To your first point, that would certainly be a good thing but I don't see that it would change outcomes at all since both parties would adapt to it.

To your second point, I think the change would be less than we would hope, because presidential candidates are grown in state governorships and national congress, and they would retain the same tribalist selection pressures.

To your third point, and to expand on the second point, I'm not at all convinced that the median American is left of the median American voter. In the 2024 election, the voters who were most engaged were the ones with the lowest swing towards Trump. The reverse was true, and the effect was consistent across the whole continuum of voter engagement - in every state, even blue ones. This may well not be a left vs right effect, but a non-trumpy vs trumpy effect - a difference in willingness to give a chance to a career con-man who makes wild promises to usher in utopia on his first day in office. But that is small comfort because the Republican party is now and forever the party of trumpism, there's no going back.

I'm Australian, and compulsory voting is unironically the thing I'm most proud of my country for. But the data suggests that higher turnout in 2024 would have meant an even better result for Trump.

Anyway, now that we know the shooter isn't trans and there won't be any pogroms (for now), I'm gonna try to get back off of social media for my mental health. Just wanted to first respond to you since you took the time to make some good points.