Thanks for sharing but I have to respectfully disagree. In your ideal world, that means every 4 years we'll switch ruling party. That will just ensure short-term thinking over long-term planning. This is especially true if every time the new ruling party just overturn/undo many of the policies from the previous admin because of ideological differences.
I acknowledge your point about a ruling party holding onto power for too long and becomes corrupt. I think we need some kind of balance where one term is probably too short IMHO.
Lastly, if the goal is "to preserve a system where anyone can be removed from power peacefully," then what if the challenger has a history of denying election results (if he loses) and had a history of refusing to be removed from power peacefully? In that case, still vote for the challenger?
Right, but that's your ideal scenario, no? If let's say there will always be 40% people voting Dems and 40% voting GOP, and the remaining 20% all go with your "vote against incumbent" strategy, then the end result will be every 4 years we switch ruling party? Or am I misunderstanding your point?
Thanks for sharing but I have to respectfully disagree. In your ideal world, that means every 4 years we'll switch ruling party. That will just ensure short-term thinking over long-term planning. This is especially true if every time the new ruling party just overturn/undo many of the policies from the previous admin because of ideological differences.
I acknowledge your point about a ruling party holding onto power for too long and becomes corrupt. I think we need some kind of balance where one term is probably too short IMHO.
Lastly, if the goal is "to preserve a system where anyone can be removed from power peacefully," then what if the challenger has a history of denying election results (if he loses) and had a history of refusing to be removed from power peacefully? In that case, still vote for the challenger?
not necessarily every 4 years there will be a new party in power because realistically there will always be some people voting for just one party
Right, but that's your ideal scenario, no? If let's say there will always be 40% people voting Dems and 40% voting GOP, and the remaining 20% all go with your "vote against incumbent" strategy, then the end result will be every 4 years we switch ruling party? Or am I misunderstanding your point?