politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I want to get rid of FPTP voting but a recent veritasium video has me wondering if we should try something better than RCV.
Not saying I would vote no on RCV, but if we're going to change the voting method, let's do it in a way ensures that the people are best represented.
There are many better systems than RCV, but if has two things going for it:
With all due respect to Veritasium, perfect here is definitely the enemy of good. RCV is maybe the least good of many better-than-FPTP options, and has flaws; however, any argument for doing better than RCV based on "it has flaws" will always end up with arguing that we should use the Condorcet method, which would be impossible to approve and possibly impossible to implement.
The next best thing to RCV is far less of an improvement over RCV than RCV is over FPTP. I'd rather have STAR, but all of these options are broadly unknown, difficult to explain, and more complex to execute by hand than RCV. I'd rather have something, than stay stuck on FPTP.
I don't disagree one bit.
I just want people to realize that anything is better than FPTP but we shouldn't stop at RCV. We should relentlessly pursue democracy, ensuring that The People are represented in the most accurate way possible.
So yes, vote for RCV. But don't let it be the destination.
Agreed 🤝