|
Voting for a candidate based on policy positions they have sworn to under oath....
Why not just argue for a direct democracy? That's essentially what it would be, but more complex, confusing, and even less effective. There are a ton of reasons direct democracy is bad, and I can't for the life of me think why it would be better to have a pseudo-direct democracy with a figurehead whose hands are tied based on statements he was forced to make under oath in order to gain votes, even when he finds out after the fact that those proposals aren't actually in the country's best interest.
If you don't like the idea of electing people to government so that they can make decisions for you, let's have a discussion about the merits of direct democracy. But this idea of having them campaign under oath; it's just crazy.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout
"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
|