I spoke to a professor who has been studying this issue for decades, and he says that yes, America should adopt a hybrid parliamentary system. Here’s the link if you want to listen: sharonmcmahon.com/podca… (or just google “Sharon McMahon Mac Stearns” and you’ll get to the page.
I spoke to a professor who has been studying this issue for decades, and he says that yes, America should adopt a hybrid parliamentary system. Here’s the link if you want to listen: https://sharonmcmahon.com/podcast/reimagining-democracy-with-max-stearns (or just google “Sharon McMahon Mac Stearns” and you’ll get to the page.
Excited to listen to this interview. I am already captured by the intro blurb: "Many voters are familiar with this scene: You walk into a voting booth, review the options, and feel as though you’re voting between 'the lesser of two evils.' You might worry that voting third-party is wasting a vote, but you don’t feel represented by the main candidates. Sound familiar? If you’re like the majority of Americans, you probably find yourself frustrated with the two-party system and a historically unproductive Congress. What if it didn’t have to be that way?"
I would encourage our group to also learn more about Approval Voting. Because then a voter never has to feel like they are throwing their vote away. Approval Voting let's voters select all candidates they *approve of* for the position, and which ever candidate gets the most approval votes, wins!
So if you like a third-party candidate, you can vote third-party AND for a major candidate (to hedge your bets). Approval Voting makes it possible for voters to ALWAYS vote their favorite candidate(s). Also, consider a Primary election where there are 6+ candidates, Approval Voting means you no longer are "splitting votes" because if you like 3 (or more) of the 6+ candidates, you can vote for all three.
This method of voting actually *encourages competition* through *more choice*. Whereas, if you think about today's Primary landscape, candidates tend to drop out because they worry about splitting votes and having the least favored candidate win their party's nomination.
Also, because every voter could vote for ANY candidate, candidates would be encouraged to truly win over ANY voter, because it's no longer about *stealing votes* from another candidate, it becomes about simply appealing to voters. Voters don't have to be concerned with the tradeoffs of voting for one candidate and sacrificing a "winning" vote, they can just focus on whether they would approve of any candidate winning or not.
I am feeling SO grateful for this link. I’ve been wondering about this question for awhile and of course you’re on it and have been for a long time! You have so much great content - thank you for that!
Approval Voting actually *encourages competition* through *more choice*. Whereas, if you think about today's Primary landscape, candidates tend to drop out because they worry about splitting votes and having the least favored candidate win their party's nomination.
Also, because every voter could vote for ANY candidate, candidates would be encouraged to truly win over ANY voter, because it's no longer about *stealing votes* from another candidate, it becomes about simply appealing to voters. Voters don't have to be concerned with the tradeoffs of voting for one candidate and sacrificing a "winning" vote, they can just focus on whether they would approve of any candidate winning or not.
I spoke to a professor who has been studying this issue for decades, and he says that yes, America should adopt a hybrid parliamentary system. Here’s the link if you want to listen: https://sharonmcmahon.com/podcast/reimagining-democracy-with-max-stearns (or just google “Sharon McMahon Mac Stearns” and you’ll get to the page.
MAX Stearns 😊
Excited to listen to this interview. I am already captured by the intro blurb: "Many voters are familiar with this scene: You walk into a voting booth, review the options, and feel as though you’re voting between 'the lesser of two evils.' You might worry that voting third-party is wasting a vote, but you don’t feel represented by the main candidates. Sound familiar? If you’re like the majority of Americans, you probably find yourself frustrated with the two-party system and a historically unproductive Congress. What if it didn’t have to be that way?"
I would encourage our group to also learn more about Approval Voting. Because then a voter never has to feel like they are throwing their vote away. Approval Voting let's voters select all candidates they *approve of* for the position, and which ever candidate gets the most approval votes, wins!
So if you like a third-party candidate, you can vote third-party AND for a major candidate (to hedge your bets). Approval Voting makes it possible for voters to ALWAYS vote their favorite candidate(s). Also, consider a Primary election where there are 6+ candidates, Approval Voting means you no longer are "splitting votes" because if you like 3 (or more) of the 6+ candidates, you can vote for all three.
This method of voting actually *encourages competition* through *more choice*. Whereas, if you think about today's Primary landscape, candidates tend to drop out because they worry about splitting votes and having the least favored candidate win their party's nomination.
Also, because every voter could vote for ANY candidate, candidates would be encouraged to truly win over ANY voter, because it's no longer about *stealing votes* from another candidate, it becomes about simply appealing to voters. Voters don't have to be concerned with the tradeoffs of voting for one candidate and sacrificing a "winning" vote, they can just focus on whether they would approve of any candidate winning or not.
I am feeling SO grateful for this link. I’ve been wondering about this question for awhile and of course you’re on it and have been for a long time! You have so much great content - thank you for that!
Approval Voting actually *encourages competition* through *more choice*. Whereas, if you think about today's Primary landscape, candidates tend to drop out because they worry about splitting votes and having the least favored candidate win their party's nomination.
Also, because every voter could vote for ANY candidate, candidates would be encouraged to truly win over ANY voter, because it's no longer about *stealing votes* from another candidate, it becomes about simply appealing to voters. Voters don't have to be concerned with the tradeoffs of voting for one candidate and sacrificing a "winning" vote, they can just focus on whether they would approve of any candidate winning or not.
Thank you. I’ve never heard of this.