Board of Elections - referendum uprising?

Ethan Allen2 said:Wouldn't it be better if we had a referendum every single week on any issue of national importance? Maybe even hold elections for US Congress every week, too. Just so even the slightest shift in public opinion could actually shape our government and policy.

Not so sure about that. Aren't those liberals—who seem to be the ones pushing this, if you ask me—the same people who were slamming the Swiss referendum? 🤷

Richard Wilson4 said:Not so sure about that. Aren't those liberals—who seem to be the ones pushing this, if you ask me—the same people who were slamming the Swiss referendum? 🤷

Who’s even talking about liberals here? And what does any of this have to do with them?

I'm either all in for a referendum on every single issue, or I'm for banning them entirely. It's one or the other, right? Either we elect people to US Congress and let them actually do the job we hired them for, or we scrap US Congress and just vote on every single decision ourselves.

Ethan Allen2 said:Who’s even talking about liberals here? And what does any of this have to do with them?

I'm either all in for a referendum on every single issue, or I'm for banning them entirely. It's one or the other, right? Either we elect people to US Congress and let them actually do the job we hired them for, or we scrap US Congress and just vote on every single decision ourselves.

I was talking about that specific crowd that fights against both the EU and GMOs, not your post.

PS
What's the vibe regarding GMOs over there in Canada? Are you guys on the same page as the US or more like Europe?

Richard Wilson4 said:I was talking about that specific crowd that fights against both the EU and GMOs, not your post.

PS
What's the vibe regarding GMOs over there in Canada? Are you guys on the same page as the US or more like Europe?

What are you even talking about? Liberals? Those people are communists—extreme socialists, really. It's nothing like a liberal worldview.

Think about it—can a true liberal, someone who treats individual liberty and rights as sacred over social norms, actually support collectivization or the nationalization of private property? 🤷

They aren't opposing the EU because they dislike centralization or imposed standards; they oppose it because they view it as neoliberal. You seem to be mixing up your terms again... 😉

northernsailor8 said:What are you even talking about? Liberals? Those people are communists—extreme socialists, really. It's nothing like a liberal worldview.

Think about it—can a true liberal, someone who treats individual liberty and rights as sacred over social norms, actually support collectivization or the nationalization of private property? 🤷

They aren't opposing the EU because they dislike centralization or imposed standards; they oppose it because they view it as neoliberal. You seem to be mixing up your terms again... 😉

Where do you even find liberals like that today?

Look, your definition is spot on, but we both know that when people say "liberal" nowadays, it usually means something else entirely.

Your theory is solid, but sometimes you're ignoring how things actually work in the real world.

Anyway, let's not get bogged down in semantics. I won't call those guys liberals anymore.

Marin Vidra, go check your inbox...🙂

Richard Wilson4 said:Where do you even find liberals like that today?

Look, your definition is spot on, but we both know that when people say "liberal" nowadays, it usually means something else entirely.

Your theory is solid, but sometimes you're ignoring how things actually work in the real world.

Anyway, let's not get bogged down in semantics. I won't call those guys liberals anymore.

Just because some people call themselves liberals doesn't make it true. That word had a real meaning long before people like you were even born. It's like when North Korea calls itself "democratic" or East Germany claims to be "people's"—it's written in the title, but it's nonsense. People who go along with those labels are just doing them a favor by watering down the actual meaning of the term.

FOR or AGAINST

A. Reversing the transformations, privatizations, and other transfers of non-personal property from 1990 to the present?

B. The sell-off of American assets, real estate, and natural resources?

C. The United States joining the EU?

D. Banning the production and sale of GMOs in America?

These questions are loaded and clearly aimed at undermining the legacy of Franjo Harmon. He oversaw the transition and privatization processes, actively encouraging both foreign and domestic investment into American assets, land, and resources—which this text mischaracterizes as a "sell-off."
Harmon was focused on leaving America and the North America behind to join the Western civilized sphere, which is where we belong: the EU. He transitioned us from a planned economy to a democracy and a free market. As for GMOs, that should be decided by individual democratic choice and the laws of the market!

So, is this essentially a referendum against Harmon's legacy?
If it is, I am FOR all points.

The rationale behind the ballot questions and the specific justifications provided by the referendum committee regarding why these votes are necessary:

Joshua Davis79 said:This feels like a bit of a setup... honestly, I'd much rather see them pass laws that actually allow referendums to decide the really big, essential issues. But let's be real: that idea is such a long shot for both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party that I find it hard to believe Congress would ever pass something like that as long as those two parties are calling all the shots...

The Puppet Parliament had to amend the Constitution just to make a binding referendum regarding the European Union constitution even possible in terms of voters making the final call. With those changes, you can actually push back against Congress by gathering signatures from 10% of voters, which lets us force a referendum on any proposed Constitution or law. To pull this off, we really need to start a citizens' association with its own bank account and a massive crew of volunteers—because let’s face it, trying to grab over 425,000 signatures without help is basically impossible! An association can also organize petition drives to demand specific changes suggested by the Government, Congress, or the President. We've got the Referendum Law on our side!