On July 1, Mexico held a presidential and a congressional election. The presidency was won by Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. He was the nominee of the National Regeneration Movement (MORENA), a new party; and also the Labor Party, which has existed since 1990; and the Social Encounter Party, which has existed since 2006. The three parties named their coalition “Together We’ll Make History” (Juntos Haremos Historia).
Mexico election laws are superior to the laws of the United States in several ways: (1) parties are permitted to jointly nominate the same candidate; (2) access to presidential debates is far more inclusive; (3) election administration is carried out by a non-partisan body; (4) for president, whoever wins the most popular votes is elected. Also Mexico uses proportional representation for its congressional elections.
Will hoards of USA citizens flee south and claim to be escaping gerrymander tyrants in the USA regime and all 50 State regimes ???
Well, now that socialists are in power in Mexico I’m sure tons of people will flock south to live in the upcoming socialist paradise.
To elect only 32 of 500 seats under proportional representation as stated in Wikipedia, if true, that’s far less than 10% of the seats claimed to be proportional representation and that is not proportional representation.
Proportional representation means all the available seats are elected at-large.
Since all the open seats are not elected simultaneously then there is no way we can say that Mexico’s system uses proportional representation.
The system in Mexico is nowhere near proportional representation.
The United Coalition’s Earth Day video documents the correct voting and vote counting of the 8th California Super-state Parliament Election, 250 seats elected at-large under pure proportional representation :
The United Coalition of Candidates (UCC)
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
Click here (https://youtu.be/DgXaC_Uzm6s) to see the Earth Day event video
Even though the California Peace and Freedom Party chair Kevin Akin claims that his team will bring the correctly written statutes for California law to bring a ballot measure for pure proportional representation (PPR), the reality is that he nor the United Coalition’s effort has begun to coordinate together because political parties are biased while the math of PPR is dry and unbiased.
The only way we can bring pure proportional representation is by working together collaboratively and not by being biased.
The One Party is the only party not biased towards others by using PPR and the One Party is eager to work with anyone who displays proper team psychology:
http://www.allpartysystem.com/one/php
What are the actual vote percentages?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_general_election,_2018
Will take some time for final stats — perhaps a week ???
—
Basic PR —
Party Members = Total members x Party Votes / Total Votes
(only partly in Mexico — thus another dubious regime of monarchs and oligarchs)
The available results seem to indicate that Obrador won a clear majority in a fairly open election. What this means for electoral systems in general, or Mexico, in particular, remains to be seen. While Obrador generally had leftist support, his own positions have been rather ambiguous.
Mexico’s legislative elections are not, strictly speaking, proportional. See Matt Shugart’s description here: https://fruitsandvotes.wordpress.com/2018/06/29/mexico-2018/.
MMP is not proportional representation.
Morena was formed after Lopez Obrador lost the last presidential election as the candidate of PRD.
Social Encounter Party (PES) and another party will be officially disbanded if they fall below the 3% threshold, as it appears they will.
@Joogle,
What is pure proportional representation?
PPR = having a zillion members ***elected at-large under pure proportional representation*** ???
See JO July 2 above.
—
How about having a mere 140,000,000 member legislative body in the USA ???
– ie A-L-L voters are members — adding and amending and enacting bills 24/7 ???
Jim, pure proportional representation is ranked choice voting (RCV) in multiple winner districts of two or more, where every marked ballot is correctly marked under RCV.
Then the Hagenbach-Bischoff method must be used to guarantee the correct quota for electing each and every one of the open seats.
Pure proportional representation (PPR) happens when the math is done perfectly correct for every step and so multiple copies of the original stack of ballots will always render the exact same mathematical results for each of the duplicate stack of marked ballots.
Hagenbach-Bischoff Method (Two descriptions)
THE “SAINTE-LAGUE PARLIAMENT SYSTEM” for seat allocation in all multi-seat districts
By Mike Ossipoff [Peace and Freedom] in 1992
Divide the election’s total number of votes by the number of seats. This is the 1st quota.
Divide this quota into each candidate’s votes, and round off to the nearest whole number. That’s that candidate’s seat allocation.
