Cadlillac agrees with Trump. Slave labour is what makes America great and the slaves love it apparently.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xNzXze5Yza8

Unfortunately Americans are not reading this thread :(

So MMP solves the problem, yes?

Ranked choice with a single member is better than FPTP.

5 candidates is closer to proportional but it is flawed because it is “low resolution”.

One could theoretically have a system to vote for hundreds/all seats for finer resolution but MMP is a tried and tested way to achieve the same.

We have come full circle to my initial comment…

Ranked choice allows for coalitions like in AU.

Maybe you mean Multi Member Proportional voting like NZ and DE. That is the best system but complicated. US cannot even deal with converting to metric so MMP would result in exploding heads.

I don’t think you understand the Australian Senate voting system or Tasmanian lower house or the MMP of Scotland, UK, DE.

They all have ranked choice but are tweaked to be proportional too.

MMP makes it proportional by also giving you a party vote which determines what proportion of seats that party should hold so that you don’t get a situation like you described in Australia’s last election. Better to watch a 2 minute video on it.

MMP is the most accurate/fair proportional system but more complex.

That’s massively skewed. Even though the difference is tiny, Labour got almost a 2/3 supermajority.

One way to remedy this would be to retain ranked choice but make the electorates/districts three times as large and elect three members in each. Just like how Tasmania does but with 5 members and 5 huge districts.

The Australian Senate voting does roughly what both houses of the Tasmanian state voting do and what you are calling for.

The Senate still has ranked choice but also proportional representation because of the multiple members in each district (in the Australian Senate the “district” is the entire state, with 6 members elected each time).

Federal Labor currently cannot pass any laws without Greens support in the senate (unless the conservatives support the bill).

Districts are fair because the member can be accessed by local constituents (in theory anyhow). US Gerrymandering is unfair. Australian Gerrymandering is nowhere near as bad.

Am not sure that any label can really work perfectly anyhow. I posed to an Australian Greens Senator in the pub the following:

If Greens ever become one of the two major parties then the ruthless power seekers will gravitate towards your party instead of the current major parties. How will the party be able to spot the wolves in sheep’s clothing?

His answer was “I don’t know. We discuss that often.”

Which struck me as the response of an honest and genuine person.

These coalitions still happen with ranked choice but only if a minor party is popular in a district.

Except for Tasmania in Australia where minor parties have an even better chance. It has only 5 districts for state elections and each district has 5 seats. Greens often get a seat because their candidate is 5th most popular in a district.

In other states they are now winning seats but fewer than Tasmania.

My parents escaped Communist Yugoslavia to Australia. Even I started off right wing until about age 30. Therein I voted Greens (not like the dodgy US Greens BTW) and after a while convinced my parents too.

I am still aware of how the extreme left can become authoritarian as happened in Yugoslavia. Tankies are oblivious. Need to be vigilant whichever party you side with.

Ranked choice allows for coalitions like in AU.

Maybe you mean Multi Member Proportional voting like NZ and DE. That is the best system but complicated. US cannot even deal with converting to metric so MMP would result in exploding heads.

deleted by creator

It would not have been a problem if you had ranked choice voting.

https://fairvote.org/

If Musk sets up his own party that would split the conservative vote so the Republicans would finally be open to ranked choice. Would probably require ⅔ majority in Congress.

But Dems might be too hungry for temporary power to support such a much needed fix.

Your comment contradicts the Wikipedia entry…

The War Powers Resolution (also known as the War Powers Resolution of 1973 or the War Powers Act) (50 U.S.C. ch. 33) is a federal law intended to check the U.S. president’s power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S. Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States congressional joint resolution. It provides that the president can send the U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, “statutory authorization”, or in case of “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces”.

Maximized efficiency at the expense of security. Can happen to anyone.

Potatoes are cheap by weight. Machine saw a single item and didn’t believe it was a potato. Not that anything looks similar; it just flags it for staff to check.

It will be remotely human run.

Consumer car

Podcast on 99% Invisible with the guy, also talking about other one handed keyboards on the market (and why they suck).

40 minute uncut video of Tesla robocar in LA. Impressive. It may be a cheat using remote drivers I suppose.

Here is a short video showing Tesla robocar ignoring a school bus’ stop signs and flashing lights.

Wow, that makes this thread all the more awesome. Thanks!

The phrase “Gandhi’s words are backed with nuclear” refers to a popular internet meme and in-joke related to the video game “Civilization.” In the game, Mahatma Gandhi, known for his non-violent philosophy in real life, has a tendency to become surprisingly aggressive and develop nuclear weapons in later stages of the game. This has led to the humorous association of his name with nuclear power, despite his actual historical stance.

I want philosophy direct from the Monarch! /s