The special counsel, Jack Smith, has led a wide-ranging Justice Department examination of the efforts by former President Donald J. Trump and his allies to subvert the will of voters in 2020.
I’m not American, so maybe I shouldn’t comment, but I think Americans wanting change should pursue Single Transferable Vote (STV).
It’s basically a ranked ballot in multi-seat ridings. This is the most surefire way to dismantle a two-party system, give roughly proportional representation, maintain geographical representation, keep extreme fringe parties from gaining wedge power, and allow for choice within a party to eliminate “safe” seats.
I really wish Canada would adopt this system to prevent our descent into American political tribalism.
Ireland has used this system since independence a century ago which suggests it would work pretty well in countries like the UK and Canada too which share a fairly similar machinery of government.
I’m British and I’d genuinely vote for this on a single-issue basis! Unfortunately FPTP means we have a duopoly of two Frankenstein’s monster UK-wide parties that in a reasonable electoral system would really be two or three each and will never abolish FPTP on their own as a result, the only chance would be as part of a coalition agreement with a regional party and thanks to FPTP coalitions are rare in the UK system. In 2015 the SNP (Scottish independence party, long-term incumbents there) got 56 seats off 1.4 million votes while UKIP (right wing populist party, very Brexity and went the way of the dodo soon after) got one seat off 8.3 million votes. UKIP were awful in my opinion but that was downright undemocratic.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
I’m not American, so maybe I shouldn’t comment, but I think Americans wanting change should pursue Single Transferable Vote (STV).
It’s basically a ranked ballot in multi-seat ridings. This is the most surefire way to dismantle a two-party system, give roughly proportional representation, maintain geographical representation, keep extreme fringe parties from gaining wedge power, and allow for choice within a party to eliminate “safe” seats.
I really wish Canada would adopt this system to prevent our descent into American political tribalism.
Ireland has used this system since independence a century ago which suggests it would work pretty well in countries like the UK and Canada too which share a fairly similar machinery of government.
I’m British and I’d genuinely vote for this on a single-issue basis! Unfortunately FPTP means we have a duopoly of two Frankenstein’s monster UK-wide parties that in a reasonable electoral system would really be two or three each and will never abolish FPTP on their own as a result, the only chance would be as part of a coalition agreement with a regional party and thanks to FPTP coalitions are rare in the UK system. In 2015 the SNP (Scottish independence party, long-term incumbents there) got 56 seats off 1.4 million votes while UKIP (right wing populist party, very Brexity and went the way of the dodo soon after) got one seat off 8.3 million votes. UKIP were awful in my opinion but that was downright undemocratic.
That will not happen in America ever, because neither of the two parties are interested in real democracy beyond the bipartisan status quo.