• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support the Fair Representation Act?

Do you support the Fair Representation Act?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 35.3%

  • No

    Votes: 11 64.7%
  • Total voters
    17
R

Roycarn

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
200
Reaction score
77
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Leave a post letting me know what you think.

 
Roycarn said:
Leave a post letting me know what you think.

[video=youtube;Bqc1ekCwmXw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bqc1ekCwmXw[video]
Click to expand...
No, and the guy is outright lying.
We are a nation of States and our national election is not supposed to be based on a majority of voters.
 
No, because for single-member states like Montana and Vermont, the "ranked-choice voting" method devolves into instant-runoff voting (IRV), which is an unrepresentative, winner-takes-all, majoritarian voting system.

Multi-member districts are a great idea, but FairVote really needs to lose their obsession with ranking ballots and IRV. Score ballots are much better.

Excon said:
No, and the guy is outright lying.
We are a nation of States and our national election is not supposed to be based on a majority of voters.
Click to expand...

You know this is about electing state representatives, right? It has nothing to do with the national election.
 
gobbler said:
You know this is about electing state representatives, right? It has nothing to do with the national election.
Click to expand...
Still no.
The election system works just fine.


And ranked voting nonsense.
 
gobbler said:
No, because for single-member states like Montana and Vermont, the "ranked-choice voting" method devolves into instant-runoff voting (IRV), which is an unrepresentative, winner-takes-all, majoritarian voting system.

Multi-member districts are a great idea, but FairVote really needs to lose their obsession with ranking ballots and IRV. Score ballots are much better.



You know this is about electing state representatives, right? It has nothing to do with the national election.
Click to expand...

If you're hoping for an honest or rational answer, don't hold your breath.
 
Roycarn said:
Leave a post letting me know what you think.
Click to expand...

For those like me who can actually read, here is some info: What Does It Do? - Fairvote

Overly complicated, unnecessary, reads like something dreamed up by a bunch of libertarians in the dorm after a night of bong hits.
 
gobbler said:
No, because for single-member states like Montana and Vermont, the "ranked-choice voting" method devolves into instant-runoff voting (IRV), which is an unrepresentative, winner-takes-all, majoritarian voting system.

Multi-member districts are a great idea, but FairVote really needs to lose their obsession with ranking ballots and IRV. Score ballots are much better.



You know this is about electing state representatives, right? It has nothing to do with the national election.
Click to expand...

Score ballots are only better than RCV when you have single winner districts. They don't do anything for proportionality or minority representation when it comes to elections with more than one winner.

Excon said:
No, and the guy is outright lying.
We are a nation of States and our national election is not supposed to be based on a majority of voters.
Click to expand...

Explain to me how he's lying? And do tell how you believe our system works "just fine" when our midterms have an abysmal turnout rate hovering at around 35-40%.
 
Redress said:
For those like me who can actually read, here is some info: What Does It Do? - Fairvote

Overly complicated, unnecessary, reads like something dreamed up by a bunch of libertarians in the dorm after a night of bong hits.
Click to expand...

How is ranking candidates in order of preference "overly complicated" since there are studies out there that show the exact opposite? Nor is it unnecessary when you look at the reasons he cites for the abysmal turnout rates of our midterm elections.
 
why the **** can't folks understand that A VOTE SHOULD COUNT FOR A VOTE, PERIOD ..............

does not matter what race, at what level, and SCREW the EC .................... a vote for a vote .................... isn't that good enuff for criminals??????????????
 
Roycarn said:
How is ranking candidates in order of preference "overly complicated" since there are studies out there that show the exact opposite? Nor is it unnecessary when you look at the reasons he cites for the abysmal turnout rates of our midterm elections.
Click to expand...

Compared to the ideal: vote for preferred candidate, candidate with most votes wins, it is much more complex. Presidential elections are different, but that is determined by the constitution, so it ain't changing. For the rest, vote for your preferred candidate works. Fixing what ain't broke is not a good plan.
 
Redress said:
Compared to the ideal: vote for preferred candidate, candidate with most votes wins, it is much more complex. Presidential elections are different, but that is determined by the constitution, so it ain't changing. For the rest, vote for your preferred candidate works. Fixing what ain't broke is not a good plan.
Click to expand...

The ideal isn't "vote for a preferred candidate, candidate with the most votes wins," it's "If you get 40% of the vote, you get 40% of the seats." If you put a lot of emphasis on how many people actually turnout to an election, then the system definitely seems broken to me. That's aside from the fact that you can still win the election while getting fewer votes than the other party. Sound familiar?
 
Roycarn said:
Score ballots are only better than RCV when you have single winner districts. They don't do anything for proportionality or minority representation when it comes to elections with more than one winner.
Click to expand...
Winner takes all is just fine.


