On 6 May 2015 at 08:38, John Mikes <[email protected]> wrote: > Quadratic, or not there are two things about voting: > > 1. The 'pre-WWII' Hungarian system (I am far from suggesting Hungary as a > good political pattern) with 2 lists per party: one of the districts and > one latent national for the leading names in the party. > EVERY VOTE COUNTS: if somebody gets within the District the fixed number > of votes for being elected, so be it and the excess goes to the national > list. If somebody does NOT get elected, all the votes (s)he got go onto the > national list, from where the names are considered one after the other as > the (pre)fixed number of votes accumulated for an election-need. > As I hear the system is still on. > > This is much superior than the Gerrymandered unjustice of the USA. > > 2. I do not approve a 'voting' of just "YES-men". There should be a way to > express a " N O " to the candidate, or proposal. > > What I completely disapprove is the Big Money influence on the voting. Any > candidate should get identical expense-money once fulfilled the conditions > of running lawfully and NO MORE from NO SOURCE. Give the voter a chance to > freely compare the proposals and make up their mind in the privacy of their > home. > Nobody should be inundated with ads etc. > > I agree with everything you say here.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
