Political parties can be a good thing because people normally take
shortcuts when deciding whom to vote for - by selecting the political
party that agrees with their own ideology. Especially under the party
list system, parties can be beneficial because smaller political
parties that
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Jameson Quinn jameson.qu...@gmail.com wrote:
Please don't lump IRV and STV. Yes, they use the same underlying mechanisms,
but the effects are totally different. STV can, in practice, completely
eliminate the partisan spoiler problem; IRV cannot. And, as I've
Kathy Dopp Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 2:30 AM
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 7:19 PM, James Gilmour
Kathy, your comments illustrate the fundamental problems with all
party list voting systems: 1. you must have registered political
parties;
As someone else noted in this thread
4:50 PM
To: election-methods@lists.electorama.com
Subject: [EM] What's wrong with the party list system?
Someone from Europe on this list recently said that they did
not like the party list system. Why not? Party list seems
like a fair, simple system of electing legislators who
On 4.7.2011, at 4.08, Kathy Dopp wrote:
Thanks for the responses. In response to the party leaders having too
much control, I believe it is possible to make party-lists on the
fly from voters' own rank choice ballots in a way that the most voters
would naturally support -- which would put
From: Juho Laatu juho4...@yahoo.co.uk
To: EM election-methods@lists.electorama.com
Subject: Re: [EM] What's wrong with the party list system?
On 4.7.2011, at 4.08, Kathy Dopp wrote:
Thanks for the responses. In response to the party leaders having too
much control, I believe
Kathy Dopp wrote:
Thanks for the responses. In response to the party leaders having too
much control, I believe it is possible to make party-lists on the
fly from voters' own rank choice ballots in a way that the most voters
would naturally support -- which would put the control into voters'
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm
km_el...@lavabit.com wrote:
You could make a party list system that would arrange the list after the
election, yes. This would have a ballot where you first pick a party and
then order the party's candidates.
Yes, the open party list
The nice feature of existing party list methods is that it allows the
election of a large number of candidates to a large national body of
legislators without requiring voters to rank individually a huge
number of candidates.
Yes, this is the main reason for people who favor party list
Kathy Dopp Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 2:53 PM
However, either the election method used within each party to
determine the list orders would be majoritarian (in which case the
system isn't proportional beyond the party level),
Plurality is how it is done I believe. To have PR within
On 4.7.2011, at 16.53, Kathy Dopp wrote:
That is an interesting idea that would require a different ballot type
than in existing party list systems whereby one could rank all the
candidates within a particular party one votes for.
I just note that if we combine party lists and candidate
Juho Laatu Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 4:30 PM
(Of course the idea of having proportionally ordered
candidate lists in a closer list election would make voting
in the actual election even simpler. But then one would need
to have a primary to find the ordering for each party.)
But that
Jameson Quinn Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 5:03 PM
As I said in my last message, asset-like systems can let you
have your cake and eat it, if you trust your favorite
candidate to agree with you in ranking other candidates. This
is fundamentally different from trusting your party, because
2011/7/4 James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk
Jameson Quinn Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 5:03 PM
As I said in my last message, asset-like systems can let you
have your cake and eat it, if you trust your favorite
candidate to agree with you in ranking other candidates. This
is
On Jul 4, 2011, at 12:28 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
2011/7/4 James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk
Jameson Quinn Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 5:03 PM
As I said in my last message, asset-like systems can let you
have your cake and eat it, if you trust your favorite
candidate to agree with
On 4.7.2011, at 18.59, James Gilmour wrote:
Juho Laatu Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 4:30 PM
(Of course the idea of having proportionally ordered
candidate lists in a closer list election would make voting
in the actual election even simpler. But then one would need
to have a primary to
One possible unwanted feature in Asset like methods is that they make it
possible for the candidates to trade with the votes. The voters may trust their
candidate, but they should not trust them too much, since in extreme cases they
might even sell their valuable vote assets to someone.
One
Kathy Dopp Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 10:40 PM
James, As someone on this list already pointed out, such a
system as you suggest does *nothing* to ensure
proportionality *within* the party list because the list of
candidates could all have been chosen by either the leaders
or the
My point was to show how the problems of Asset could be fixed and that
there is a continuum of methods between Asset and basic list methods.
Exactly. And the common advantage is that they simplify the task for at
least some voters, without requiring artificial party divisions. Divisions
and
On 3.7.2011, at 18.49, Kathy Dopp wrote:
Someone from Europe on this list recently said that they did not like
the party list system. Why not? Party list seems like a fair, simple
system of electing legislators who represent people in approximately
the same proportion that they exist in the
On 3.7.2011, at 20.44, Toby Pereira wrote:
The problem I have with party list systems is that you do not elect
individuals but organisations, who can then put in who they like.
Closed and open party lists have different philosophy. Basic closed lists
contain an ordered list of candidates and
4:50 PM
To: election-methods@lists.electorama.com
Subject: [EM] What's wrong with the party list system?
Someone from Europe on this list recently said that they did
not like the party list system. Why not? Party list seems
like a fair, simple system of electing legislators who
Thanks for the responses. In response to the party leaders having too
much control, I believe it is possible to make party-lists on the
fly from voters' own rank choice ballots in a way that the most voters
would naturally support -- which would put the control into voters'
hands and treat all
23 matches
Mail list logo
