Forum Thread

Dynamic democracy

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 6 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    As we all know democracy is basically dictatorship of majority over minority. Let imagine situation where 2 political group exist, one with popularity of 40% other one 60%. In this kind of setup 60% always outvote 40% what is clearly wrong.
    What I propose is so called dynamic democracy, it means that during any kind of ballot, no matter the kind of it, if you succeed your vote is factored with 0.05 penalty and assuming you started with 1 now you voting strength equal to 0.95. On the other hand if your vote failed your voting strength is boosted by 0.05 and assuming previous setup, now it is worth 1.05. I believe this kind of system would reflect better what we really want
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    What do you mean by a vote succeeding or failing?
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Central, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    What's important in your opinion. If we are to consider your unusual idea, we should know more about who's suggesting it. 3 or 4 ideas on what you support or oppose would help.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    This is just unworkable in any form. We are not really have a two party system. The biggest voting block is the independents. According to a Pew Research poll, the Independents have 39 percent representation. Democrats come in at 32 percent and Republicans at 23 percent.

    Furthermore, how would the formula be applied when we elect, for example, a Democrat for governor and a Republican senator in the same election? At the state and local level there is considerable churn in elected officials, and many of the issues are local as opposed to national. And the issues of one election are not necessarily the hot topics of the next election.

    Sorry, putting a "golf type" of handicap on elections is just an opportunity for more cheating. Doesn't make sense to me.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    is more about votings which take place in a parliament or any other electing body(city cuncil ). Which basically means that an opposition can change something, not much maybe but something.


    Vote succeed if your vote is in majority pool in currently conducted ballot.

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    This is just unworkable in any form. We are not really have a two party system. The biggest voting block is the independents. According to a Pew Research poll, the Independents have 39 percent representation. Democrats come in at 32 percent and Republicans at 23 percent.

    Furthermore, how would the formula be applied when we elect, for example, a Democrat for governor and a Republican senator in the same election? At the state and local level there is considerable churn in elected officials, and many of the issues are local as opposed to national. And the issues of one election are not necessarily the hot topics of the next election.

    Sorry, putting a "golf type" of handicap on elections is just an opportunity for more cheating. Doesn't make sense to me.

    No Schmidt we do have a two party system; a third party never has won even if they tried. Any third party will be railroaded because the corruption by the Super PAC's as well the voter intimidation is part of the culture if you corrupt voting with "money" as is done here; on top of that use the "electoral college" system, then the result is obvious. As long as this country "corrupts" itself , then the outcome also corrupts itself. Why are there "independents" who actually don't belong and negated and get "shoveled" to the one party or the other. Sorry it is an super "corrupt" country, which ever way you look at it.