2 ms·
This still sounds like it's based on a polarized two party system. In practice (outside the US) few people fully agree with one political party. In Germany I fi
by pluma 10y ago
This still sounds like it's based on a polarized two party system. In practice (outside the US) few people fully agree with one political party. In Germany I find most people I talk to don't fully support any party but partly agree with one or more parties on various issues.
A scoring or approval system makes more sense in this situation because it would allow voters to express their tendencies towards each party individually rather than having to pick one compromise directly. It's also one of the few systems that allows voters to accurately represent ambivalence or apathy.
DPR still sounds like it suffers from all the problems of FPTP with regard to strategic voting and spoilers.
- grzm 10y agoIn practice (outside the US) few people fully agree with one political party. I don't think people in the US fully agree with one political party, either. Unfortunately that tends to be forgotten when things get heated, especially around elections. The polarization is artificial.
- dane-pgp 10y agoI don't see why DPR would require or support a polarized two party system. The idea is that the secondary (party) ballot allows you to be completely honest and vote for the party you really prefer, even if that party would be considered a "spoiler" under FPTP. Because the secondary ballots are totalled nationally, there is no danger that your support of a smaller party ends up as a wasted vote. Of course, there are a few extra details to deal with, such as how to include independent candidates (with no party behind them) and whether to introduce a minimum threshold of support for a party to appear on the secondary ballot. These are relatively straightforward questions, though, and are covered by this website about the voting system: http://www.dprvoting.org/ http://www.dprvoting.org/