For me it is the concept of registering to vote. I am citizen so I have the right to vote automatically and only thing I need to provide is some accepted ID.
Being registered “as a republican/democrat” is weird.
Electoral college is weird AF
One party trying to stop people voting is weird.
Queuing for hours to vote is weird.
Purging voter rolls is weird.
Rallies are weird.
Townhalls are weird.
Flags everywhere is weird.
The orange one is super weird.
Electoral college is weird AF
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0065
It was just added because it was the only way to launder slave votes for slave states, if you did it 1 vote per person then who got to choose who the slaves voted for?
We need to fix it, but there’s no way in hell they’ll give up their most precious possession, no matter how wrong it is.
That might have been revolutionary in 1776, and cut it in 1950, but its the 21st C — as long as the electoral college exists the US should not be viewed as more than a pseudo-democracy at best.
Electoral college is weird AF
I think it’s less unique than people think. In France, there is an electoral college specifically for the Sénat, which is a secondary legislative chamber compared to the Assemblée Nationale. They can amend law proposals after they are submitted by the Assemblée, but in case of conflicts, it’s the Assemblée that decides.
The college is made of people locally elected in various types of previous local elections. I think part of the reasons for this system is to have a representation of every locations that is not only proportional to the population. For example to prevent populated areas from dictating laws to unpopulated areas that don’t make sense for their local circumstances (typically around urbanism and transportation).
It may make sense for specific services which are naturally bias and unfair (can’t think of any that would warrant it), but for general governance weighting citizens votes differently for any reason is entirely anti-democratic.
Also the UK’s House of Lords is no better. Giving a bunch of historically elite landowners authority based on wealth and birthright is fucking disgusting.
Townhalls are weird.
Town halls? As in the building or does this mean something else? Aren’t town halls quite common and normal elsewhere?
Flags everywhere is weird.
We kinda do this in Denmark too tbh. I personally don’t find it that weird due to that.
Townhalls are a type of political event. They are typically small forum events held in places like town halls or school gyms and involve the politician giving a short speech typically limited to a single issue or current event followed by a longer period where the audience asks the politician questions. It’s not limited to campaigning, legislators often hold these events outside of elections. Theoretically they give the politician the opportunity to hear issues and concerns that their constituents most care about but mostly they are used to drum up support for legislation that the politician already supports.
Hmm okay. I do think we have something similar here where there might be meetings that we call “citizen meetings” where anyone is invited to come and hear about a current political topic. It’s mostly informative and people can ask questions and stuff, not related to campaigning or elections mostly I would say. So yea I don’t think that is too weird honestly.
I think they’re talking about town hall meetings.
I’m not sure about the format but I know that towns in Denmark also occasionally calls for meetings. This doesn’t sound that weird to me
Good summary
FYI registering with a party affiliation is so you can vote in their closed primary election (where they pick candidates to run in the general election)
Anyone can register with any party, or none, and change their affiliation at will.
Electoral college is fucking weird
That you disallow prisoners to vote, but a felon can run as a candidate
That you end up in situation where there are hours long lines and you don’t have one station per, say, 1000 people at most
Registering to vote is weird, but that is i understand mostly a consequence of not having countrywide ID standard. In my country you’re automatically registered where you live, and IDs are free of charge and mandatory to have (not driving license or passport. there are fees for these)
Election isn’t on weekend, there’s zero reason why it couldn’t be or it could be made national holiday. There was even free public transit for election day in my city, but that one was paid by the city
That some of people (republicans) seem to be into politics in the same way ultras seem to be into football, it’s still fucked up but i’ve seen it in other places so it’s not that weird by now
That you end up in situation where there are hours long lines and you don’t have one station per, say, 1000 people at most
If you make it hard for the people you don’t like to vote, then they won’t vote. You never hear about rich white districts running low on election machines do you. Since the machines are provided by the state I wonder why that would be. 🤔
I am not American, but I believe the reason a felon can run is that the founding fathers didn’t want peoples political rivals to be able to bring charges to stop someone being president.
