Re: CHAT (POLITICS!!!): Putting the duh in Florida

Nik Taylor wrote, quoting myself (Adrian Morgan):

> > This may sound a little harsh, but I find it unbelievable that a
> > reasonably literate nation should still use a FPTP voting system (i.e.
> > where everyone marks just one candidate). I think FPTP is suitable
> > for developing nations with very low literacy, but I don't see why it's
> > accepted elsewhere, because in the end it says nothing about which
> > candidate really carries most favour with the community. I'd like to see
> > Americans adopt a preferential voting system, or an equally
sophisticated
> > equivalent.
>
> I agree. Is the preferential system wherein a person can vote for one
> or more candidates? I've heard that called Approval Voting. The best
> system, IMO. It would certainly improve the chances of third parties,
> since there'd be no risk of "wasting your vote".
As I've described in the reply I've just posted to Yoon, it's a tad more
complicated than that.

I realise that the preferential system would be daunting in a country with
as large a population as America (although modern communication methods
between vote counters would help), which is precisely why I added "or an
equally sophisticated equivalent".

As for approval voting, I'd want to be able to give candidates one point,
zero points or minus one points.

> > Of course, I'm an Australian who voted 'no' at the referendum :-)
>
> Which referendum is that?
The one where we decided that we don't want to become a republic or have
a president (at least, not until we get a better offer). If you're really
curious, I can provide some information.

Adrian.