What are your thoughts on a non-partisan plurality-at-large voting system?

[Machjo]

Essentially a combination of the following:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-partisan_democracy

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurality-at-large_voting

Your thoughts on it?

Such a system would tend to favour moderate candidates by far, which in turn would lend itself to very stable government while still ensuring democracy.

One weakness of such a system is the risk of the tyranny of the majority, which would mean that if this system were adopted, an extremely strong human rights declaration would be needed to protect minorities.

That said, it would provide much more stable government than other systems.

 

[Curious Cdn]

I think that it has a snowball's chance in hell, seeing as it will require the most partisan people in the country to suddenly abandon all that they believe in and drop the system that gave them power in the first place.

Nice theory but it will never fly, Orville.

Perhaps, post-the-apocalypse (it would sure beat the overt fascism that followed an Apocalypse in the Star Trek fictions).

 

[taxslave]

How would you ever get an agreement on anything important in a timely manner?

 

[Machjo]

How would you ever get an agreement on anything important in a timely manner?

Plurality-at-large voting tends to promote a landslide majority (even more so than fptp) in a partisan system, so we can reasonably suppose that it will promote the tendency of more like minded candidates winning seats.

 

[petros]

I want a Republic!

 

[Machjo]

I want a Republic!

I'd prefer just improving the present monarchy. Maybe an elective monarchy.

 

[Curious Cdn]

I want a Republic!

Can't see how that will fix the problems being discussed. I might even make them worse!

 

[taxslave]

Can't see how that will fix the problems being discussed. I might even make them worse!

For a start we wouldn't have an unelected foreign ruler.

 

[Curious Cdn]

For a start we wouldn't have an unelected foreign ruler.

There is something rather useful about having a third party leader with little power. It keeps our homegrown fuhrers in check.

 

[damngrumpy]

I like partisan politics and I prefer first past the post not this watered down
democracy. People belong to a political party it is up to the party to decide
if people are welcome in it.
I am also a moderate I would not belong to a party that has people like Trump
in it.for example. Yes I believe there is a place for differences of opinion within
the party but radical crap like we have watched down south would see me
heading for the exit.
The other thing I saw this morning in Virgina they are not allowing independents
and the radicals to vote good. A party is for members that is the function of the
party. The thing that disturbs me though when members begin swearing an oath
to the Republican Party. We had other parties that did that in the past.
They governed in less popular places in their time.
Republicans have to do something though in the USA they have been taken over
by the religious, radicals and those who are unreasonable idealists in my view.
If they continued they will be getting a huge setback in the next election

 

[FiveParadox]

I am looking forward to seeing how many threads you can turn into a discussion on Nunavut's legislature.