And how does that handle a candidate who is in prison, and how is it different?
Eugene Debs, the must successful American socialist candidate for president, was at one point running for office while in prison. Of course he lost so I can’t imagine it helped
I imagine if such a candidate won, the would forfeit their win by not attending the inauguration and not getting sworn in.
Nothing states WHERE the President has to be sworn in. LBJ was sworn in on Air Force One. I believe Andrew Johnson was sworn in at the house where Lincoln lay dying.
Well I don’t really expect someone in prison to win, but I don’t believe there’s any law about the location where the president gets sworn in. If a majority of voters chose that person, they could get sworn in in jail, immediately pardon themselves and off they go.
but a felon can run as a candidate
No no this one is one of the good ideas in the American system. In dictatorships this sort of restriction can be and is used as a way to prevent political rivers from running for office.
Yeah, and for the same reason prisoners should be allowed to vote too
The rivers must run, lest they be dammed.
Oh shit I didn’t notice. As a proud grammar Nazi, I must now commit keppusu.
Well to be honest we don’t have a justice system - we have a punishment system pretending to be a justice system.
Non US citizens, what’s the weirdest thing about USA elections, compared to elections in your country?
I will probably get downvoted to oblivion for that but here it is: that one of your candidate was not put in jail already and is still legally able to run for presidency (note that I did not name said candidate, I would not want to influence US voters ;)
I like your optimism that by naming said candidate you would influence anyone!
Maybe I was a little bit sarcastic?
Woah, tone down that rhetoric, Yosif!
/s
Why would you get down voted for that on a leftist forum?
When I see how some of our politicians can run away from justice, it isn’t that weird.
But our justice system is truly independent from the political one.
True your two remarks.
And we also have a few very questionable representatives/candidate to whatever elections around here, but so far none that has managed to get away from a failed coup at the previous election — sorry, it was unintentional but I may have hinted at the candidate I was surprised was still able to run tor presidency ;)
There are some regrettable exceptions
In my home country of Finland, you can be elected from prison.
That they’re held on a work-day, to disenfranchise those that can’t take the day off.
I mean yes, but the real disenfranchisement comes from making sure the lines are hours long for the only polling station in your county (while every suburban school is a polling station in rich neighborhoods).
We had laws against that (not that they were followed), but the Supreme Court struck them down because “they weren’t needed anymore”.
Isn’t that quite normal even in other countries? I believe we do it quite commonly in Denmark.
Yes. In the UK, our elections are always on Thursdays. No one has ever complained about it because it’s literally not an issue.
The idea that it’s an attempt at disenfranchising people because you have to vote either before or after work is laughable.
The difference I suspect is in the ease of which we have access to local polling stations within walking distance of our homes, and how short the queues are, if there are queues at all.
In the US these problems can be magnified, especially if everybody is trying to pile in to the stations (or just reach them) within the one hour they have before their 12 hour shift, etc.
-
FPTP voting system
-
Voting isn’t compulsory so a lot depends upon on riling up your base
-
Voting is on a Tuesday instead of a weekend (or a public holiday)
-
Political parties draw up the electoral boundaries instead of an independent body
-
The absurdly long leadup to an election
-
The amount of money thrown around
-
deleted by creator
The electrical college was, as I understand it, originally installed in the event the population voted really, really stupidly - to avoid the “tyranny of the majority.” If course that’s not actually how it works. It’s a dead theory and the whole process should be kicked off a cliff and replace with some kind of ranked choice system. At the federal level, if nothing else.
deleted by creator
If the electoral college had worked as intended, Trump would not have won in 2016*.
So, yeah, get rid of it. It’s not working anyway.
