On Sunday, June 24, Egypt released official election returns for the recent presidential election. Dr. Mohammed Morsi, nominee of the Muslim Brotherhood, won the run-off with approximately 13,200,000 votes, defeating his opponent Ahmed Shafiq, who garnered approximately 12,300,000.
Notice how there’s no Muslim Sisterhood candidate? That’s because single-winner districts tend to favor males with an approximate 17% advantage according to my research.
Want to see more gender balance in government? Try proportional representation!
Very Truly Yours,
–James Ogle [Free Parliamentary], Secretary
Volunteer Vote Counter
http://www.usparliament.org
Join the Frees,
Opposite gender #1!
(and consecutively alternating genders thereafter)
Day to Day Update:
http://usparliament.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=555
You a such an idiot!
Nonpartisan Approval Voting for all elected executive and judicial offices — pending Condorcet head to head math.
NO legislative powers in ANY executive/judicial officer.
Basic stuff — made complex by the usual suspect morons for thousands of years.
@2 See what I mean? “Casual Bystander” is probably one of those mean males that I’m writing about.
People who don’t support opposite gender #1, are the meanest, caustic personality types, while women are gentler and kinder, and are chased away by such rude males.
Read about Islam you moron.
Egyptian women voters were at 39.8 percent in 2007.
Your level of debate is pretty low. It’s no wonder you don’t use your own name here!
Because you don’t care about representation for women.
Ogle, your birth name is “Peaceful Revolution”?
Islam teaches that women must be subservient, so a Muslim Sisterhood would not be running for leadership in elections; it would be teaching women how to submit to the authority of their husbands.
Since Egypt is currently not a theocracy, women do in fact vote, but that may change if the Muslim Brotherhood succeeds in turning into an Islamic state. It is quite likely that women will not be allowed to vote at all at that point. They will certainly lose some of their rights.
So, to make a long story short, you are indeed quite dense. And that remains a fact regardless of whether you know my last name or not (I am not the person who posted as casual bystander, btw).
Thanks, paulie!
-NF
@7 You’re not exactly trying to empower women yourself, in fact quite the opposite.
The ranked choice voting system which I support and which you are against, allows us men to advocate for the opposite gender #1, and when the genders rankings are alternated by 2/3rds of the voters, we are guaranteed gender balance and a more equality of women winners in government in multi-set election districts.
Single-winner districts don’t do that, and you and IPR have consistently fought fanatically against women candidates, this RCV and Sainte-Lague information and have blocked me or advocated for deleting my comments and posting rights on on IPR and Boston Tea, much to the detriment of fair elections, free speech and better representation of women and the perpetuation of single-winner district power-grabbing egotists.
I don’t see this as dense-minded, quite the contrary. I find that the promotion of advanced elections, free speech and liberty to self categorize much more empowering than your continual stuffy degradation of women, suppression of free speech, hostile and false statements.
What I promote is advanced election systems, free speech, teamwork in multi-winner districts, fairness, true liberty and unity.
Everything to which you are opposed.
@7 Further more, you want more of me? I’m ready to start naming names and I’m ready to embarrass you more, especially with your oppressive actions towards female candidates.