Originally posted by wolfgang59On the face of it but there has to be more to it than that, like the population of each area.
There is a troubled country called Democratistan in which there are 4 ideologically different parties. In the elections the parties (lets call them A, B, C & D) get 27%, 26%, 25% and 22% of the vote and get respectively 27, 26, 25 and 22 seats in the parliament.
Is this fair?
Originally posted by MrPhilRequire more than 53% of the votes to pass certain things.
Its the big problem with these kind of systems - the only people who want to change it are those who aren't in a position to be able to.
You can bet that if Party D had the big share of votes they wouldn't be complaining.
So it seems fair in that, before the election, all of the parties have equal chances. They all have the opportunity to be in the drivi ...[text shortened]... just didn't get enough votes.
Can you think of a better way of organising things?
Originally posted by wolfgang59How would that give party D more power?
The point of the question is that each of the parties has a completely different ideology. PR is fair in when parties broadly agree but what happens when the dont? (Consider Iraq or Serbia)
Would it be better to give seats as follows?
A - 40
B - 30
C - 20
D - 10
So that party D has some power?
Is there a mathematical method for allocation of seats based on Power reflecting votes cast??
Even if party D's followers become fed-up with their disempowered party there is no incentive for any of the other parties to court D's supporters (since it would not make them more powerful in parliament)I'm not sure I agree with this statement. Short term, you are right. However its always better to have more supports - theres no downside to having a larger following.
Originally posted by irontigranOne thing to consider is that even with a party, not everyone is unified on every topic, especially considering that regional differences in attitudes in different areas may override overall party beliefs.
the american electoral process sucks.
its ironic that theyre trying to get different areas involved, but what happens when cali will always go one way? already over 10% is ignored.
and it kills 3rd parties. green party in germany isnt too shabby, yet here theyre practically nonexistant (although theyve made some dumb choices lately)