This is why I was so fearful of the referendum on whether NZ should change their voting system. Most people actually don't understand or don't care and when they hear FPP they think 'Hey England, we should be like them'. But thank good ness MMP was still at 50% and people didn't want to change the status quo. <3
My only worry about it is the doubling of seats. We use a PR system over here in Ireland too. You get 1 vote and list candidates by preference, so technically you can vote for EVERYONE.
There are always flaws in a system. This "winning" system puts the parties in charge of who is in power. What happens on Kiwi Island if the result is 1000 parties (1 for every 5 residents)? This, of course, results when the "favorite" of a party thinks his party has gone afield of the message.
You end up having a "past the post" way of choosing the canidate, picked by one or two "superiors".
I've thought for a while that we (US Americans) need some kind of double-voting system, where we vote for who we want to win as well as who we can tolerate winning. But that's in presidential races. How can this be adapted to presidential elections?
@TheLonelyImmortal This can't be used in presidential elections. But there are others systems. There's one called range voting, where you simply rate each candidate, on a scale of say 0 to 10, and the candidate with the highest overall rating wins.
@TheLonelyImmortal Ireland has a system where you pick your 1st choice, 2nd choice, etc - all the way down the list of ALL candidates. Then if the person who's got the most 1st choices doesn't have 51% of votes, you eleminate those with the lowest number of 1st choices and spread those votes around to their 2nd choices. This continues until someone has the quarum. It sounds like it would be REALLY MESSY with a population as big as the US though.
@CGPGrey how are you deciding what members represent the different parts+ in the video you doubled the number of members compared to the number of constituencies that are to be represented how will this help who represents what?
The biggest problem in NZ with MMP is when it comes to coalitions, this is when a minor party gets into parliment as a part of another party therefore giving them their votes. This creates one of 2 things, 1. a big mess of parties trying to get in with the largest and most popular one, even if their opinions dont mix or 2. where a major party becomes bigger when other minor ones try and join them, making a hated-by-most party the leading one. So yeah... MMP is FAR from optimal
@GlusteeXD well in Germany we're using MMP since 1949.
Coalitions are surely no 'problem' they're very useful in my opinion.
If you have a bunch of parties with different points of view and one decides alone, every time the ruling party changes politics is making a about-turn, but if you have coalitions legislation gets way more steady.
This is way better than one party making some laws and the next ruling one changes them right away and says the opposite.
Hahaha, the ad on the side of my video was about reviewing MMP which we have here in New Zealand (hence all the New Zealand animal names). MMP is far from a perfect system.
The funniest thing is that In New Zealand were MMP started and is set in the story, 46% of people wanted to have FPTP instead, Ultimately there are way too many minor parties and they all have too much control over parliment! Last year the leading party almost didnt get in because a smaller party didnt want to side with them!
I like this idea, but I'm not happy about the party based system. Luckily, this eliminates most problems that I have with it in that if anyone does not fall under an already existant parties, a new party can be made and they can get a fair share of representation.
I agree with your points in this video but there are some serious problems with MMP. A representative government causes parties to have to create coalitions in order to have a majority when it comes to voting on big issues, which they create by conceding to the lesser policies of smaller represented parties. This causes policy and law change to slow, and things tend to slump to the middle line, where nothing happens.
The big problem with PR, however is in some places (eg. post WW1 Germany) there can be so many different parties that you need massive coalitions which creates massive problems...
I wish that Canada would implement this system, as it is, the political party in power (Conservative Party) has a majority rule with about 53% of the seats in parliament, but they received just under 40% of the popular vote. I'm not sure how many people voted strategically (I know I did), but I think the problem would be even more obvious if there was no strategic voting.
@TBman256 You can use a "voter initiative." Get a bunch of signatures, and then they have to put your measure on the ballot for everyone to vote on. This is how proposition 8 was done, for example. Changing the voting system wouldn't require a constitutional amendment. Article I section 4 of the US constitution says each state can determine the manner of its own elections. This also applies to the presidential election, since each state elects its own electors.
@macarion That is why, despite all the issues I have with the National Popular Vote initiative, I will never say it is unconstitutional. Although I just ran down a scenario where with the NPV as it is currently written, a party can win with less than 45% of the popular vote.
