Steve Rose, politics columnist for the Kansas City Star, here analyzes a path to possible victory for Greg Orman, running for Governor in 2018 as an independent.
Steve Rose, politics columnist for the Kansas City Star, here analyzes a path to possible victory for Greg Orman, running for Governor in 2018 as an independent.
Promoting egocentric candidates vying for the single-winner power grab of plurality elections will only cement the two-party system.
Only by collaboration and teamwork under pure proportional representation will us voters make progress for fair elections, equal free speech time and advanced decision-making for the good of the whole.
Are you interested in pure proportional representation?
The new United Coalition has been using pure proportional representation for more than twenty-two consecutive years and it works fine.
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
Proportional representation has nothing to do with elections for Governor, or President, or any executive office that is filled by a solitary individual.
James. Please stop with your incessant postings about proportional representation. You too Demo Rep.
Yes, in a perfect world, proportional representation is a better system in almost every way – it is more democratic, it reduces the unilateral power of the executive, it would allow for multiple parties to flourish, …
So what? In a perfect world there would be very little need for any government, which means that without much power, government can’t really do much bad to you so the form of government is irrelevant. The possibility of change to a proportional form of government in our country in this century is far less than the possibility that the country will break apart into multiple nations with a mutual defense pact and a free trade agreement as the only binding between the new nations (which is BTW what my preferred outcome for the united States of America).
Back to my first sentence. IMO, your incessant postings about proportional representation are damaging the readership and reputation of this fine blog run by Richard Winger. If what you are doing is trying to make BAN a laughingstock, then keep it up.
DW – Sorry
– the ANTI-Democracy gerrymander party hack oligarchs are obviously taking the USA to party hack TYRANT monarchs
— like the incumbent NUTCASE Prez and wannabee New Age computerized Hitler.
PR – legislative bodies
Nonpartisan AppV – executive/judicial officers
Juveniles and morons (overlapping groups) can play juvenile/moron games with the MONSTER oligarchs and monarchs — hoping that they magically become human.
18 States have voter petitions for State Const Amdts — to get REAL Democracy via PR and AppV
— Such 18 may have to liberate the other 32 the 1775-1783 hard way.
I appreciate everyone who makes comments.
Richard – did you ever consider why there are so few comments here at BAN? It could be at least partially because the off-topic rants of folks like J. O. and D. R. diminish the perceived value by readers of BAN, and therefore fewer folks come back on a regular basis. With moderated comment threads or some other mechanism to discourage off-topic posts, you might actually get more comments, which might result in of attracting more readers. Then again, maybe my feeble attempt to make BAN a more popular place is a waste of my time…
2017-2018 USA GOVT MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER MATH = OLIGARCHY
GERRYMANDER LOWLITES MINI SUMMARY — Math Facts
IN 2016, 30.7 PERCENT OF THE VOTERS ELECTED LOW WIN 218 R USA REPS OF 435 TOTAL.
IN 2012-2014-2016, 17.1 PERCENT OF THE VOTERS ELECTED LOW WIN 50 R USA SENATORS OF 100 TOTAL.
IN 2016, 26.0 PERCENT OF THE VOTERS ELECTED R PREZ TRUMP – 272 of 538 ECV (28 of 50 States).
[It won in 30 States + ME CD 2]
—
2012-2014 FEC
2016 Clerk Stats — pending the very delayed 2016 FEC
—
ALL 99 houses in the 50 State legislatures are smaller versions of the USA H of Reps.
Danger level — 100 percent — like 1859-1860, 1914 or 1939-1941.
PR and AppV
You can use proportional representation with a multi-member executive. Using STV, voters would rank all candidates:
1. Bob for Governor
2. Amy for Attorney General
3. Sara for Governor
…
When a candidate is elected (exceeds the quota) calculate the weight for those ballots that elected him. Then take all the ballots, including those that are “exhausted”, and strike all preferences for the elected office, and begin the count again.
It is likely that most voters will make their first preference for governor, and so the governor will be elected first. Those that voted for winning gubernatorial candidate will have their ballots discounted, while those who voted for someone else, or some other office will have their ballot counted at full strength, increasing the likelihood that their preferences will prevail for other offices.
The JR math brings up Condorcet math for multi executive or judicial offices.
Test Winners A (N = 2 or more) vs Test Winner B vs Test Loser Other(s) C.
The N highest rankings of the votes for the C Test Loser go to the A/B Test Winners.
Computer votes needed in any large election.
One Tiebreaker = Approval Voting = vote YES or NO on each choice — along with 1, 2, 3, etc.
Example — elect 3 judges , 8 candidates
Do all of the A3-B1-C4 combinations. The top 3 choices of each C4 get moved to the A3/B1.
An A choice may win all [elected), lose all (lose) or win/lose/tie some.
Simple AppV pending Condorcet.
Pluralists have spent all their time and energy discrediting the unity between our team and snuffing out any progress for more than twenty-two consecutive years.
But the United Coalition has been using pure proportional representation despite all those who deny the team.
Had collaboration with the United Coalition been undertaken rather than hostile conflict, then the unity phenomena that’s sweeping the globe would be furthered, instead the United Coalition is microscopic in size.
The United Coalition has been using pure proportional representation for more than twenty-two consecutive years and it works fine.
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
Nice try, Don. I agree that the repetitive nature of the posts does more harm than good but at least BAN is more collegial than other sites where venom seems to flow freely.
BAN is trying to be about ballot access and election reforms to save Democracy
— NOT moronic games about which past, present or future statist gang of actual/wannabee ANTI-Democracy tyrants has done the most damage to *civilization*.
No shortage of other websites having such moronic games about statist tyrants — left and right.
@Casual Observer – I agree completely. I used to follow multiple other sites, but all of them ended being pretty biased or petty. When I want solid information, I come to BAN.
So – Richard, Thank You for all that you do. BAN is a great site and we appreciate all the hard work you put into it. Thanks!