Roycarn said:
Explain to me how he's lying? And do tell how you believe our system works "just fine" when our midterms have an abysmal turnout rate hovering at around 35-40%.
Click to expand...
I do not want those apathetic about voting to actually be voting.
Seems to work just fine in that regards.


How is he lying? He starts out with two in one sentence.

Our democracy is fundamentally broken.​
1. It is a Republic, not a Democracy.
2. It is not broken.
 
Excon said:
Winner takes all is just fine.


I do not want those apathetic about voting to actually be voting.
Seems to work just fine in that regards.


How is he lying? He starts out with two in one sentence.

Our democracy is fundamentally broken.​
1. It is a Republic, not a Democracy.
2. It is not broken.
Click to expand...

You're right about the republic part, because if we were a pure democracy women probably wouldn't be able to vote, slavery might still exist, the death penalty might still be on the books etc. The only difference is that you exclude constitutional monarchies when dealing with whatever you want to call "Free, western style governments." So the word democracy works perfectly fine in that context.

It's not out of apathy that people don't vote, but rather that most people feel like their vote doesn't make a difference. That's why you see turnout during midterms drop 30% compared to the Presidential race. That aside, would you really tell a Connecticut Republican that his voting system is "just fine" when the only people that can hope to win on his ballot are all Democrats?
 
Roycarn said:
The ideal isn't "vote for a preferred candidate, candidate with the most votes wins," it's "If you get 40% of the vote, you get 40% of the seats." If you put a lot of emphasis on how many people actually turnout to an election, then the system definitely seems broken to me. That's aside from the fact that you can still win the election while getting fewer votes than the other party. Sound familiar?
Click to expand...

Why is winner wins not preferred?
 
Roycarn said:
because if we were a pure democracy women probably wouldn't be able to vote, slavery might still exist, the death penalty might still be on the books etc.
Click to expand...
No.


Roycarn said:
So the word democracy works perfectly fine in that context.
Click to expand...
No. Republic is fine as well as most accurate.


Roycarn said:
It's not out of apathy that people don't vote, but rather that most people feel like their vote doesn't make a difference.
Click to expand...
That is being apathetic.


Roycarn said:
would you really tell a Connecticut Republican that his voting system is "just fine" when the only people that can hope to win on his ballot are all Democrats?
Click to expand...
Yes.
While he may not like it, it is "just fine".
 
Roycarn said:
Leave a post letting me know what you think.

Click to expand...


He has obviously experienced the USA's first election, and now he's convinced that because he is a college student, he knows a better way because, well he's a college student and it is all so logical and simple someone should have thought of it sooner, now lets all get together and do it!

Melt away little snowflake, your 15 seconds of fame has expired.
 
Roycarn said:
Score ballots are only better than RCV when you have single winner districts. They don't do anything for proportionality or minority representation when it comes to elections with more than one winner.



Explain to me how he's lying? And do tell how you believe our system works "just fine" when our midterms have an abysmal turnout rate hovering at around 35-40%.
Click to expand...

Do you actually have any proof that RCV would change the turnout rate?
 
chuckiechan said:
He has obviously experienced the USA's first election, and now he's convinced that because he is a college student, he knows a better way because, well he's a college student and it is all so logical and simple someone should have thought of it sooner, now lets all get together and do it!

Melt away little snowflake, your 15 seconds of fame has expired.
Click to expand...

15 seconds, no fame
 
Meh...I like it the way it is, gerrymandering and all. If a party is finding itself squeezed out, like the D are at the moment, adjust. There is no reason why they shouldn't be able to find a way to reach people who are not being served by the GOP. Lord knows that there are a lot of them out there. Reach them, sell them, convince them that you have better ideas which suit their needs.
 
Roycarn said:
Leave a post letting me know what you think.

Click to expand...


Oops. I accidently voted yes. Please subtract one yes vote and add one no vote.

Let me get this straight, you want the two parties who have the system rigged to vote for this bill?
 
calamity said:
Meh...I like it the way it is, gerrymandering and all. If a party is finding itself squeezed out, like the D are at the moment, adjust. There is no reason why they shouldn't be able to find a way to reach people who are not being served by the GOP. Lord knows that there are a lot of them out there. Reach them, sell them, convince them that you have better ideas which suit their needs.
Click to expand...

You should take your own advice and do this instead of being so anti-Trump. Hillary lost because she didn't take your advice, just running anti-Trump adds and thinking that that would be enough.
 
Moderate Right said:
You should take your own advice and do this instead of being so anti-Trump. Hillary lost because she didn't take your advice, just running anti-Trump adds and thinking that that would be enough.
Click to expand...

I've been anti-Trump since he bought the New Jersey Generals and drafted Hershel Walker. I guess I saw him for what he was even before I was old enough to legally drink.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom