Electoral methods

Oh yeah, and this was why I was obsessed with electoral methods so long:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger's_syndrome#Restricted_and_repetitive_interests_and_behavior

Pursuit of specific and narrow areas of interest is one of the most striking features of AS.[1] Individuals with AS may collect volumes of detailed information on a relatively narrow topic such as dinosaurs or deep fat fryers, without necessarily having genuine understanding of the broader topic.[1][4] For example, a child might memorize camera model numbers while caring little about photography.[1] This behavior is usually apparent by grade school, typically age 5 or 6 in the United States.[1] Although these special interests may change from time to time, they typically become more unusual and narrowly focused, and often dominate social interaction so much that the entire family may become immersed. Because topics such as dinosaurs often capture the interest of children, this symptom may go unrecognized.[4]


Self-diagnosed, bitches.
 
IRV isn't perfect, but no system is.

In my opinion it should become the universal method whereby the House and Senate is elected. I'm not entirely certain if such a law would be Constitutional, but it is worth considering at the very least. IRV should also be used in the Presidential election, although at this time I do not believe we should abolish the electoral college.
 
IRV isn't perfect, but no system is.

In my opinion it should become the universal method whereby the House and Senate is elected. I'm not entirely certain if such a law would be Constitutional, but it is worth considering at the very least. IRV should also be used in the Presidential election, although at this time I do not believe we should abolish the electoral college.

Well, electoral methods are all about forcing a coalition together, like in a parliamentary system.

Plurality just selects the biggest and tells everyone else to go fuck themselves.

Condorcet sometimes elects tiny kingmakers in an absurd fashion.

IRV doesn't ever produce results that are far out of logical thought.
 
i like the democracy method of doing the thing where you say who you want to win and then you say that and then that guy wins.
 
Well, electoral methods are all about forcing a coalition together, like in a parliamentary system.

Plurality just selects the biggest and tells everyone else to go fuck themselves.

Condorcet sometimes elects tiny kingmakers in an absurd fashion.

IRV doesn't ever produce results that are far out of logical thought.

Plurality is a terrible system. However, at the time of the founding of our country, I suppose it was the most practical method. The same could be said for the electoral college.

Americans would be too stupid to grasp Condorcet, leading to untold difficulties.
 
Plurality is a terrible system. However, at the time of the founding of our country, I suppose it was the most practical method. The same could be said for the electoral college.

Americans would be too stupid to grasp Condorcet, leading to untold difficulties.

They basically used it because the British did also.

Condorcet just doesn't really make sense. Although at first it could seem brilliant, it's main flaw is that it doesn't take strength of preference into account. Like in the below scenario:

99: A > C > B
2: C > B > A
98: B > C > A

C is the Condorcet winner with only two first place votes. I suppose that would be alright if A and B love C almost as much as their favorites, but it very well could be the opposite, which would of course lead to an election that elected someone who practically everyone despised. And I'm not talking about Bush bad. Imagine if it elected Badnarik.

*shudders*
 
Back
Top