gerrymandering only works due to the whole first past the post voting system you have for districts.
In addition, the commission who draws up the electoral districts in the US are not independent, but appointed by whichever party is ruling in a given state. John Oliver covered the topic.
I don’t understand that since gerrymandering allows you to manipulate the results of the voting itself by diminishing the significance of the votes themselves.
Can you explain more how gerrymandering only works with fptp?
FPTP means that if candidate A gets a majority of the votes in a district they get to represent the district as a whole, meaning that effectively all votes for candidante B, C, D, and E are thrown away.
This means that there is a point to gerrymander districts so they will allways have the majority.
If I understand the voting system in the US correctly, votes are counted in the disctricts, districts are then counted further up.
In a fair voting system, districts does not matter for anything but statistics.
Your understanding of fptp and the US district voting system is correct, but I’m still not sure how any different voting system solves dividing districts into specific voting blocks.
I guess it would make a small but significant difference over time, but as long as gerrymandering is legal within the US framework, it’s still very easy to manipulate the results by district, ranked choice voting or not.
It’s s kind of like the structural problem of the electoral college. You can change the rules within the electoral college, but as long as you have those 200 people standing between the popular vote and the presidency, Donald Trump can get elected despite people not wanting him to be president.
From what I can tell, gerrymandering only works due to the whole first past the post voting system you have for districts.
In a fair system where every vote is counted all the way up the chain, ditrict shapes and sizes doesn’t matter.
Getting rid of FPTP would also finally make new parties a realistic thing.
In addition, the commission who draws up the electoral districts in the US are not independent, but appointed by whichever party is ruling in a given state. John Oliver covered the topic.
I don’t understand that since gerrymandering allows you to manipulate the results of the voting itself by diminishing the significance of the votes themselves.
Can you explain more how gerrymandering only works with fptp?
FPTP means that if candidate A gets a majority of the votes in a district they get to represent the district as a whole, meaning that effectively all votes for candidante B, C, D, and E are thrown away.
This means that there is a point to gerrymander districts so they will allways have the majority.
If I understand the voting system in the US correctly, votes are counted in the disctricts, districts are then counted further up.
In a fair voting system, districts does not matter for anything but statistics.
Your understanding of fptp and the US district voting system is correct, but I’m still not sure how any different voting system solves dividing districts into specific voting blocks.
I guess it would make a small but significant difference over time, but as long as gerrymandering is legal within the US framework, it’s still very easy to manipulate the results by district, ranked choice voting or not.
It’s s kind of like the structural problem of the electoral college. You can change the rules within the electoral college, but as long as you have those 200 people standing between the popular vote and the presidency, Donald Trump can get elected despite people not wanting him to be president.
Without FPTP, you would simply count the votes, and send the data to the election agency who will compile the final result.
There is no selecting a winner for each district and sending that on, mening there is no point to gerrymandering as it would not affect the result.
The electoral collage should also be scrapped, there is zero point to it.