View Single Post
Old 10th November 2017, 10:28 PM   #32
Loss Leader
Would Be Ringing (if a bell)
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,866
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
That isn't my concern.

My concern is that our local political mental defectives would endeavor in "Californicating" the rest of the Nation at a faster pace than they are as-is.

All I read this as is, "I don't like that the demographics of the nation are changing." If the population becomes more progressive, that's not something that should be fixed with weighted voting. That's something that should be fixed by getting rid of old voters.

Perhaps you mean that you don't want to see the nation led around by a few large cities, as most of California is dictated to by LA and SF. In that case, my point remains that the Electoral College isn't doing that effectively anymore.


Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I think you have that backwards. It is FPTP that delivers straight majorities to one party - even when that party gets well below a majority of the vote. It promotes gerrymandering since it is so easy to manipulate boundaries. It also forces a 2 party system on the population since a vote for anybody else is a vote that is "thrown away".

It is only under MMP or multiple member electorates with PR that candidates from smaller parties have a chance to be elected so you can sure that there will be "a multiplicity of parties representing all sorts of political demographics" come election time.

Fair enough. Thanks for the correction.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top