@pastoh1 "with the NPV as it is currently written, a party can win with less than 45% of the popular vote."
That's also possible with the electoral college. Bush won in 2000 with 47.9%. Clinton won in 1992 with 43%. Nixon 1968: 43.4%. Abraham Lincoln got 39.8% in 1860 and was elected. etc
@macarion Very true. And I have no problem with that. I haven't looked at the numbers (partly because I try to ignore the "popular vote") but I would suspect that the norm is for the president to be elected by only a plurality of the "popular vote"
@pastoh1 Then why did you say "Although I just ran down a scenario where with the NPV as it is currently written, a party can win with less than 45% of the popular vote"?
@macarion "Yes, MMP would work in the US." If any state in the USofA wants to use MMP for their states senates and delegates, they can. If they wish to use it to pick electorial college delegates, they can. If a party wants to pick a presidential canidate's delegates in this manner, they can.
Once that's done, it's up to the electorial college... if it's the president.
That's the beauty of the 9th and 10th amendments of the US Constitution.
This is good if every person sided with a party, but many people I know see themselves as independents so who do they choose with their second vote? Do they just have to side with one of the given parties?
@pineappleryan96 That's pretty unlikely, and even if the communist party gained one or two seats, they would have absolutely no power. Come on man, the cold war has been over for a long time. Join us in the 21st century.
@macarion "That's pretty unlikely, and even if the communist party gained one or two seats, they would have absolutely no power"
Not so. Here in the USofA, the Comminists have no seats in Congress, there is 1 socialist Congressman (a Senator)... but the Democrat Party votes more and more like them every day.
Video doesn't mention the issues of coalition governments and minor parties representing only ~5% of the voters holding the balance of power, being able to decide which major party governs and forcing their agenda (which is only supported by a tiny minority) through, holding the government to ransom.
These videos are excellent at explaining potentially confusing political systems, but need to be careful to take an impartial view - this makes MMP look perfect apart from list selection. It's not.
@darthcarnate That problem with coalition governments, not with MMP. Look to the UK with the Conservatives and the Lib Dems - same problems under FPP of all systems.
And the two election in which that happened in New Zealand, if held under FPP, would have resulted in hung parliaments and exactly the same problems!
@lcmortensen Coalition governments are more likely under MMP, as shown in the video. And New Zealand has had issues with minor parties, especially NZ First in the '90s, again and again dictating to the rest of the country. The Maori party are essentially threatening the same at present.
@darthcarnate But the Maori Party are not threatening loss of confidence or supply by breaking the agreement. National can sill govern 61-60. They just have to make sure they don't lose an MP during a budget debate (vacancy or naming), otherwise we could have a loss of supply, in which case: John Key and National must resign as Prime Minister and the government, and either Labour forms a government or we go to the polls.
One big problem with MMP was highlighted recently with the Auckland Central electorate. The National Party candidate won because a bunch of Green Party supporters voted for their candidate rather than the Labour candidate. This meant that although the electorate had largely voted centre left, the winning candidate was centre right. A preferential electorate vote would fix this.
@franzfanz That's the problem with the FPP electorate vote. Also, imagine what would happen in Epsom under a PV electorate vote if all the Labour and green voters gave their second preference to National - ACT would be extinct and asset sales would be off the agenda (NZ First would get the ACT seat in that case according to the Electoral Commissions calculator).
The comments regarding the ineffectiveness of this system make me laugh, because I'm in New Zealand and we have some of the most effective democratic representation in the world.
There is absolutely no way to reason FPTP over MMP.
Could you please make videos about Party-list proportional representation system (most used according to Wikipedia), and Schulze system (best according to you).
Usually in the direct vote (first vote) we can only choose from so many representatives (5 I think) while for the second vote we can chose between ~ 20 parties or more (depending on where you live). So most of the parties don´t even have direct candidates for many regions. Not to say this were good or bad. Just FYI.
ummm... just for everyones information Germany tried this after WWI in 1918-1933 and it was so ineffective and slow b/c of all the parties that it was able to be toppled by you know who BTW( it was called the Weimar Government) also wierd laws were passed b/c each party had to make deals with the other just to pass stuff. I hate to day this but thumbs up to start a flame war dicussion
@CGPGrey Actually, cjfields and you are both right. Both the Weimar and the Federal Republic use(d) a system with proportional representation. Back in the 20s it was ineffective and slow b/c of all the parties. Then a percentage barrier was established, meaning that only parties w/ over 5% are represented via party lists. There has been some debate on that being undemocratic because its dismisses the party votes of a fraction of citiziens, but so far it made the system work for Germany.
