Only about 35% of the voters did vote for his party. Using FPTP as a voting method with more than two political parties begs to have this kind of result. It's just that this time has had the worst outcome thus far.
My state (Michigan) is currently moving to pass a law requiring charges to be pressed in order to keep any seized property. It won't protect against a federal seizure and, from what I've been able to discover, many police departments in the state already have this as standard procedure but, it'll be nice to actually see this as the law.
Don't forget that the law requires the FCC to have no more than three members of the same party as the sitting President out of the total of five. Since the guy being replaced by O'Rielly was a Republican and his replacement had to get through Senate confirmation without being blocked by filibustering Republicans (IIRC this was before the Republicans acquired a majority in the Senate), he had to pick someone 'suitably' conservative.
Re: Just take all of Verizon's infrastructure away from them...
Wonderful idea but, that would require the city to pay "fair market value" for the infrastructure. I don't know if NYC could afford it easily and who's to say that Verizon wouldn't just take the money and leave NYC to find someone else to cover those customers?
Are there any citizen groups for fast track authority. This is one of those things that I can't imagine much of the constituency being for but that comes uncomfortably close to passing. Why would anyone be in favor of their representative giving up power to be exercised by the executive branch even if you generally dislike your representative and like the President, this simply makes it easier to do something like this again in the future when the situation may be reversed.
The problem with that thought is that they'd still have to vote yea-or-nay on the agreement itself even if Fast Track had passed. They just wouldn't be able to debate or amend anything. So, we (those of us who are paying attention) would still know who voted for or against the horrible agreement.
Ann Arbor, MI (the city where the University of Michigan is located) tried IRV once, Albert H. Wheeler their first black mayor was elected. The city held a referendum to go back to FPTP the next year. It's too bad that bigotry seems to have removed a chance to see a better system work.
I don't think we have the infrastructure in the US to pull off a full participatory democracy yet. Too many Americans live in rural areas to provide fast broadband to everyone at a reasonable cost. However, I wouldn't be surprised if we reached that level by the end of the century. If we did have that level of infrastructure though, I'd be in favor of a full participatory democracy (even though it'd require a rewriting of the Constitution since I don't think Amendments would be enough).
The provisions in the Freedom Act which extended parts of the Patriot Act are only part of the total. Those parts shouldn't be applicable since the laws they act on have already expired (in many eyes this is a legal grey area although I hope section 215 stays dead) but, the modifications of other (permanent) parts of the Patriot Act and other surveillance related laws are still important.
Members of the House of Representatives are already up for election every two years. How much more often do you want to replace them?
Also, the approval rating for individual members of Congress by their own constituents generally stays above 50% otherwise, they wouldn't be reelected. Yours is a system that sounds good but has a couple major failings.
You say this but, the Nexus branded Android devices (you know, the ones Google designs themselves) do have encryption enabled by default. Google just isn't forcing encryption on their OEM's. I think they should but, that's my own opinion.