Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
What's wrong with a district-based voting system? (Read 1193 times)
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Nov 22nd, 2019 at 5:59pm
 
Assume that we would elect a leader, there are two ways that said leader could be chosen:

1) One vote per person - each person casts one vote and the person elected as leader would be the person who obtains an absolute majority

2) Divide the country into equally populated districts (say of 100,000 each) and the people vote for their candidate in each district, much like we elect MPs. Let's say there's 150 districts - the person chosen as leader is the one who gets a majority of votes in a majority of districts - a double majority - i.e. 76 districts.

Whilst 1) seems more democratic, this is actually misleading because we need to look at VOTE VALUE. The value of each vote in 1) is 1/10 million (assuming there are 10 million voters in Australia); whereas the vote value in 2) is 1/100,000 (assuming each district has an equal number of people). Therefore, a person's vote has more power under 2) than in number one, and would have more say over who becomes a leader.

A one-man one-vote system (number 1) would benefit the Eastern States because they are the more populated areas. Candidates for President would have no incentive to campaign in Tasmania because of the smaller population. In fact, the combined populations of SA, TAS and WA doesn't even equal the total population of Greater Metropolitan Sydney. With 2) system, a candidate for leader would have a greater incentive to campaign across as much of the country as possible, since each person's vote is equal in value, thereby creating a more democratic system.

Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 57065
Here
Gender: male
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #1 - Nov 22nd, 2019 at 7:33pm
 
Auggie wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 5:59pm:
Assume that we would elect a leader, there are two ways that said leader could be chosen:

1) One vote per person - each person casts one vote and the person elected as leader would be the person who obtains an absolute majority

2) Divide the country into equally populated districts (say of 100,000 each) and the people vote for their candidate in each district, much like we elect MPs. Let's say there's 150 districts - the person chosen as leader is the one who gets a majority of votes in a majority of districts - a double majority - i.e. 76 districts.

Whilst 1) seems more democratic, this is actually misleading because we need to look at VOTE VALUE. The value of each vote in 1) is 1/10 million (assuming there are 10 million voters in Australia); whereas the vote value in 2) is 1/100,000 (assuming each district has an equal number of people). Therefore, a person's vote has more power under 2) than in number one, and would have more say over who becomes a leader.

A one-man one-vote system (number 1) would benefit the Eastern States because they are the more populated areas. Candidates for President would have no incentive to campaign in Tasmania because of the smaller population. In fact, the combined populations of SA, TAS and WA doesn't even equal the total population of Greater Metropolitan Sydney. With 2) system, a candidate for leader would have a greater incentive to campaign across as much of the country as possible, since each person's vote is equal in value, thereby creating a more democratic system.



Yes we would have an awful problem if we were stupid enough to want to elect a president.

In system 1) the voter has 1/10M across Australia. in 2) the voter also has 1 vote in 10M across Australia no real difference except that the influence of his/her vote extends well beyond the scope of the value of the vote they cast.

In comparison also if Sydney had 2 million people that would be 20 voting districts.

I.e. a region of say 7 townships say in SA would have 1/100,000 where Sydney would have 1/(20 X 100,000) The bias effectively remains it is just better hidden. Effectively Sydney gets 20 votes as does Melbourne and Brisbane almost as many.

By far the biggest disadvantage of 2 is that things change and politicians are dishonest. Rorting boundaries has been a long term favourite and has determined the result of many elections.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #2 - Nov 22nd, 2019 at 9:56pm
 
Auggie you are doing that thing again where you reinvent democracy in 30 seconds, then spend days demanding everyone else explain to you why you are wrong.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bam
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #3 - Nov 22nd, 2019 at 10:01pm
 
Auggie wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 5:59pm:
Assume that we would elect a leader, there are two ways that said leader could be chosen:

1) One vote per person - each person casts one vote and the person elected as leader would be the person who obtains an absolute majority

2) Divide the country into equally populated districts (say of 100,000 each) and the people vote for their candidate in each district, much like we elect MPs. Let's say there's 150 districts - the person chosen as leader is the one who gets a majority of votes in a majority of districts - a double majority - i.e. 76 districts.

Whilst 1) seems more democratic, this is actually misleading because we need to look at VOTE VALUE. The value of each vote in 1) is 1/10 million (assuming there are 10 million voters in Australia); whereas the vote value in 2) is 1/100,000 (assuming each district has an equal number of people). Therefore, a person's vote has more power under 2) than in number one, and would have more say over who becomes a leader.

A one-man one-vote system (number 1) would benefit the Eastern States because they are the more populated areas. Candidates for President would have no incentive to campaign in Tasmania because of the smaller population. In fact, the combined populations of SA, TAS and WA doesn't even equal the total population of Greater Metropolitan Sydney. With 2) system, a candidate for leader would have a greater incentive to campaign across as much of the country as possible, since each person's vote is equal in value, thereby creating a more democratic system.


The second system is NOT democratic because there would be many wasted votes. Getting 50,001 votes in a "district" gives the same result as getting a lot more. The extra votes are all wasted.

The wasted vote effect makes such a system highly susceptible to gerrymandering.

We would also get the anomaly where the winner of the most votes does not always win. There can be no convincing reason to prefer a system where this is possible over one where it is not.

This has happened in two of the last five US presidential elections and five times in total, or about one election in twelve. Having so many elections won by the non-preferred candidate is the reason why some states in the US are planning to subvert the electoral college by giving their EC votes to the winner of the popular vote. This is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. So far 17 states have ratified this Compact. It is not yet in force, but will come into force once enough states are in the Compact to command a majority of EC votes.
Back to top
 

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.
 
IP Logged
 
juliar
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 22966
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #4 - Nov 24th, 2019 at 3:02pm
 
Another armchair arm waver appears with the solution to nothing.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bam
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #5 - Nov 24th, 2019 at 4:32pm
 
juliar wrote on Nov 24th, 2019 at 3:02pm:
Another armchair arm waver appears with the solution to nothing.

No need to announce yourself.
Back to top
 

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #6 - Nov 24th, 2019 at 7:37pm
 
Dnarever wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 7:33pm:
Auggie wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 5:59pm:
Assume that we would elect a leader, there are two ways that said leader could be chosen:

1) One vote per person - each person casts one vote and the person elected as leader would be the person who obtains an absolute majority

2) Divide the country into equally populated districts (say of 100,000 each) and the people vote for their candidate in each district, much like we elect MPs. Let's say there's 150 districts - the person chosen as leader is the one who gets a majority of votes in a majority of districts - a double majority - i.e. 76 districts.

Whilst 1) seems more democratic, this is actually misleading because we need to look at VOTE VALUE. The value of each vote in 1) is 1/10 million (assuming there are 10 million voters in Australia); whereas the vote value in 2) is 1/100,000 (assuming each district has an equal number of people). Therefore, a person's vote has more power under 2) than in number one, and would have more say over who becomes a leader.

A one-man one-vote system (number 1) would benefit the Eastern States because they are the more populated areas. Candidates for President would have no incentive to campaign in Tasmania because of the smaller population. In fact, the combined populations of SA, TAS and WA doesn't even equal the total population of Greater Metropolitan Sydney. With 2) system, a candidate for leader would have a greater incentive to campaign across as much of the country as possible, since each person's vote is equal in value, thereby creating a more democratic system.



Yes we would have an awful problem if we were stupid enough to want to elect a president.

In system 1) the voter has 1/10M across Australia. in 2) the voter also has 1 vote in 10M across Australia no real difference except that the influence of his/her vote extends well beyond the scope of the value of the vote they cast.

In comparison also if Sydney had 2 million people that would be 20 voting districts.

I.e. a region of say 7 townships say in SA would have 1/100,000 where Sydney would have 1/(20 X 100,000) The bias effectively remains it is just better hidden. Effectively Sydney gets 20 votes as does Melbourne and Brisbane almost as many.

By far the biggest disadvantage of 2 is that things change and politicians are dishonest. Rorting boundaries has been a long term favourite and has determined the result of many elections.


The system would essentially work as this: each State would be entitled to a number of presidential district equal to the total number of members of both Houses they have: for e.g. NSW would have 60 districts; TAS would have 17 districts (5+12). Whilst Tasmania has less districts, the voting power of Tasmania is skewed slightly (in favour of itself). In population terms, NSW has 14 times the population TAS does, but with the district method, Tasmania's voting power is slightly more than one-third of NSW's voting power. The advantage of this is that the smaller States will be considered more fairly because their voting power is more skewed, although not to the point where they out vote the majority.
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #7 - Nov 24th, 2019 at 7:43pm
 
freediver wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 9:56pm:
Auggie you are doing that thing again where you reinvent democracy in 30 seconds, then spend days demanding everyone else explain to you why you are wrong.


Let's look at this situation:

A leader in Australia could simply campaign in NSW, VIC and QLD and disregard the other parts of the country entirely; and still win an election. The number of votes of WA, SA, TAS and NT doesn't even match that of NSW solely.

A one-to-one vote of a leader in Australia would create a system whereby the leader has no incentive to support policies that benefit WA, SA or TAS since their votes don't count.

The type of voting system you want is one that gives smaller States greater voting power so that they're not ignore, but not too much power that the majority doesn't matter.

Dividing each State into districts equal to members and senators for each State would give the eastern States a majority, but also give the smaller States enough 'oomph' to have a leader campaign in TAS.

How is it democratic when a leader can simply campaign in 3 of 6 States and win an election?
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #8 - Nov 24th, 2019 at 7:58pm
 
Quote:
How is it democratic when a leader can simply campaign in 3 of 6 States and win an election?


Democracy means rule by majority. You can confuse yourself all day long drawing circles on maps, but I don't see why any sane politician would ignore a minority group defined by geography merely on account of them forming a minority. You could draw the same circle around Sydney and fret about politicians ignoring it as soon as it has a circle around it.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bam
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #9 - Nov 24th, 2019 at 8:33pm
 
Auggie wrote on Nov 24th, 2019 at 7:43pm:
How is it democratic when a leader can simply campaign in 3 of 6 States and win an election?

You're obviously unaware of how your foolish system will enable this exact phenomenon.

Consider Federal elections. The bulk of campaigning is in marginal seats.

Or consider US presidential elections. Most of the campaigning is in about a dozen "swing states" that change hands regularly and decide elections. Safe states are often ignored.

Example:
...
Back to top
 

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.
 
IP Logged
 
Bam
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #10 - Nov 25th, 2019 at 8:47am
 
freediver wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 9:56pm:
Auggie you are doing that thing again where you reinvent democracy in 30 seconds, then spend days demanding everyone else explain to you why you are wrong.

Nailed it.
Back to top
 

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.
 
IP Logged
 
juliar
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 22966
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #11 - Nov 25th, 2019 at 10:21am
 
Another armchair arm waving solution to nothing.

Our current system is spot on as it allowed the wised up voters to save Australia from a Fate worse than Death - A Lunatic Extremist Greeny controlled Labor "Govt" intent in reducing Australia to scrap.

The Lefties seem really disappointed that a Greeny controlled Labor Shambles did not get in and create a severe Depression with soup kitchens with long queues everywhere and unemployment edging towards 40%.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #12 - Nov 29th, 2019 at 4:29pm
 
freediver wrote on Nov 24th, 2019 at 7:58pm:
but I don't see why any sane politician would ignore a minority group defined by geography merely on account of them forming a minority.


Because we live in a Federation - we've already drawn 'circles' around the country and created different governing authorities based really on arbitrary reasons. The fact is that there competing interests because of the nature of the Federalism.

If we had a unitary state then the idea of a majority would be more logical, but in a federal system, it's different.
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #13 - Nov 29th, 2019 at 4:31pm
 
Bam wrote on Nov 24th, 2019 at 8:33pm:
Auggie wrote on Nov 24th, 2019 at 7:43pm:
How is it democratic when a leader can simply campaign in 3 of 6 States and win an election?

You're obviously unaware of how your foolish system will enable this exact phenomenon.

Consider Federal elections. The bulk of campaigning is in marginal seats.

Or consider US presidential elections. Most of the campaigning is in about a dozen "swing states" that change hands regularly and decide elections. Safe states are often ignored.

Example:
http://www.randalolson.com/wp-content/uploads/us-presidential-election-campaign-...


The key difference is that in the US, the States are elected in a string of beads; they're not elected according to a district-based system, which was the original intention of the Founders, by the way.

If Presidents were elected by a district-based model in the United States, the Donald Trump would not have won the election; so if you're wanting a Trump-proof system, the district-based mode based on the States would work.
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: What's wrong with a district-based voting system?
Reply #14 - Nov 29th, 2019 at 4:32pm
 
Bam wrote on Nov 25th, 2019 at 8:47am:
freediver wrote on Nov 22nd, 2019 at 9:56pm:
Auggie you are doing that thing again where you reinvent democracy in 30 seconds, then spend days demanding everyone else explain to you why you are wrong.

Nailed it.


No one as of yet has been able to refute my arguments.
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print