• ChaosSpectre@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Not that I think he had much in the way of empathy prior to this, but he lacks a filter of any kind which is a symptom I had to repeatedly apologize for when my grandfather’s dementia got worse.

    The dude has full on dementia, no one is doing anything and he will continue to degrade both himself and the reputation of anything associated with him as this keeps going.

    Funnily enough, dipshit donny might be the best publically perceivable evidence of the need for reform we will ever get.

    • Gazza_of_the_Overflow@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Reforms that are needed:

      1. Compulsory voting for all citizens
      2. Ranked choice voting system
      3. Age limits for politicians

      I’m sure there are more, but this is just off the top of my head.

      • huppakee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Plenty of countries have laws that fine or otherwise punish people that do not vote, afaik this doesn’t tend to lead to better functioning democracies. I think this is a thing where the carrot works better than the stick.

        • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          19 days ago

          Automatic voter registration based on citizenship. Boom, solves a big percentage of the problem.

          You’d be shocked how much a bit of minor paperwork stops a large percentage of people from doing the bare minimum.

      • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago
        1. I’d be less oppose if it’s accompanied with NOTA options.
        2. What if A gets 26% of the vote, B gets 25%, C gets 24%, D gets 15%, and E gets 10%?
        3. What should be the age limit for US Presidents? and should the 35 be lowered to 18? Ditto for US VPs?
        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          What if A gets 26% of the vote, B gets 25%, C gets 24%, D gets 15%, and E gets 10%?

          The standard method of ranked choice voting: E gets eliminated as they have the least, everyone who voted for them goes to their next ranked choice. Repeat until one person has over 50%.

          • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Please forgive any ignorance on my part, but would it be required that we’d know what the 2nd (and 3rd and 4th and so on) preferences of those who voted for E in the first choice?

            If so, and if such could be done, what if of those who voted for E on their first choice, in their second preference, half of them (i.e. half of 10% being 5%) voted for C, a third of them voted for B, and a sixth of them voted for A;

            meanwhile two-thirds of those who voted in their first preference for A, half of those who voted in their first preference for B, and a third of those who voted in their first preference for C, voted for D in their 2nd preference? —i.e. (⅔ x 26%) + (½ x 25%) + (⅓ x 24%) = 16⅔% + 12½% + 8% = 36⅚%.

              • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Thank you. 🙂

                1st count

                Bamboot got 39.

                Floundra got 35.

                Aggy-Waggy got 20.

                Gort got 6.

                But why did Bamboot get 4 of Gort’s votes while Aggy-Waggy got only 1, even though the latter got over half the number of the former?

                Shouldn’t it be 3+2+1 instead of 4+1+1?

                and why in the 3rd count did Floundra get 16 of Aggy-Waggy votes, while Bamboot got only 5 or less than 1/3rd?

                Presumably in a run-off, it would be Bamboot versus Floundra;

                while in proportional representation, the Complete Scumbag Party, Discreet Scumbag Party, the [Gort Butterson Party], and the Nice Party, in a parliament of 100 might get 39, 35, 6, and 20 seats respectively, with probably the Nice Party being in a coalition.

                Even if it was 1/2 PR and 1/2 FPP, each system electing 100 candidates (hence a parliament of 200), and in the FPP vote, the Complete Scumbag Party won 51 of the FFP seats, the Discreet Scumbad Party won 38 seats (i.e. less than 75% of the former’s number of seats, or conversely the former got over less than 35% the latter’s number of seats), the Nice Party won only 8 (2/5ths of what they won in the PR count) seats, and Gort won 3 seats it would still be:

                name PR FPP %
                Complete Scumbag Party 39 51 45
                Discreet Scumbag Party 35 38 36.5
                [Gort Butterson Party] 6 3 4.5
                Nice Party 20 8 14

                We could have 3 possible coalitions:

                Complete Scumbag Party & Discreet Scumbag Party most powerful but least probable
                Complete Scumbag Party & Nice Party most probable
                Discreet Scumbag Party & Gort Butterson Party & Nice Party possible, but probably most unstable
                • sys110x@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  But why did Bamboot get 4 of Gort’s votes while Aggy-Waggy got only 1, even though the latter got over half the number of the former?

                  Because Bamboot isn’t getting Gort’s votes. Now that Gort is eliminated, all of the voters that voted Gort #1 now have their #2 vote counted as if it’s their #1 vote.

                  • 4 people that voted Gort #1 voted Bamboot #2.
                  • 1 person that voted Gort #1 voted Floundra #2.
                  • 1 person that voted Gort #1 voted Aggy-Waggy #2.

                  This keeps happening down the choices until someone has a majority. People that voted Floundra #1 don’t end up having their #2 vote counted because their candidate wasn’t eliminated in the end. This is why it’s not possible to throw your vote away have your vote taken away - if your favourite candidate is eliminated, your vote goes to your second favourite, then your third favourite, etc until someone has the majority.

                  Not sure what it looks like in the US, but Australian ballot slips have all the candidates and you number them 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.