I'm German, and while I mostly agree there really are many benefits to MMP, the issues mentioned at 2:49 should really be considered: The political system will depend on parties (not a big problem), and it's VERY difficult for representatives (MPs etc.) to defy the official party line on certain issues (BIG problem) - they'd just get a lower list place, or none at all. Someone like, say, Ron Paul wouldn't stand much of a chance of getting elected here. Good or bad? You decide.
@FnordPerfect But if Paul were running in an MMP system, he would run in a third party. He wouldn't get elected in the main, first-half part of the election, but as a part of the party votes.
@FnordPerfect Ron Paul would have a BETTER chance of being elected, because the party system would be completely different, there wouldn't be just two
thaths why MMP is perhaps the worst system and the least democratic
it destroys the ability to vote for a person you like rather than what is dictated by a party. this makes opinions less diverse and despite a proportional representation the people have little say in what happens
In Sweden where i lived for sometime , opinions expressed by the parties are extremly simmiliar, none ever dares to vote against their party and governments often to things against the will of the people
@FnordPerfect But that is where list voting comes in. In Norway the voter can change the order of the list to their preference (don't really remember the exact rules right now). That means that Ron Paul might actually get a higher spot on the list, because enough people bumped him up from last spot to first spot, and when the final tally is over he ended up somewhere in the middle.
@cjfields2550 Um.. the global economic recession and the Versailles treaty had a lot more to do with the development of Weimar Germany than their voting system. Come on, man. History.
@cjfields2550 You are basicly right, but among other changes a 5% rule was implemented, which means any party getting under 5% on the second vote are denied representation in congress and their seats are devided among the other parties. On the other hand representatives of those parties could be voted directly into congress, by getting a majority of first votes in their districts.
@cjfields2550 . In the Weimar Republic congress was composed of so many small parties, that passing a law was impossible. Adding to that if the leading party gets under 50% of the votes (which is almost all the time) they have to form a coalition with one or more other parties to gain that majority. So basicly we put safeguards in place, to prevent anything like WW2/Hitler/Nazis/etc from happening again.
No, because it represents the peoples views. If tiger takes 11% of the vote to decrease leopard to 40%, they can join together to beat gorilla's 49%.
Also, if a party loses it's support to another party this way, it shows the actual opinions of the people, so it's just tough luck for the losing party, but they still get a proportional amount of seats with which to beat gorilla.
@axeldamm I live in the Netherlands and we have a similar system. The 3 biggest partys will create the government. And then there is the opposition wich has 150 seats, that will be devided by the percentages (as explainded in the video).
@axeldamm bolivia, Hungary, Lesotho, Germany, New Zealand, Romania and Venezuela. There is also a bunch of countries that use a form of MMP including the country i am from, Denmark.
3:23 ". . . in the local elections, citizens have to vote strategically." Agreed. This is the Spoiler Effect to which you allude in an earlier video /watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo.
3:46 "However, when it comes to voting for their favorite political party, this strategy doesn't matter. The more votes a party gets, the more representatives it has on the council." I agree that this _should_ happen. However, isn't this 2nd vote also vulnerable to the nefarious Spoiler Effect?
@cammerytzar Humans are animals, too... alas, it's easier to represent parties with animals from the region, more timeless and less inflammatory, too, than trying to use people and attributing this or that to them. When explaining a SYSTEM, it's far better NOT to complicate it by using politicians-minimize bias w/fluff. Easier to follow "squirrel&turtle like owl" than "Ventura&Kucinich like Paul" to learn a concept. Later, people can insert their OWN politicians worldwide.
@tavin15 It's also what us New Zealanders use, I believe we were one of the first countries to start using it :) Also he's using a bunch of native New Zealand animals (Kea, Kakapo, Kiwi, Tuatara) in his example. I don't have a clue why, though.
@toSTONEiGO That's already a given, and he said that on one of his first videos on the subject. These videos are to allow other methods IF they can't get rid of electoral college.