- You could, of course, consider the attitudes and biases of the founding fathers and come to the conclusion that they would have preferred to see a man win instead of a woman. However, I don’t think that’s fair. Even in their lifetimes they were shifting their views based on their experiences. If you are going to ask them what they would do today, then you have to give them the benefit of having experienced the events of the last 248 years. You have to assume they would have continued to grow.
The fucking shows your politicians put on. Like going places and then having some monologue in front of a bunch of people. Not even a debate or something… Weird as fuck to me.
Gerrymandering. i dont know a second democracy where such a blatant version of voter suppression is allowed.
Singapore
61% of the votes, but 89% of the seats in parliament
The weirdest thing, the thing that I have the hardest time understanding, is how many people vote for Trump. There was just a survey here in Denmark asking how many would vote for Trump. It was 8%. That number I still find a bit high but I can understand it a little bit. 8% of people voting for something very harmful seems almost inevitable I guess. Some people just aren’t educated or informed enough.
But the fact that close to 50% of americans choose to vote for Trump, and that in some states, it is even more than 50% - that I don’t think I will ever understand. That is madness.
I think his main “selling point” that’s a bit unique to the US is his hard stance on the southern border. Too many white people are afraid of us becoming another Latino/Hispanic country.
It’s much less than 50%. 2020 had the highest percentage of eligible voters actually vote in US history, it was about 67%. About 70% of Americans are eligible to vote and of that 70% about a third voted for Biden, about a third for Trump, and about a third didn’t vote. So a little over 20% of Americans chose to vote for Trump last time. That number is still too damn high but it’s not as bad as half.
That just makes me think, how can those people not voting just sit idly by and watch? I don’t understand that either.
Some people are genuinely apathetic or feel like it doesn’t directly impact their life, but a lot of people fall for the propaganda of “both sides are the same” and that it makes no difference either way, and a lot of people are intentionally disenfranchised by various voter suppression efforts by Republicans. Then there’s the electoral college nonsense which leaves the populace of 43 states with essentially no say in who the president is, leading some to wonder why they should bother, not being mindful that their vote may carry weight for the federal legislature and state/local elections. And many people are just too busy surviving to worry about anything else.
For my part, voting straight Democrat in a heavily Republican-leaning state, my vote literally means nothing at all because my state will inevitably give all of its electoral college votes to Trump, and will elect nothing but Republicans to the federal legislature and for almost all state/local offices. But I voted on the first day of early voting, and I will vote in every election, because we have to show support for change if we ever want there to be change. There are enough left-leaning people in my state for it to be a swing state (hell, we had a Democrat for governor 2003-2011, and he was popular), but so many see their votes as meaningless simply because their fellow left-leaners also aren’t voting…
Some people just aren’t educated or informed enough.
There’s a lot in your guess. Look at a map of the ‘red’ and ‘blue’ states: the Atlantic and Pacific coasts are not red, but the ‘inner’ states. These people hardly know that the countries outside really exist.
First past the post. Electorate college. Overrepresentation of smaller States. Gerrymandering. PACs.
And thats just the ones that pop up immediately. For calling yourself a democracy, your system is quite rigged.
The PACs. I think this practice should be considered blatant corruption in any democratic system as it enables large corporations and wealthy individuals to predetermine which candidate or party has even the slightest chance in elections. In my home country, of course, there are private political funds as well but those are not nearly as important in our system as there is solid public funding for political parties based on past election results. I might be wrong but I always thought that the insane amount of private money that fuels US elections boils down to the US being a plutocracy rather than a democracy.
The entire process of the electoral college makes no sense at all. The only thing it accomplishes is making some peoples votes better than others. Which is so fucked up if you think about it.
That one party (the Republicans, just to be clear about that) tries to invalidate votes and tries to make voting as hard as possible AND THEN gets away with it.
That for the last 8 years one party keeps nominating a criminal who keeps admitting that he wants to fuck the country into the dirt. And people still vote for him. Every country has its idiots, but they usually are in the 5%-10% range. In the US it’s almost 50% of the voters. That is remarkable.
