Are you saying politicians shouldn't listen to the people when developing policy ideas?
If people actually used such a website in good faith then it could potentially produce some useful ideas and allow them to percolate upwards to party policymakers. They shouldn't blindly pick whatever ideas turn out to be popular on their website, but it might bring up some things they hadn't thought of before.
The sad part is they feel a website like this is necessary. They're professional politicians in a democratic country. They should already be in touch with their constituency. They should have a chain of advisement and direction built all the way from local caucuses at the precinct level.
And if they were serious about making the project more efficient by taking it online, they should have a registration-based website with registration tied to actual party membership and heavily moderated to allow only articulate arguments.
> they should have a registration-based website with registration tied to actual party membership
So if I'm in an area that is represented by a member of another party, then my voice deserves less weight than the voice of someone that is a member of that party?
Yes, but in the example we're talking about elected officials. It's their duty to represent everyone in their constituency, not just the ones that are members of their political party.
I was of the understanding that this thread had branched to discuss communication at the ground level with your elected representative, not a forum to discuss the direction of an entire political party as a whole. The discussion was just framed around each political party providing their elected officials with a way of communication with their constituents.
It's their duty to represent everyone in their constituency, not just the ones that are members of their political party.
I'm not sure that's true. In that case, there would be a moral argument against voting for third parties, since they definitely don't represent the views of a majority of people. And there'd be a moral argument against voting Republican in Manhattan, or Democrat in Utah.
I would not trust any politician who says “I have no idea what policies I should be proposing once I get elected, so I want to hear your ideas.” Such a politician is either an idiot or a liar.
A politician with intelligence and integrity would say something like “If I’m elected, I will try to get the government to do X, Y, and Z. If you have any particular ideas about how to accomplish these goals, or if you want to try and convince me I’m wrong, I welcome your feedback.”
If people actually used such a website in good faith then it could potentially produce some useful ideas and allow them to percolate upwards to party policymakers. They shouldn't blindly pick whatever ideas turn out to be popular on their website, but it might bring up some things they hadn't thought of before.