fever or anything like that. I think people are just angry.
I’ve certainly seen an uptick in anti-social behavior since Covid. Whether or not it’s because of the economic situation or being cooped up inside, it really seems to have done a number on some people.
You’re not wrong. We have a representative democracy because the Founders thought the same way. I guess I prefer not to believe that it’s impossible for people to be well-informed enough to make a good decision on these things. I’ve certainly seen some new lows in the past 10 years.
I’m asking for the individual candidates to lay out their specific political goals. The party can continue to publish its platform and planks.
Then people vote based on whether they want to see those goals met. When those politicians are up for re-election, it’s fairly easy for someone to tabulate whether or not those goals were met. If there are extenuating circumstances (overwhelming opposition, for example), then they can use that to defend themselves. This would help hold their feet to the fire.
As for voting ideologically, I attribute that mostly to FPTP - people feel as though they cannot do anything but vote ideologically because there are no real alternatives. That’s why RCV is extremely important.
Hard disagree. It’s really easy for candidates to talk the talk on the campaign trail, and then do a 180 once they’re in office.
That being said, this doesn’t work if you let them use flowery speech and vague promises. If you had parties submit a platform of actually actionable decisions they would make (e.g. “decrease the federal minimum wage”), you’d be able to suss out what they actually want to do. It would also provide a rubric for re-election - how many of the things you wanted to do did you accomplish? Are there good reasons why you weren’t able to?
I understand how advertising works, I’m saying that I would like to choose for myself instead of having name recognition forced into my brain cells.