The Automation Ranked Vote thread has been posted! Now taking nominations! http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-long-term-implications-of-automation.534062/ -Meta
Well the winner should be the one that get's the most votes. Period, that is our system now. You want to modify the system so the winner doesn't need to get the most votes. That is wrong.
Lol! No its not. Just read that exchange between wyly and Longshot. Although it is sort of beside the point...or beside my point at least... That being that if you want the majority to have the final say, then Plurality voting is not the way! ♪ Also, consider that in a Ranked system, the winner is indeed the candidate who gets the most votes. We just tally those votes in such a way that votes cannot so easily be "wasted". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ In Instant Runoff for example, votes will be tallied...the candidate with the least number of votes will be eliminated, and people who voted for that eliminated candidate can have their vote move over to one of the others. Whoever has the most votes at the end is the winner. Its just like a regular runoff election, except with more cycles and less effort. Are you suggesting that all runoff elections are inherently unfair? Then let us take Ranked Pairs (or Condorcet methods in general). The idea here is that we're ranking candidates based on how many of the other candidates they would beat vote-wise in one-on-one match-ups (and how badly). The winner of this method is the candidate who beats out every other one one-on-one, so of course such a candidate needs to get more votes than everyone else for that to happen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ By sticking with Plurality, all we are really doing essentially is limiting who voters can vote for. And yes...Plurality is the system we use now, not that that's much of an argument in its favor (appeal to tradition arguments rarely are) especially considering that what I'm saying is that we need to replace that flawed system. Are you suggesting that a flawed system should never be replaced with something less flawed?? Once more, I want to direct you towards the vegetable vote...you know... ...the one in which Plurality voting would have led to Okra! of all things getting first place. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...rite-vegetables.530698/page-4#post-1068992191 Here, I'll even post the results of that vote right here: Spoiler: Vegetable Ranked Vote Results Results (Ranked Pairs - Plurality - Instant Runoff): The first GreenPe = "Green Peas". Second = "Green Peppers". Spoiler: Ballots Highlighted top three contenders. Spoiler: Options Artichoke Asparagus Avocado BakedBeans Beans Broccoli BroccoliRabe BrusselSprouts Carrots Cauliflower Chard Corn Cucumbers Eggplant Escarole Garlic GreenBeans GreenPeas GreenPeppers Greens Lettuce LimaBeans Mushrooms Okra Olives Onions Peppers Potatoes RoastPumpkin ShitakeMushrooms SnowGreenPease Spinach SweetPotatoesYams Tomatoes Truffles ZucchiniSquash ...that's a lot of veggies! Spoiler: Instant Runoff Process Walk-through To start off in this method, options which no one ranked as their number one get eliminated immediately. Obviously, no votes are shifted at this point. We are then left with the following: Options which contribute to the tally are highlighted in dark green. Spoiler: Tally Code: 2 Avocado 1 BakedBeans 2 Broccoli 1 BroccoliRab 1 Corn 1 Garlic 1 GreenBeans 2 GreenPeas 1 Mushrooms 2 Okra 1 Potatoes 1 ShitakeMushrooms Spoiler: Ballots We then eliminate the lowest scoring options (this time, options which only had 1 vote) Doing this causes several ballots to become essentially nullified, but those voters who ranked additional options after the eliminated ones still have an affect on the outcome, as their votes rather than disappearing simply move over to the next non-eliminated option in their ranking. In this case, Green Peas picks up 2 additional votes that way. Spoiler: Tally Code: 2 Avocado 2 Broccoli 4 GreenPeas 2 Okra Spoiler: Ballots Lowest scoring options are once again eliminated and Green Peas picks up 1 more additional vote to make 5 total, though at this point the actual number doesn't matter anymore since Green Peas has already become the last man standing. Spoiler: Tally Code: 5 GreenPeas Spoiler: Ballots Now, looking at that, are you really going to sit there and tell me that Okra!.....OKRA!...deserves first place? Does it really deserve to be chosen over something like corn...despite the fact that all but 2 people didn't even bother to put it anywhere on their ballot??? -Meta
A vote is a choice made by one participating in an election. The state appointed electors elect the president, and 304 of them voted for Trump vs. 227 of them who voted for Hillary. Trump received a majority of the votes.
In order words, you don't count the votes of the people, i.e. 'the voters' as votes. Even though of course they 'participate' in elections just as much as the electors. Look, I've got no problem with the electoral college system, though I do think it a bit antiquated, but lets not kid ourselves here about what it is or about what a vote is. -Meta
They're votes. They're just not votes to elect the president. Only the electors appointed by the several states elect the president.
Heh! You really don't want to say it do you...that's OK, I'm not going to try and force you to. -Meta
The Automation Ranked Vote thread is now Open for Voting! http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-long-term-implications-of-automation.534062/ -Meta
Electing the President is not a democratic process except at the state level. Each State decides who it will support then the States make the selection. Always been that way.
always been that way isn't justification for a lack of democracy...absolute dictatorships or royal rule were always the way it was until it was changed to something better...
You have democracy in your state if your state legislature allows it for you. The STATES elect the President and VP. And the Constitution guaranties to the States that we will not be a democracy.