Ariz. considers $1 million voter lottery

Ron Burgundy · 08-03-2006, 03:45 PM

Ariz. considers $1 million voter lottery (AP)

AP - "Vote your pocketbook" could take on a whole new meaning in Arizona.

Ardentfrost · 08-03-2006, 04:51 PM

How does this help an election process? More voters does not mean more people's interests are being represented. It seems to me that people would go and just vote for whoever has the coolest looking name or whatever.

You can't force people to look at the issues, but they'll certainly pick a random name for the chance to win a million bux

lew · 08-03-2006, 04:54 PM

WickedLou9 · 08-03-2006, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

How does this help an election process? More voters does not mean more people's interests are being represented. It seems to me that people would go and just vote for whoever has the coolest looking name or whatever.

You can't force people to look at the issues, but they'll certainly pick a random name for the chance to win a million bux

yeah I agree. They should give you a quiz after the ballot and if you get a few rudimentary questions about the candidates correct THEN you get entered in the drawing. The quiz would be optional and would not prevent you from casting a vote.

Ardentfrost · 08-03-2006, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

yeah I agree. They should give you a quiz after the ballot and if you get a few rudimentary questions about the candidates correct THEN you get entered in the drawing. The quiz would be optional and would not prevent you from casting a vote.

I dunno... I mean, sometimes people go to vote for a particular election and don't care about the rest.

I know we often whine about our horribly low voter turn-out, but that's just a possible side-effect of living in a free society... you don't HAVE to participate.

hsmith · 08-03-2006, 05:53 PM

I would rather a larger percentage of people not vote, America is filled with idiots.

Thorgrim · 08-03-2006, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

I would rather a larger percentage of people not vote, America is filled with idiots.

typical anti-democracy libertarian answer

I am all for this option for obvious reasons

Dems would never lose!

lew · 08-03-2006, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

typical anti-democracy libertarian answer

I am all for this option for obvious reasons Dems would never lose!

Founding Fathers were anti-democracy as well.

Thorgrim · 08-03-2006, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by lew

Founding Fathers were anti-democracy as well.

they were also slave owners

thats why they made the constitution so vague, so that expanded views of rights and government could be applied into the future via the Democrats running the country

lew · 08-03-2006, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

they were also slave owners

thats why they made the constitution so vague, so that expanded views of rights and government could be applied into the future via the Democrats running the country

Kytro · 08-03-2006, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by lew

Founding Fathers were anti-democracy as well.

US is a form of democracy. Just not a direct democracy (though some states seem to have provisions leaning that way)

Ardentfrost · 08-03-2006, 06:49 PM

I think it was Ben Franklin (a staunch abolitionist) that said Democracy is simply a way for 51% of the population to take away the rights of the other 49%.

They made it so that minorities are protected, and democracy does not do that.

Additionally I doubt democrats would automatically win if this happened... I think if your name was "Max Paine" or something really cool like that, you'd win.

lew · 08-03-2006, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by Kytro

US is a form of democracy. Just not a direct democracy (though some states seem to have provisions leaning that way)

It is now. It wasn't created that way. Founding Fathers hated democracy.

Thorgrim · 08-03-2006, 06:56 PM

Originally Posted by lew

It is now. It wasn't created that way. Founding Fathers hated democracy.

They hated mob rule which is what they thought direct democracy would bring

Remember Athens had its glory days but they were short and powerless compared to the restricted democracy of the Roman Republic

Also the next example of democracy after failed Athens came the French Mob Rule

OFCOURSE they disliked direct democracy it seemed to always involve butchering, but we've evolved

lew · 08-03-2006, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

They hated mob rule which is what they thought direct democracy would bring

Remember Athens had its glory days but they were short and powerless compared to the restricted democracy of the Roman Republic

Also the next example of democracy after failed Athens came the French Mob Rule

OFCOURSE they disliked direct democracy it seemed to always involve butchering, but we've evolved

We're still not supposed to be a democracy. There are stark differences between a democracy and a republic.

Founding Fathers admired the Roman REPUBLIC.

Thorgrim · 08-03-2006, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by lew

We're still not supposed to be a democracy. There are stark differences between a democracy and a republic.

Founding Fathers admired the Roman REPUBLIC.

The Roman Republic was still a type of democracy...im not arguing this though ill concede the point because its a bitch to argue

motivez · 08-03-2006, 09:57 PM

This would be cool if it got people interested in being active and involved in government.. but people will simply go and vote for the money, and that shouldn't be what it's about.

Diesel66 · 08-03-2006, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

typical anti-democracy libertarian answer

I am all for this option for obvious reasons Dems would never lose!

So the uneducated vote Dem ?

motivez · 08-03-2006, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

So the uneducated vote Dem ?

He did kind of set himself up for that one

Scrum · 08-03-2006, 11:30 PM

This is a horrible idea.