If, due to rounding, this awards a number of seats different from the desired number of seats, then adjust the quota slightly up or down until when paragraph two is carried out, it will award all seats.
* * *
Hagenbach-Bischoff Quota for Pure Proportional Representation (PPR)
By International Parliament Vote Counting Minister James Ogle [One]
Total number of votes / total at-large seats (plus one seat) = Hagnebach-Bischoff Quota
Any candidates reaching quota (plus one vote) is elected
Calibrate quota up or down (within 1/10,000th accuracy) until all seats are elected and filled.
* * *
JO–
What percent of the ballots are NOT correctly marked in an actual IP election ???
OR – do NOT vote for ALL choices ???
How much variation in the actual votes to elect in an actual IP election — due to district variations ???
Each winner has a ONE voting power in the IP ???
@Joogle,
Why do you need candidate rankings?
When you use divisors, there is no need to adjust the quota?
Let each candidate define a catchment area where voters may vote for them. All candidates who receive one or more votes is elected, and will exercise the number of votes that they receive. This would be a pure system of representation.
JR
Any problems having 10,000,000 – 140,000,000 or more winners — with a voting power they each get ???
How about a 3 (repeat 3) member body with the most votes — perhaps 51 million, 49 million, 40 million voting powers ???
@DR,
You may have missed the part about catchment areas, that each candidate could designate where he may receive votes from.
JR, we need rankings because it is more advanced than no rankings, more ties get broken, and the proportionalism of (single transferable vote) STV allows interest groups to be represented by the exact math.
Plurality democracy is good. Pure proportional representation (PPR) is best by far.
Cambridge MA has been using STV for more than 50 years and PPR has proven to be far better than pluralism there.
Period.
DR, spoiled ballots do happen, the percentages vary so it would be impossible to give a blanket percent.
Generally pretty high, around 5 to 10% spoiled but can vary depending on the election.
Yes, each of the 529 Members of International Parliament, get one vote, that can be made/changed as a vote of confidence anytime, for the Ten Execs and the set of guidelines.
The biggest faction who votes for the guidelines is the majority coalition.
Because we are trying to build the team of vote counters, and since a lot of web page work results from each vote, we l8ke the voting numbers to be as low as possible.
Most people generally vote in the elections and rank a few names. Some may rank 20 to 30 names. A few may rank all names.
No matter, as more people vote, the voters who voted for a long list, well their ballots get averaged along with everyone else’s.
The great thing is that it averages perfectly whether two people vote or 2000 vote.
For example, it two people vote and rank 2000 names each but there are only 1000 seats, then each voter is guaranteed to elect their top 500 names each.
If either of the two rank the sane name, or a third voter ranks one, then that name goes to the tip of course.
But the great thing is by rankings, every name gets prioritised, and with far fewer ties than had we used “Xs”.
This system works really well for both small amounts of data or large.
The world One Party will be the first worldwide party sustained in the International Parliament to allow participants of not just One Party members, but also all parties and independents.
Next all the world parties will follow.
The world One Party will be helping the California Green Party and others.
We will be announcing more within a few weeks. The leader Nadine Squires [One] of Canada, myself, a fellow from Ireland and others will be making headway and we welcome everyone who wants to join.
http://www.allpartysystem.com/one.php
It’s a new venture only possible with ease, through email.
But we prefer paper ballots when possible and the Earth Day event using paper ballots worked great.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_general_election,_2018
ABOUT 80 PCT DONE —
NOTE THE PCT OF VOTES VS PCT OF SEATS IN THE MEXICAN CONGRESS.
If 11% of the voters say that they want George to represent them, and 9% say John. How is it “proportional” in any sense of the word to give both groups the same representation?
Town meetings have been held in Massachusetts for nearly 400 years. You are probably excited by Cambridge because it has a couple of schools and they use computers to count the votes.
@DR,
Notice the results for the Chamber of Deputies, particularly the district seats won by PES and Labor Party. While the proportional seats are not compensatory, there is a limit of a party gaining 8% more total seats than their popular vote. PES and Labor are coalition partners of Moreno, and they were assigned districts that they could win with no Morena candidate.