Republicans Will Lose Senate

[SuburbanFarmer]

Finally, another sensible voice.

[Martin Hash]

You won't get it with the Democrats in power, they are the reason for the two party system, and now they are trying to make it into a one party...

That is why I have been entertaining ideas that would likely lead to greater 3rd party influence.

This why I've taken towards approval voting where you vote for every candidate you approve of. This results in no downside to voting for a third party candidate as you can also vote for an established candidate. Unlike ranked choice you can't just ignore the 3rd party votes that got knocked off in order to give someone 50+% of the vote.

Then I also think because there is no way to legally eliminate parties it is better to embrace them, and use a proportional representation in the House. So instead of breaking up a state into districts you instead have each party provide a list of candidates, then people vote based on party instead of candidates. So if a state had 10 representatives if 50% vote for party A the first 5 seats would go to the top 5 candidates from party A, then party B gets 40% of the vote so the next 4 seats go to the top 4 candidates from party B, finally party C gets 10% of the vote so the final seat goes to the top candidate from party C. I think this style of voting would eventually cause us to have more than just 3 parties with some amount of representation in Congress. That could eventually result in issues when electing the president, but I think that could be fixed with using a runoff system.

I assume you know you're describing a parliamentary system?

[TheOneX]

You won't get it with the Democrats in power, they are the reason for the two party system, and now they are trying to make it into a one party...

That is why I have been entertaining ideas that would likely lead to greater 3rd party influence.

This why I've taken towards approval voting where you vote for every candidate you approve of. This results in no downside to voting for a third party candidate as you can also vote for an established candidate. Unlike ranked choice you can't just ignore the 3rd party votes that got knocked off in order to give someone 50+% of the vote.

Then I also think because there is no way to legally eliminate parties it is better to embrace them, and use a proportional representation in the House. So instead of breaking up a state into districts you instead have each party provide a list of candidates, then people vote based on party instead of candidates. So if a state had 10 representatives if 50% vote for party A the first 5 seats would go to the top 5 candidates from party A, then party B gets 40% of the vote so the next 4 seats go to the top 4 candidates from party B, finally party C gets 10% of the vote so the final seat goes to the top candidate from party C. I think this style of voting would eventually cause us to have more than just 3 parties with some amount of representation in Congress. That could eventually result in issues when electing the president, but I think that could be fixed with using a runoff system.

I assume you know you're describing a parliamentary system?

The election system is not the defining feature of a parliamentary system.

[Martin Hash]

That is why I have been entertaining ideas that would likely lead to greater 3rd party influence.

This why I've taken towards approval voting where you vote for every candidate you approve of. This results in no downside to voting for a third party candidate as you can also vote for an established candidate. Unlike ranked choice you can't just ignore the 3rd party votes that got knocked off in order to give someone 50+% of the vote.

Then I also think because there is no way to legally eliminate parties it is better to embrace them, and use a proportional representation in the House. So instead of breaking up a state into districts you instead have each party provide a list of candidates, then people vote based on party instead of candidates. So if a state had 10 representatives if 50% vote for party A the first 5 seats would go to the top 5 candidates from party A, then party B gets 40% of the vote so the next 4 seats go to the top 4 candidates from party B, finally party C gets 10% of the vote so the final seat goes to the top candidate from party C. I think this style of voting would eventually cause us to have more than just 3 parties with some amount of representation in Congress. That could eventually result in issues when electing the president, but I think that could be fixed with using a runoff system.

I assume you know you're describing a parliamentary system?

The election system is not the defining feature of a parliamentary system.

How is, for example, Britain's MPs in the Lower House elected differently than how you're describing?

[TheOneX]

I assume you know you're describing a parliamentary system?

The election system is not the defining feature of a parliamentary system.

How is, for example, Britain's MPs in the Lower House elected differently than how you're describing?

I'm just talking about how you elect your representative. I'll let Wikipedia describe the difference.

A parliamentary system or parliamentary democracy is a system of democratic governance of a state (or subordinate entity) where the executive derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the confidence of the legislature, typically a parliament, and is also held accountable to that parliament. In a parliamentary system, the head of state is usually a person distinct from the head of government. This is in contrast to a presidential system, where the head of state often is also the head of government and, most importantly, where the executive does not derive its democratic legitimacy from the legislature.

Essentially, to turn us into a parliamentary system we would need to change how we elect our president from having the states elect the president to Congress electing the president.

[Martin Hash]

So a parliament except an elected president rather than a prime minister.

[TheOneX]

So a parliament except an elected president rather than a prime minister.

At this point we are at a useless semantic. A parliament and a congress are the same thing. The system of election does not change what kind of government system you have.

[Martin Hash]

You described how MPs are elected.

[TheOneX]

You described how MPs are elected.

Yes, I described a process that is used to elect MPs, that same process could be used to elect US representatives and senators. That does not suddenly change our system of government. It only changes our election system. This is very simple.

[Martin Hash]

The U.S. has a less representative election process; a disadvantage of being first. I’ve done a couple podcasts on parliaments, I rather like them. They did get Brexit done after all.