• Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 day ago

    Let’s let the class decide what type of pizza to get.

    Counting the votes, pepperoni wins.

    Counting the votes at each table, then each counting the winner per table, pepperoni wins.

    Arbitrarily dividing each table into “groups” of students, then adding those groups up to determine which choice won the table, then counting the tables… anchovies wins!

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      A better analogy

      Counting the votes- pepperoni wins.
      There’s a lot of vegetarians but they don’t make up an absolute majority so their needs are ignored.

      Counting the votes at each table- cheese wins, because even the two huge tables want pepperoni, many of the smaller tables are mostly vegetarians who don’t eat pepperoni.
      This is why the electoral college is still relevant- to ensure that urban voters don’t bowl over suburban or rural voters who deserve to have a say in government too.

      Dividing each table into groups then adding them together- that’s a scam by a pepperoni fan because they will ensure every group has 5 known pepperoni lovers and 2 others.

      • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Okay, but cheese does not win in this system because pepperoni lovers can tolerate it while vegetarians cannot eat pepperoni. Nor does it win because minorities are getting more representation in general. Cheese wins here purely because you’ve arranged the voting system to give more power to the ones you wanted to win.

        Dividing each table into groups then adding them together- that’s a scam by a pepperoni fan because they will ensure every group has 5 known pepperoni lovers and 2 others.

        If it’s possible to ensure such majority of pepperoni lovers in every single group, then pepperoni lovers have an overall majority. They don’t need scams to win. In fact - you’d need scams to prevent them from winning.

      • uniquethrowagay@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        There are better ways to achieve local representation while still respecting the nationwide percentages. See Germany’s federal voting system for example.

      • Zorg@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 day ago

        Isn’t the House and the Senate already skewed in rural areas favor? Do urban voters really need to be kneecapped all across government?

        • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          That’s the whole point of the House-Senate split- that the more populous urban areas get more representation in the House, but proportionately less in the Senate.

          That said- gerrymandering has fucked that up hardcore. The solution though is to stop gerrymandering, not to give urban areas universal control over the Presidency.

          If you make the Presidency a popular vote only, then candidates will campaign in every major city and won’t give a fuck what rural areas want.

          • Burninator05@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            12 hours ago

            If you make the Presidency a popular vote only, then candidates will campaign in every major city and won’t give a fuck what rural areas want.

            You may not be wrong but with the current system candidates pretty much only campaign in swing states. If you’re in a reliably red or blue state you likely arent getting a visit from a candidate.

        • infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          The senate sure is. The house get reapportioned after every census to stay more or less proportional to population differences.