ro-esp ro-esp at dds.nl
Thu, 7 Apr 2005 20:07:14 +0200
sorry if i've explained this here already. BTW you're way of quoting is rather
confusing to me, as I'm accustomed to the Http://www.learn.to/quote -way
Citeren Mark <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> --HighIQSingles@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" wrote:
> --"Ryan Mathew Parr" wrote:
> >R: At the same time, a bottom-up system is exactly the kind of
> system that voted Bush in office. Look at all the red necks!
Those who voted for Bush were only a 25% minority. The problem is that noone
cares about the 50% that didn't vote. What is needed is a voting-system in
which everyone also has the "none-of-those-listed"-option. Those who use it
should be represented by empty seats in parliaments etc. _without_ changeing
the criterium for a majority. This means:51% of the representatives present
being for something is not enough, it takes more than half the seats...
Of course, this means that if only half the voters vote for a candidate, the
gremium in question would be powerless. I don't see that as a problem, since
they would be able to organise referenda, let the decision be taken by
a "higher" or "lower"gremium AND they could organise new elections with
additional parties running.
In the US this could lead to an end for the very strange two-party-system