Electoral reform ideas

[Brandon H]

Does anyone think perhaps a seperate voting page would work, that would be tied to the users account, and only a few select people could view it? If Dave can add the PC scores, then this could also be done, except no one has written it yet. This would make it harder for a voter to vote invalidly except for perhaps write ins.

[Brandon H]

Don't come back with you rank all the candidates BS Hugh. If I think Dubya or Jesus is not worth my vote/preference, I should be allowed to deny it to them.

that's what preferential voting is. The system of preferential voting insists you rank all candidates. Optional preferential voting also exists, where someone can choose just to list one candidate and then either have their ballot exhausted when they are eliminated, or follow a pre-determined order of preference that candidate chooses.

Preferential voting is the best system. It's the most democratic, it's very simple, etc. Add a secret ballot, and institute true preferential voting, and Atlasia has the best system of voting.

I really thought about not preferencing any of the candidates who did not preference Dubya at all. However that would only hurt the candidates themselves rather then the people who voted for them. One of the things I like about the Demochoice polls.

[Brandon H]

Preferential voting is the best system. It's the most democratic, it's very simple, etc. Add a secret ballot, and institute true preferential voting, and Atlasia has the best system of voting.

In your opinion. I see little reason why it is more democratic to force voters to vote for people they don't support.

How do we force them to vote for people they don’t support?  If anything, we’re encouraging more candidates into the race, meaning it is more likely for everyone to have a candidate that they enthusiastically support, instead of just voting for the lesser of two evils.

I believe he was talking about Hugh's idea of requiring that all the candidates are preferenced.  I wouldn't put it exactly the way Jake did, but I'm not too hot on that idea myself.

Maybe, but surely everyone has a preference between any two candidates. Example: I would never vote for Ted Kennedy, but I would give him my second to last preference to rank him ahead of someone like Hitler.

I saw someone mentioning putting a limit on something like three candidates to preference. Maybe we could do something like exactly three candidates. I definitely don't like that being for the tie breaker.

I think the Signature thing mentioned in Fezzy's idea could be good, but would make it something like 5 signatures from anyone as opposed to just a few Senators.

We just need to keep the ideas coming.