Like I said, you can argue what is better, I don't think this system is good either, still it isn't the same thing as overruling the will of the majority.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @verylargeant @arthur_affect
In my first tweet I said that you'd be right in saying that doing things this way overrules the will of the plurality, but not the majority. The whole problem comes from the fact that the will of the majority is undetermined.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I think your argument about "there's no candidate "Somebody Else" is interesting, because the people whose votes would be disregarded if the nomination goes to whoever won the plurality didn't vote for that candidate either.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @verylargeant @ImpPercyPtible
The difference between a plurality and a majority is not "anal retentive" jfc it means the actual majority voted against you
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @verylargeant @ImpPercyPtible
FPTP plurality-wins is regarded by almost everyone who seriously studies elections as a horrible way to run elections Nobody actually designs a system that way on purpose, it just ends up happening because people don't anticipate elections with more than two parties
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
The general election itself for the presidency doesn't actually work that way at the national level, if nobody has an actual majority of electors then it gets thrown to the House of Representatives
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.