Single-winner For-or-against
-
Someone responded to me by pointing out that voting for-or-against is horrible. I would respond to that response instead of posting a new topic, but the search mechanism in this forum software (NodeBB) doesn't seem to be of much help in digging that conversation up again. And anyway, I want to promote my position to a larger audience if I can.
I predict that the benefits of for-or-against as opposed to FPtP would be revolutionary. I know how I would vote in it for President of the United Snakes of America in 2024.
In the Green-party forum I recently posted about, one of the listeners mentioned a State in which she or he said that the law prohibits voting systems that allow more than one "vote" per voter. This would probably outlaw then Approval and the like. Vote For-or-against would meet that constraint.
-
@jack-waugh “…more than one ‘vote’ per voter…” I always find this so silly. Nobody bothers to define what a “vote” is to begin with, so what is being counted? The correct, fair thing that, as far as I can tell, can apply universally is: one ballot per voter.
Seriously, maybe I’m a jerk, but I think we should all perhaps be reading a bit more Aristotle in public school. As required reading.
(Then again that wouldn’t serve the status quo)
-
@cfrank I agree that for purposes of "one person, one vote", two approvals or two disapprovals should not count as two votes. However, legislators and judges and juries seem to lack for an ability to think straight.
-
@cfrank @Jack-Waugh Drumming short slogans without clear definition or explanation can be problematic. Even "one ballot per voter" could lead to people insisting that all offices and questions, up for vote on the same day being crammed on one sheet of paper. Or originalist judges going back to little ball used for secret voting as the definition of ballot. We need to remind people that a vote: is the opinion of one member of a group, used in an effort to determine the opinion of the group, on a matter that they are trying to make a decision upon. The more often people are exposed to longer explanations of what a vote is, the less they will assume a narrow definition based on exposer to only one voting method.