[Election-Methods] RE : Re: Primary Elections using a "Top 2/Single Transferable Voting Method"

Juho juho4880 at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Dec 18 10:58:56 PST 2007

On Dec 18, 2007, at 16:38 , Brian Olson wrote:

> On Dec 17, 2007, at 9:33 AM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
>> --- Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <abd at lomaxdesign.com> a écrit :
>>> My own opinion is that state parties should directly elect  
>>> delegates,
>>> not Presidential candidates. Then the delegates make the choice, at
>>> the convention. They can actually .... *deliberate*. What a concept!
>> I'm skeptical that it would be feasible to be elected as delegate
>> without
>> being willing to commit to voting for a specific presidential
>> candidate.
> I think people just like a taste of direct democracy sometimes (err,
> more-direct, since it's voting for the guy who does the democracy, but
> at least it's not voting for the guy who votes for the guy who does
> the democracy). There are lots of reasons to have a deeper hierarchy
> of actions, but those systems may yet just be unsatisfying in various
> ways.
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  
> list info

Some quick notes on opportunities and threats that different  
political structures offer:

Direct democracy or democracy with immediate feedback (=ability to  
cancel support)
+ voter opinions rule
+ politicians must remember and fulfil their promises all the time
+ unwanted political games will be cut short
+ political direction can be changed when needed / ability to react  
to events
- populist and non-expert opinions rule
- only tax cuts and more benefits to people

Indirect / representative democracy (with no continuous feedback)
+ representatives have some time to prove their point before the next  
election (also tax raises etc. possible)
+ decisions will be made by the most competent citizens (based on  
their own independent thinking)
- it is easy to make promises and be nice only before the elections

Multiple layer hierarchy
+ less voters per representative => closer contacts and feedback
+ responsibility and contact between top and bottom layers lost in  
the multiple steps
- vote opinions may be lost in the multiple steps
- civil servant / politician centric thinking concentrates step by step

Low hierarchy
+ direct relationship between the voter and his/her representative
- inability to maintain contact to all the numerous direct voters

Parties (in elections and in everyday work)
+ clear political agendas
+ representatives can be connected to some known agenda
+ not so easy for representatives to continuously change opinion  
depending on current winds
- individual representatives may be forced to follow party leaders
- limited number of options to choose from
- puppets (instead of individual thinkers)

No parties
+ less hidden cabinet decisions
+ free opinions
+ also minority opinions present
+/- less group power (coordinated voting according to majority  
opinion of the party)
- more populism
- candidates may tell different stories to different potential voters
- different stories in different elections


Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The Wall Street Journal 

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list