anyone else feel voters deserve another option, when faced with candidates that are running unopposed or trying to decide between dumb and dumber?
My guess is if voters actually felt their voices were being heard above business as usual politics (on both the left and right), then there would be greater voter participation.
So I'm wondering how hard would it be to get "public" support for something like a 28th "voters participation" amendment (i.e. ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States)?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl3sgKj6oTQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXUPDAMc_6o
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/rmbag2/th ... ank-update
Basically I want a ballot that states, along with the list of candidates (like Clinton vs. Trump) there should be an option to vote "not sure" as in the movie "idiocracy" (I would like this option even when a candidate is running unopposed, for council members, judges, the dog catcher, etc.)
basically I'm thinking if "not sure" wins the majority of the votes then the second place winner is sworn into office and not paid or allowed to make any policy, etc. (basically just be a place holder until the next election cycle)
figure after a while, politicians would figure out it would be in their best interest to avoid "not sure" from winning...