In a democracy, you should have two votes instead of one

https://pietrasiak.com/in-a-democracy-you-should-have-two-votes-instead-of-one

2•pmontra•2h ago

Comments

FrankWilhoit•1h ago

The value of elections, if they have any, is knowing why the winner won. That is why nothing more complicated than first-past-the-post can work, because it is the only thing that people can understand, and why FPTP only works if there are exactly two options on the ballot.

krapp•1h ago

>That is why nothing more complicated than first-past-the-post can work, because it is the only thing that people can understand,

Except systems more complicated than first-past-the-post do work, and people do understand them. And FPTP doesn't tell you anything about why the winner won. Can you tell me why Trump won? There are more theories than there are grains of sand on a beach. All FPTP can tell us is that he got more electoral votes than his opponent. Once, that even happened when he lost the popular vote.

dtgm92•1h ago

This is about voting in an election... essentially voting for who will be voting on your behalf for the next x years.

I don't get it honestly, If you aren't actually voting on actual decisions yourself. If democracy isn't a dumb idea, then that is how it should be. The moment someone else is deciding things for you is when it makes no sense.

But even then, if we did vote on everything, someone else is still deciding what the voting options are. And the rest is being decided without a vote by other random people nobody voted to elect.

Giving you an extra vote just for the electing process isnt really going to improve the democratic system.

beardyw•7m ago

Is this different to Single Transferable Vote?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote