General > General Technical Chat
Improving democracy through math
<< < (3/3)
VK3DRB:
The videos miss some things which distort democracy badly.

No matter the system, lying to get votes is not democracy. We had a Labor politician named Steve Bracks who told the electorate one week before voting day that there will be NO tolls on new major freeway - a major issue at the time. Almost immediately after winning the election, he reversed his decision and there were tolls.

No matter the system, deception to get votes is not democracy. Trump stood in front of a church recently holding a bible, whilst he got the cops beat up pedestrians around him to clear the way. That stunt helped him get 80% of evangelical "Christians" to vote for him.

No matter the system, those with money and power tend to get a bigger vote than a poor person. Rupert Murdoch has a much bigger say than a homeless person living in poverty.

No matter the system, any democracy is better than living in a communist country run by a ruling elite that brainwashes its population into submission and imprisons anyone whose beliefs are contrary to those of "the state".
rstofer:
California now enjoys "top two" voting.  Assume 3 candidates, 2 from brand D and 1 from brand R in a primary election.  Both brand D candidates win over brand R in the primary and are the only candidates running in the general election.  Brand R voters have nobody to vote for.

There are similar atrocities with gerrymandering and other practices but the "top two" must lead the list.

One thing we haven't quite signed up for is "electors go to the winner of the popular vote" such that it makes no difference who wins or loses the California vote, the 52 electors go to the winner of the popular vote.  Why vote at all?  Just wait to see what everybody else thinks and have the electors vote for that candidate!  Why even have electors, the result is determined elsewhere.

james_s:

--- Quote from: rstofer on November 07, 2020, 12:38:33 am ---California now enjoys "top two" voting.  Assume 3 candidates, 2 from brand D and 1 from brand R in a primary election.  Both brand D candidates win over brand R in the primary and are the only candidates running in the general election.  Brand R voters have nobody to vote for.

There are similar atrocities with gerrymandering and other practices but the "top two" must lead the list.

One thing we haven't quite signed up for is "electors go to the winner of the popular vote" such that it makes no difference who wins or loses the California vote, the 52 electors go to the winner of the popular vote.  Why vote at all?  Just wait to see what everybody else thinks and have the electors vote for that candidate!  Why even have electors, the result is determined elsewhere.

--- End quote ---

They have that in WA too now, this last election both lieutenant governor candidates were the same party. I don't particularly like this, even if it ends up being the party I lean towards.
Simon:
This topic is dommed to go sour. If we can stick to the theory it may be OK, if it goes tribal it will be locked.

Interestingly the BBC made a little video about the American electoral system pointing out how you can win with less than the majority of votes. What they carefully did was avoid naming the system, First past the post because here in the UK the debate around FPTP and some sort of proportional system never went away. The current system was sort of OK when there were only two parties but even them can introduce some distortions. Ultimately our "democracy" hinges on 650 ish votes, the rest of the millions of votes do not count.
EEVblog:

--- Quote from: Simon on November 07, 2020, 10:49:29 am ---This topic is dommed to go sour. If we can stick to the theory it may be OK, if it goes tribal it will be locked.

--- End quote ---

It's doomed!
Navigation
Message Index
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod