Difference between revisions of "Voting systems"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (slight update: "about" section, category rename) |
(→Articles: Declared-Strategy Voting; updated URL for Hively article; core argument-quote from Hively) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
* {{wikipedia|voting system}} | * {{wikipedia|voting system}} | ||
===Articles=== | ===Articles=== | ||
| − | * [http:// | + | * '''1996''': [http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/diss/book.html Declared-Strategy Voting: An Instrument for Group Decision-Making] by Lorrie Faith Cranor |
| + | ** [http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/diss/node3.html Voting Systems Overview] | ||
| + | *** [http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/diss/node4.html Vote Aggregation Methods] | ||
| + | * '''1996-11''': [http://spot.colorado.edu/~mcguire/hively.html Math Against Tyranny]: by Will Hively: " When you cast your vote this month, you're not directly electing the president – you're electing members of the [[wikipedia:United States Electoral College|electoral college]]. They elect the president. An archaic, unnecessary system? Mathematics shows, says one concerned American, that by giving your vote to another, you're ensuring the future of our democracy." Note, however, that in the {{USA}} this only applies to the [[President of the United States|Presidency]]. | ||
| + | ** "[[James Madison]], chief architect of our nation's electoral college, wanted to protect each citizen against the most insidious tyranny that arises in democracies: the massed power of fellow citizens banded together in a dominant bloc. As Madison explained in The Federalist Papers (Number X), "a well-constructed Union" must, above all else, "break and control the violence of faction," especially "the superior force of an . . . overbearing majority." In any democracy, a majority's power threatens minorities. It threatens their rights, their property, and sometimes their lives." It's clear that Madison was against direct democracy, but his argument doesn't really make sense. How does the Electoral College (or representative democracy in general) make factionalism any less likely? | ||
Revision as of 19:20, 17 April 2011
About
|
This page is a seed article. You can help Issuepedia water it: make a request to expand a given page and/or donate to help give us more writing-hours!
|
Reference
- Particular Systems
- Collections & Discussion
- ElectionMethods.org
- ElectoRama! wiki
- Voting Simulation Visualizations by Ka-Ping Yee (posted 2005-04-21, updated 2006-07-31)
Related Pages
- virtual voting districts
- InstaGov: a voting-related project on Issuepedia
Links
Reference
Articles
- 1996: Declared-Strategy Voting: An Instrument for Group Decision-Making by Lorrie Faith Cranor
- 1996-11: Math Against Tyranny: by Will Hively: " When you cast your vote this month, you're not directly electing the president – you're electing members of the electoral college. They elect the president. An archaic, unnecessary system? Mathematics shows, says one concerned American, that by giving your vote to another, you're ensuring the future of our democracy." Note, however, that in the United States this only applies to the Presidency.
- "James Madison, chief architect of our nation's electoral college, wanted to protect each citizen against the most insidious tyranny that arises in democracies: the massed power of fellow citizens banded together in a dominant bloc. As Madison explained in The Federalist Papers (Number X), "a well-constructed Union" must, above all else, "break and control the violence of faction," especially "the superior force of an . . . overbearing majority." In any democracy, a majority's power threatens minorities. It threatens their rights, their property, and sometimes their lives." It's clear that Madison was against direct democracy, but his argument doesn't really make sense. How does the Electoral College (or representative democracy in general) make factionalism any less likely?