Representitive government is so antiqated

100 Senator and 435 is U.S. House of Representatives....

Great Idea in the 1700s elect some people to represent you and these people vote and decide things but now we could easily mass vote on things ourselves with modern technology. Back then what was everyone going to ride a horse to Washington and vote on each thing? Impossible but now for example Youtube likes and dislikes became almost voting before they got rid of dislikes to make it easier for MSM to lie about public opinion.

Imagine if we got to vote on bills in congress directly and they had to convince us to vote yes or no we would probably have much better outcomes.

I guess 100 Senator and 435 is U.S. House of Representatives would be in charge of the convincing or something we could keep that.

I once came up with the idea that I should run for maybe senate and if elected I would set up a voting system where everyone in my state decides what my vote on bill is with a state wide online voting referendum.

That's all my job would be to just vote the way the majority in my state wants on bills in Washington no red team vs blue team nonsense instead one issue or bill at a time all the people decide.

 

In many ways, this is how government in the UK works.
Every region elects their local representative, then the party with the most representatives elect our prime minister.
If that party has a narrow majority, it only needs a few members to defect of abstain at the division for a bill to be defeated.
That is why a narrow majority government (less than 10) ends up forming a coalition with one of the other parties.

The regional system works quite well, particularly on local matters, since the elected representative has local powers. This avoids the bankers in London passing laws on how the farmers milk the cows.
Needless to say, the farmers spell Banker with a 'W' and we see plenty of jokes about them trying to milk the bull.