Approval voting seems like a good choice from the "wake up tomorrow and not much changes exept that we have a better voting system" perspective. It is a good c

Approval voting seems like a good choice from the "wake up tomorrow and not much changes exept that we have a better voting system" perspective. It is a good choice if "not much changes" is attractive to you. To me it seems like it would be similar to Fusion nominations in effect, maybe a slightly larger effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_voting But IMO it sidesteps the most important issues, which are related to what happens after the election. Currently, only people who vote for a winning candidate are really represented. The system assumes that differences in opinion are largely regional but we actually have strong differences of opinion within each region. It seems to me that there are two basic ways to improve this (that I can think of, I'm sure there are more). 1) Change how elected representatives vote. Instead of each representative getting one vote yes or no, a representative might vote X% yes and Y% no. In this system the representatives would ideally be nonpartisan, with systems outside the government used for collective influence. 2) Look at voting in terms of how each individual picks the representative that best represents them personally with some limitations such as fitting within a particular number of total representatives ("subscribing" to a representative as excalibur puts it). Voting for each individual would then be expected to be between fairly similar candidates, but possibly a completely separate set of candidates than someone you live with who has a significantly different perspective. Lots of complicated possibilities here. One notable suboption would be a two layer system where the person you vote for is not the final representative, but someone who closely monitors politics on behalf of a small number of people and votes for the representatives who make the detailed decisions. This person could be nonpartisan and local as in #1, leaving a combined system where a large number of local nonpartisan representatives are primarily responsible for setting up a partisan government with a composition that accurately reflects constituents (I'm not sure this would be the best option, just one possible option).