The Voting System That's Actually Too Good for Politicians to Allow

> the EU is not democratic in the first place EU Election system is _literally_ one of the fairest systems in existence[0] ensuring that every party get some measure of proportional representation. Compared to English First Past the Post (minority rule, and 2 party systems) or Scotlands Single-transferrable vote (which is still winner take all); but D'Hondts method means that people can be safe in the knowledge they'll be represented and it's proportional to the input. It's not "perfect" but it's _literally_ the best humans have come up with. [0]: link [0.1]: link CGP Grey did some videos on these: FPTP (England): link STV (Scotland): ▶ this video D'Hondt-esque (EU): link

Ireland uses this appraoch. We call it STV. STV Explained -- ▶ this video It just a better democracy because it's more representative. It's solves the "wasted vote" problem people have with democracy and why many democracies result in a two party system. This way it ensures your vote is counted and multiple parties exist.

Now if only they would introduce something like Single Transferable Vote (entertaining CGPGrey video: ▶ this video ), or another more effective voting system. Probably won't happen though, as it would seriously shake up politics as we know it.

How important is this privilege if I can maliciously control how you vote? Now imagine the good we can do with real electoral reform (Democrats idea of repealing citizens United is a meager start, but weak lip service to real reform) What we have now - First Past The Post Voting - link Range Voting - link Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video Alternative Vote - link Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - link Electoral reform is just step 1, something we can all come together for. Something no one could possibly be against. How about if I control who can be voted for? Of course it matters - link bonus video: This video will make you angry - link

Reform the electoral system to achieve the representation we all deserve. The electoral system we use now: link Alternatives: link ▶ this video link link We can start introducing these to everyone at the state and local level to build momentum for electoral reform at the federal level. A good old fashioned general strike until we get what we need from our "representatives".

erentz was probably referring to the single transferable vote system ( link ), which uses a ranked ballot in elections and results in relatively proportional representation. CGP grey explains it pretty well: ▶ this video

Elections are supposed to be bloodless revolutions. If you can't effect change through the electoral system, then the non violent solution is to revolutionize how we vote. Relevant videos (IMO) First Past The Post Voting - link Range Voting - link Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video Alternative Vote - link Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - link Bonus video This video will make you angry - link

The real problem is both main stream political parties don't represent around 45% of the country. First Past The Post Voting- link Range Voting- link Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video Alternative Vote - link Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - link

Some tweaks I'd make: Corporate structure: link Electoral system: What we have now - link Range voting - link Alternative vote - link Single transferrable vote - ▶ this video Marx wrote about the theory of societal evolution; That there are certain phases civilization must pass through. The communism he wrote about would have to be very far down the road, 100+ years (IMO). This does not mean people sit back and do nothing, we still would have to work towards it. (Most) Capitalists profit from the status quo, and work to keep in place systems to maintain their spot in the hierarchy. Thus the antiquated electoral system in the USA, and the top heavy power/pay structures of business. TL;DR: give the average person more of a say/choice in the world they live in (politics/workplace), and they will find their way forward. (IMO)

Yep, STV: Single Transferable Vote. ▶ this video Closer to home, it's also used by the Apache Software Foundation for the annual election of the Board of Directors. When the election is only for a single position, this is exactly equivalent to "instant runoff".

Gerrymandering is a problem because we have a poor voting system. I'm not sure if a single transferrable vote (STV) is the best system, but it would significantly reduce the benefit of gerrymandering (and probably result in better candidates from both parties). CGP Grey did a great video on STV: ▶ this video

First Past the Post voting: link Range Voting: link Single Transferable vote: ▶ this video Do away with voting booths, attach voting to everyone's tax forms. Give everyone a $5 tax credit for voting. People who don't do taxes can go to a public library and just pull the voting portion off of the tax forms there and mail it in. Break up corporations in every sector of the economy and either resell the chunks back to the market or turn them all into 100% worker owned and operated co-ops.

"bad electoral system." First Past The Post Voting - link Range Voting - link Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video

Perhaps because powerful people don't want to find a solution; The powerful is exactly who is represented in our flawed electoral system: http//i.imgur.com/Uc6kX8G.jpg link link ▶ this video

Support anyone who wants to get rid of FPTP voting and introduce a more representative voting system (ranked choice, for example). Right now, people have to vote for the least of two shitty candidates. Instead, we could vote for the ones who represent us the most without worrying about who will actually win. This won't fix corporate corruption, which is the underlying cause of the attack on net neutrality, but it will certainly make representatives more beholden to their voters. ▶ this video

Elections were (IMO) meant to be bloodless revolutions. its just the 1% has captured both primary political parties. Also, the flawed first past the post electoral system discourages competition (IMO to keep it cheaper for the 1% to own the whole process). I'll post some videos from people smarter then me: link link link ▶ this video link link

I wish they also enacted multi-winner ranked choice voting (also called Single Transferable Vote) for legislature. Fair representation beats winner-takes-all systems every time, because it guarantees more than just two parties get to be in charge, much like in parliamentary systems (which also use some kind of fair/proportional representation voting system). But it's still a good start, and maybe other states will take a look at both, and choose a better system next time. By the way, this is exactly the sort of thing Sam Altman should be fighting for, along with joining Wolf-Pac, Represent.Us, and others to get money out of politics. Not try to use GOTV tactics to get people to vote for his preferred candidate. That is, if Altman still cares about this, and the "improve democracy thing" he pushed for earlier wasn't just a one time ruse to get people to vote for Clinton. If Altman is serious about improving democracy, these right here are by far the best ways to do it - way better than just trying to "increase turnout" in an election. Because for one, fair representation voting systems increase turnouts by default, because people feel better represented and have more reasons to go out and vote, and second, STV also eliminates gerrymandering, which would also greatly improve democracy by making seats less safe. link link STV by CGP Grey: ▶ this video Droop method for STV is probably preferable: link Also preferred by FairVote: link

Multi-winner ranked choice voting would do much more good to the democracy of US than ensuring the Democrat and Republican seats are "fair", and it would also solve the gerrymandering problem as a consequence: link ▶ this video