5 ms·

> It tends to lead to a fragmented government (which is usually bad) The stalemate of the past two terms in the US doesn't say much for winner-takes-all. > It

by vacri 11y ago

> It tends to lead to a fragmented government (which is usually bad) The stalemate of the past two terms in the US doesn't say much for winner-takes-all. > It also privileges party over individual candidates Only depending on the proportional rep type. But again, in the US, there are only two parties. Very rarely you might glimpse an independent, but they mean nothing in the overall political landscape. There is no functional way for another party to rise in the current political system in the US - so party is inherently privileged over individuals. > Most (in)famously, the Weimar Republic used PR. That didn't end well. Ah, you're just trolling.

ClayShentrup 11y ago
Or more sophisticated analysis of the pros and cons of PR. http://scorevoting.net/PropRep.html http://scorevoting.net/PropRep.html
- vacri 11y ago
  "PR gave you Nazis!" isn't a sophisticated analysis. Edit: chock full of nazis, apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#List_of_countries_using_proportional_representation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#Li...
Turing_Machine 11y ago
"The stalemate of the past two terms in the US doesn't say much for winner-takes-all." You think it's bad with two parties who can't agree on anything? Try twenty parties who can't agree on anything. "Ah, you're just trolling." No, I certainly am not trolling. The multitude of parties in the Weimar Republic, which could not form an effective government for two entire election cycles, were directly responsible for Hitler's rise to power.
- vacri 11y ago
  > Try twenty parties who can't agree on anything. What, multipolar politics, like modern Germany or Sweden or Australia? Wealthy, socially progressive countries with high standards of living? You're just spreading FUD. PR was one of a great many factors involved in the rise of Hitler, but keep in mind that the US system also let a president get elected that didn't win the popular vote, who then went on to destroy a foreign country to drum up domestic political support. Literally hundreds of thousands of people died in Iraq to make Bush more popular in the US, despite Iraq having nothing to do with threats to the US. But it would be stupid to say that the US electoral system was directly responsible for the Iraqi bloodbath. And as I say in the other comment, there are a shitload of countries using PR that aren't fascists.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    "What, multipolar politics, like modern Germany" Modern Germany does not have PR. For good reason. " PR was one of a great many factors involved in the rise of Hitler, but keep in mind that the US system also let a president get elected that didn't win the popular vote" The U.S. President has never been elected by popular vote. Again, for good reason. Feature, not bug.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      Modern Germany hasPR via a mixed member proportional (MMP) system -- which, IIRC, was a German innovation when introduced; it doesn't have straight party-list PR, but then the more proportional system for the US proposed upthread isn't party-list PR, either. Proportionality is a (really, continuous valued, not binary) outcome, there are a number of systems for achieving it to a greater or lesser extent.

by vacri 11y ago

ClayShentrup 11y ago

Or more sophisticated analysis of the pros and cons of PR. http://scorevoting.net/PropRep.html http://scorevoting.net/PropRep.html

vacri 11y ago
"PR gave you Nazis!" isn't a sophisticated analysis. Edit: chock full of nazis, apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#List_of_countries_using_proportional_representation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#Li...

Turing_Machine 11y ago

"The stalemate of the past two terms in the US doesn't say much for winner-takes-all." You think it's bad with two parties who can't agree on anything? Try twenty parties who can't agree on anything. "Ah, you're just trolling." No, I certainly am not trolling. The multitude of parties in the Weimar Republic, which could not form an effective government for two entire election cycles, were directly responsible for Hitler's rise to power.

vacri 11y ago
> Try twenty parties who can't agree on anything. What, multipolar politics, like modern Germany or Sweden or Australia? Wealthy, socially progressive countries with high standards of living? You're just spreading FUD. PR was one of a great many factors involved in the rise of Hitler, but keep in mind that the US system also let a president get elected that didn't win the popular vote, who then went on to destroy a foreign country to drum up domestic political support. Literally hundreds of thousands of people died in Iraq to make Bush more popular in the US, despite Iraq having nothing to do with threats to the US. But it would be stupid to say that the US electoral system was directly responsible for the Iraqi bloodbath. And as I say in the other comment, there are a shitload of countries using PR that aren't fascists.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  "What, multipolar politics, like modern Germany" Modern Germany does not have PR. For good reason. " PR was one of a great many factors involved in the rise of Hitler, but keep in mind that the US system also let a president get elected that didn't win the popular vote" The U.S. President has never been elected by popular vote. Again, for good reason. Feature, not bug.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    Modern Germany hasPR via a mixed member proportional (MMP) system -- which, IIRC, was a German innovation when introduced; it doesn't have straight party-list PR, but then the more proportional system for the US proposed upthread isn't party-list PR, either. Proportionality is a (really, continuous valued, not binary) outcome, there are a number of systems for achieving it to a greater or lesser extent.