Post #2330892
2026-05-08 21:33 UTC
@syllopsium@peoplemaking.games @RolloTreadway@beige.party
There is some virtue in a system which gives some weight to a voter's second choice. Every party is itself a coalition so more granularity means more accurate representation.
There are any number of balanced systems and arguments for and against each. I am open to any fair formula.
FPTP is about elective dictatorship though. It is an anti-democratic abomination.
Replies (1)
-
@syllopsium@peoplemaking.games 2026-05-08 21:43
@lionelb@expressional.social @RolloTreadway@beige.party In your opinion and viewpoint. Many would disagree. It's notable the number of Reform voters who think FPTP is OK has almost doubled since they thought they had some sniff at winning outright, so they can push through their nasty little bigotry without opposition. I don't personally like it, but FPTP tends to favour stronger parties. It's still democratic, and a decision on how the country should be governed, even if it is a messy system. More granularity may mean 'more accurate representation' but what voters actually want are their views enacted. Going to be tricky if everything is PR based and each action is a heavy compromise.