1318
How long will people be in denial that america is now a fascist regime? You all really going to wait until trumps third term until you come to terms with it, arent you?
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
1318 points (98.2% liked)
Political Memes
8553 readers
1912 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One way to remedy this would be to retain ranked choice but make the electorates/districts three times as large and elect three members in each. Just like how Tasmania does but with 5 members and 5 huge districts.
The Australian Senate voting does roughly what both houses of the Tasmanian state voting do and what you are calling for.
The Senate still has ranked choice but also proportional representation because of the multiple members in each district (in the Australian Senate the "district" is the entire state, with 6 members elected each time).
Federal Labor currently cannot pass any laws without Greens support in the senate (unless the conservatives support the bill).
Districts are fair because the member can be accessed by local constituents (in theory anyhow). US Gerrymandering is unfair. Australian Gerrymandering is nowhere near as bad.
Tbh, at that point you can just drop the ranked choice and go with a regular proportional system.
It's just trying to shoehorn proportionality into ranked choice.
Another option is to send at least one representative from each party and weight their voting power based on the popular vote. But I haven't seen that implemented anywhere so far.
I don't think you understand the Australian Senate voting system or Tasmanian lower house or the MMP of Scotland, UK, DE.
They all have ranked choice but are tweaked to be proportional too.
MMP makes it proportional by also giving you a party vote which determines what proportion of seats that party should hold so that you don't get a situation like you described in Australia's last election. Better to watch a 2 minute video on it.
MMP is the most accurate/fair proportional system but more complex.
I know MMP, I live in Austria, you know, right next to Germany, and my wife's from there. MMP is something different than instant runoff, because it's primarily a proportional voting system with a ranked choice component tacked onto it.
What I meant is that having 5 candidates decided by ranked choice without the proportional part of MMP hardly helps, especially if these candidates just feed into an otherwise winner-takes-it-all system.