Oh, and the two party system sucks, too. They are not the same, fuck everyone who says they are. But it still does suck.
for republicans, if you don’t toe the line, you’re out. no longer part of the club. only 100% unwavering loyalty and fealty to dear great leader will allow you a seat at the table. it’s a cult.
Having only 2 realistic choices
That’s very common though.
No, not really. Only some parts of the english-speaking world use FPTP and it’s not that common to have only 2 choices unless you have that system.
FPTP is not the only form of being limited to two (or fewer) choices. Look at Georgia, Cambodia and Thailand as a few examples. Vietnam, Russia and China for other limited-choice countries. Not sure what the “english-speaking” part is relevant for.
Well the map includes Canada, US, UK and India, and some african territories that I imagine may have been UK colonies at one point (I could be wrong), hence english-speaking world.
I think those are particular examples but if you look at most of the EU, I think there are more political choices than just 2. Here in Denmark there’s sometimes a discussion that there are too many political parties. We currently have like 12?
Europe and the EU are a very small part of the world as a whole, 60% of the world lives in Asia, with the biggest countries in the world having two or zero choices.
There can be plenty of political parties (a la the UK), it doesn’t mean there is the possibility of electing them all.
deleted by creator
No, in systems where there is a dictator, corruption and no realistic opportunity for other parties to get a foothold.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Some things come to mind:
- Each state could theoretically name a different candidate (all that primaries bullshit)
- No unified federal law for voting for the fucking president; each state has different voting laws
- Parties have to be registered at a state level and ONLY Rep and Dem exist on all 50. What the fucking fuck
- Unlimited money spending
- The fucking electoral college. Winner takes the whole state.
- Election on tuesday (if i recall, that’s a leftover of ye olde times because it’s when rural people were more likely to be around cities)
'muricans somehow insist they are a democracy despite all the hurdles, weird laws and obvious gatekeeping that make it a very shitty republic where votes are NOT equal.
For comparison, Brazil’s elections for president and state governors happen on the same year/day (also for some senators and federal deputies, but let’s focus on president). It’s direct vote counting, majority (50% + 1) wins. If no candidate gets more than half total votes, the 2 better voted candidates go to a 2nd turn, which happens 4 weeks after the 1st. Election happens on a sunday and there’s an electoral tribunal that handles all the logistics across all 27 states.
Regarding expenditure, it took us a while to stop allowing corporations to finance candidates’ campaigns (thanks in no small part to a supreme judge who wanted to keep that legal), the downside is that candidates with rich “friends”/families still have a significant advantage, since direct individual donations are still allowed.
Some states actually split the electoral college vote. Us elections are truly bonkers
https://electoralvotemap.com/which-states-split-their-electoral-votes/
For me it is the concept of registering to vote. I am citizen so I have the right to vote automatically and only thing I need to provide is some accepted ID.
This but also that in some US states you don’t need a valid ID to vote
Your signature is your ID.
When you register to vote, your signature is placed on file.
When you go to vote, you sign in and your signature is compared to the registration.
If it matches, you can vote. If it doesn’t match, you can prove who you are or cast a provisional ballot pending identification.
The system seems to work - voting fraud doesn’t seem to be a huge issue in the US.
It’s just that it’s so counterintuitive to me, making sure that everyone voted only once and only in their own name is essential. But somehow you managed to do it without requiring a formal ID document.
I’d think the signature would be way harder to fake than an ID. Nobody signs my name like I do, but I bet there are plenty of bad ID photos that kinda/sorta look like me.
Needing an ID is fine in theory, but in practice many older folks who do not drive do not have one. In order to get one you need a certified birth certificate. In order to get one of those you usually need to deal with a lot of red tape, especially if you were born at home in a rural area.
People often forget how rural the US is. Sometimes it’s hard to document exactly who you are. Especially if you were born poor and black in the South.
