> PR makes party tickets central to the electoral system. That doesn't parse. Party tickets are just as critical in the UK (First Past the Post) as in Germany

> PR makes party tickets central to the electoral system. That doesn't parse. Party tickets are just as critical in the UK (First Past the Post) as in Germany (Mixed Member Proportional). That campaign contributions are more critical in the US than party membership has other reasons. Note also that MMP systems do allow for the direct election of half the parliament using FPTP rules, so these seats would be immune to such a defect. In practice, it comes down to whoever finances an MP's election campaign. > It creates a higher proportion of safe seats, which encourages party people to play to their base. That claim sounds nice in theory, but in practice Angela Merkel has been moving to the left during the election year, while Mitch McConnell seems to be getting primaried for being insufficiently hostile to Obamacare and David Cameron had to promise an EU referendum to fend off defections to UKIP. > PR makes it easier for groups to get elected who are pursuing sectional interests. I'm not sure why that would be a bad thing. If a "sectional interest" can gain 5% or more of support from the electorate, then this would be an interest that a very large number of citizens care about and should be represented; FPTP systems tend to shut out even large minorities. In 2010, the Liberal Democrats got 23% of the popular vote, while Labour got 29%, but the LibDems got 57 seats as opposed to Labour's 258.