Wouldn't it be better to have a system that didn't lead to two choices, both of them bad?
Yes, let's do something to change it.
Proportional Representation.
In Germany they have a choice between six viable parties.
Traditional left, traditional right, center right, further right, further left and environmental left.
Not only this, no one party gets to control everything.
With FPTP the CDU/CSU gained 37% of the vote and 77% of the seats. However with PR they gained 33% of the vote and 34% of the seats.
Much fairer, leads to better politics, leads to individuals having the representatives of their choice.
Bad idea.
I'm willing to bet you live in a big city.
It's not a bad idea. Also, I don't support Republicans or Democrats and have never voted for either.
I'm willing to bet you don't understand this system.
Let's take the present system.
Presidential election.
Only 12 states get to decide the result of the election. 12. Not 50. 12.
Many people don't get to vote for who they'd like to vote for. They get a choice of two. It's a negative voting system.
Smaller states, smaller rural states, don't make a difference. If you live in a smaller state like Wyoming, **** you, your vote hardly counts.
Presidential candidates don't care about your state, they don't spend money on your state, they don't care about your state.
Republicans know Wyoming is in their pocket. Democrats know they don't stand a chance. **** Wyoming.
With House elections, gerrymandering is a massive problem. It doesn't represent the country and people vote negatively, so third parties are screwed over.
With PR, EVERYBODY'S vote counts.
Why are you afraid of everyone's vote counting?
Wait, you're afraid that the Republicans will lose their massive superiority. Democrats need 3 million more votes than 50/50 to win. Republicans need 3 million less votes to win.
I see, not interested in Democracy, just interested in getting what you want.
Actually, that has nothing to do with it.
I don't view the nation as a monolithic Democracy. I view it as a Republic with many competing interests which ALL need to be represented.
Proportional representation works fine in small nation states, but in huge massive nations, it is a disaster, because massive cities end up dictating policy for massive swaths of the population. That is unfair, and it is NOT how our government was designed to work. The cities have no interest in the lives and desires of the populations or interests of the masses of people through out the lands, they just don't care.
States with a smaller population than Los Angeles County
Come on. The current system is a disaster. Who controls the US? The people? No way. The interests of the people are put last. The US has massive income inequality, it has poor education, massive divisions.
The problem is you don't understand Proportional Representation.
Germany has large cities. It also has very rural areas.
The thing is, people can vote for the party that represents them. No one party gets elected to power.
List of Federal Republic of Germany governments - Wikipedia
Here's a list.
Right now, two parties hold power, the main two parties and has been like this since 2013. Basically traditional left and traditional right. This means that one party can't just set about ******* the other party over.
Before that it was traditional right and center right.
Before that traditional right and traditional left.
Before that it was Traditional left and environmental left.
Coalitions. People WORKING TOGETHER. Unlike what happens.
People get the representation THEY CHOOSE. They don't get to choose between two bad choices of people who just go off and sell themselves to the highest bidder like in the US.
The US has 81.6% urban population. Slightly higher than Germany's 75%. However much of this urban population live in smaller places.
The US has 9 cities over 1 million people. However this doesn't really tell us much due to the nature of US cities.
New York urban area has 18 million people.
LA urban area has 12 million people.
Chicago urban area has 8.6 million people.
Miami urban area has 5.5 million people.
All in all there are 42 urban areas with a population of 1 million or more. That's 133 million people, out of 330 million people.
The MAJORITY of people live in places areas that are LESS than 1 million people.
But here's the thing. In the last election, 769,000 people in LA county voted Republican. Their vote means nothing. Discarded because of those around them.
We they voting with PR their vote would count.
Even more interesting is that if there were PR, then there'd be more parties to vote for.
Take the 71% of people who voted for Democrats. Chances are that this vote would get split between center right, traditional left, further left, potentially other left.
It wouldn't be all Democrats.
Like I said. The CDU/CSU gained 77% of the seats in the Bundestag with 37% of the vote. Why? Because that's how the FPTP system works. You just need to get a majority in some areas and then in other areas you get nothing.
But with PR they only got 34% of the seats because they only got 33% of the vote.
8% of people changed their vote, and these people knew even with FPTP that they could vote for whoever they liked.
They generally change from larger parties to smaller parties.
LA county would matter the same as everywhere else. There'd be rural parties, parties representing farmers. Right now they have to hope the Republicans can be bothered to represent them.
But it'd also do away with gerrymandering.
The House has a system whereby people are elected to an area. That hasn't stopped the Republicans coming out on top.
LA county has 18 seats in the House in DC. Does this mean it's unfair? Has LA county taken over national politics?
No.
You're trying to scaremonger with very, very little information.
