in reply to RE: Voting Help in the US
in thread Voting Help in the US

Not only is this system, as Borda says, a system only for honest men, it is also a system only for informed men. While it's a kinda cool idea, I just don't see it gaining a lot of popular support because, well, it's hard1. Ok, it's harder than going to the voting booth and pushing the "vote all [democrat|republican]" button. Given that that is too much trouble for a large number of people2, what's going to make this appealing enough to overcome their apathy?

man, I'm gonna run out of pfennigs if this keeps up. :grin:

1 I'm not talking about hard for you, or for me. I'm talking about the average citizen. PM ain't exactly average.
2 Anyone got numbers handy on the percentage of people who vote in this country? How about broken down by age?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: RE: Voting Help in the US
by swiftone (Curate) on Oct 21, 2000 at 00:53 UTC
    Not only is this system, as Borda says

    Well, don't forget that I want the approval vote, which is less complicated than the Borda system. The approval vote simple says "vote for any and all that you would be willing to run the country". Certainly different people will set the limit in different places, but overall it guarantees that the candidate with the greatest general appeal will be elected. (While this may result in a wave of mediocrity, welcome to democracy).

    I don't like the Broda system, as it assumes that the amount of difference between pick one and two is the same as between pick three and four. Another way to do it is to offer y votes, where y=Number of candidates * some constant, and let you split those votes amongst the candidates. This wouldn't make much change in the single-candidate voters, but would change the results of those who are split between two or more candidates. It's much more complex though, and overall I prefer the approval vote.