• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 months ago

      The suggestion wasn’t to remove the vote from people who don’t have children.

      So your entire argument is predicated on a faulty base.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          The state of Wyoming has 2 US Federal Senators, for 576,000 citizens. The state of California has 2 US Federal Senators, for 39,000,000 citizens.

          We already have systems that change voting power of an individual based on arbitrary things.

          Why is this one worse?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14 months ago

              I’m saying that it’s already unequal, and nobody is planning on changing that.

              So why shit on other ideas like you aren’t already doing that.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                44 months ago

                Because your ideas are horrible. You’re not just building a bad system hundreds of years ago that’s over time sorted into a partisan warp on policy that we can’t easily get rid of, you’re proposing, in the modern age, selecting for the type of person you want to influence the government. That’s very much worse.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  14 months ago

                  Why? We select the type of person we want to influence the government all the time, they’re called party conventions. The parties get together and figure out what their platform will be, and only the people who are in that party get to vote, and the people with money get to influence the result.

                  • Todd Bonzalez
                    link
                    fedilink
                    34 months ago

                    What are you even arguing for against at this point? Just take the L and stop trying to get the last word in, because every new reply you make is more intellectually bankrupt than the last.

                    You aren’t going to win this argument, because the core of this argument you are making is that this Neo-Nazi / Christofacist ghoul that Trump has selected as a running mate is somehow “right” about his plan to disenfranchise people.

                    If this is what you actually support, you are a fascist, full stop. If you are on J.D. Vance’s side, you are a fucking Nazi.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    24 months ago

                    This is entirely nonsense. A delegate is not a type of person, nor is a voluntary and open party member, and political corruption is not codified electoral preference towards a better class of citizen. You’ve started this whole storm of comment arguing an immoral and poorly thought through philosophy of ‘parents are just better political deciders’ and with every whatabout and excuse for discriminatory systems have demonstrated conclusively that no, you are not.

              • Todd Bonzalez
                link
                fedilink
                24 months ago

                why shit on other ideas

                Because your idea is fucking stupid as fuck, that’s why.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  14 months ago

                  So my idea is bad (it’s not my idea)

                  But, you’re okay with the existing bad idea(s)

                  Hell, the US even allows effectively unlimited money in politics if we want to get into bad ideas that hurt democracy that we already have.

                  Where’s your campaign to overturn those?

      • Todd Bonzalez
        link
        fedilink
        44 months ago

        I don’t get how you’re not understanding this. There’s no functional difference between giving more voting power to parents, or taking voting power away from the childless.

        If one person is granted more voting power than the other, someone is getting their voting power diminished.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          I don’t get how you’re not understanding this. A parent is responsible for more than 1 person, because in order to become a parent you have to have children. You disenfranchise those children by default for 18 years to increase YOUR voting power. This suggestion is just a form of voting by proxy for people who should be represented but currently are not.