@TheEranster i see. there is no reason the have the electoral collage in the first place, as his other video explained. except whenever banks and big corporations benefit, dont expect there to be change.
I suppose I'd considère myself flattered as we have exactly that system in Switzerland.
PS : it would be pretty funny if you made a video about the swiss political system, but I srrongly advise you to stay clear of guns during that time. Just my two cents.
In your other video you make the U.S voting system seem bad, but in this you make this system seem good when the U.S system is actually VERY similar. Sooo ya
Its actually a parliamentary system. Representatives are decided by overall proportion. You are simply getting rid of the boundary lines without saying so. The problem with giving the power to the parties is that it again leads to voting problems within the party since those in power have no real obligation to let others have power they can rig it. The shortest distance method is a much better system. Even if it can lead to accidental overrepresentation of a particular party.
Are there any problems with the system, besides the popular regional votes screwing up the final council?
firecracker999999 12 hours ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Haha, nice use of native New Zealand animals :D, but the representation of the country is a bit shoddy XD.
Forewarn00 1 day ago
Office Space!!! 2:43
AttackoftheArab 1 day ago
I have to ask MR. Gery what is the software that you use to make these presentations?...
KingofNewAnglia 1 day ago in playlist Political Advice
This is why I was so fearful of the referendum on whether NZ should change their voting system. Most people actually don't understand or don't care and when they hear FPP they think 'Hey England, we should be like them'. But thank good ness MMP was still at 50% and people didn't want to change the status quo. <3
AlexChanNZ 2 days ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Why is the queen of New Zealand a Lion?
salamut2202 2 days ago
0:10 Its a minecraft Piggu! You must really like minecraft!
TheCleverJon 2 days ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
My only worry about it is the doubling of seats. We use a PR system over here in Ireland too. You get 1 vote and list candidates by preference, so technically you can vote for EVERYONE.
AdderSIG 2 days ago
There are always flaws in a system. This "winning" system puts the parties in charge of who is in power. What happens on Kiwi Island if the result is 1000 parties (1 for every 5 residents)? This, of course, results when the "favorite" of a party thinks his party has gone afield of the message.
You end up having a "past the post" way of choosing the canidate, picked by one or two "superiors".
Wetta cries foul.
bsabruzzo 3 days ago
@bsabruzzo Parties would have to have a certain threshold of support to get on the ballot. You wouldn't have 1000 parties.
macarion 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@macarion "Parties would have to have a certain threshold of support to get on the ballot. You wouldn't have 1000 parties."
And if 1000 parties appear and nobody reaches that threashold... or they make alliances and they all make the threashold?
What is nobody agrees? Who decides the threashold?
Wetta still feels out numbered and thinks the parties shouldn't decide for her.
bsabruzzo 3 days ago
@bsabruzzo I don't think you understand... 1000 parties? It just doesn't happen, and they things preventing how they do it
AlexChanNZ 2 days ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Kakapo! o/
CaptainSatkins 3 days ago in playlist Grey Explains
I've thought for a while that we (US Americans) need some kind of double-voting system, where we vote for who we want to win as well as who we can tolerate winning. But that's in presidential races. How can this be adapted to presidential elections?
TheLonelyImmortal 3 days ago
@TheLonelyImmortal This can't be used in presidential elections. But there are others systems. There's one called range voting, where you simply rate each candidate, on a scale of say 0 to 10, and the candidate with the highest overall rating wins.
macarion 3 days ago
@TheLonelyImmortal Ireland has a system where you pick your 1st choice, 2nd choice, etc - all the way down the list of ALL candidates. Then if the person who's got the most 1st choices doesn't have 51% of votes, you eleminate those with the lowest number of 1st choices and spread those votes around to their 2nd choices. This continues until someone has the quarum. It sounds like it would be REALLY MESSY with a population as big as the US though.
AdderSIG 2 days ago
@CGPGrey how are you deciding what members represent the different parts+ in the video you doubled the number of members compared to the number of constituencies that are to be represented how will this help who represents what?
ConvexVortex 4 days ago in playlist Grey Explains
say hello to LUMBERGH FOR ME!!
lmao
chrisfur2 5 days ago
Okay, question--and be honest: Are the names an Office Space reference?
Pyroclasticman 5 days ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
That´s what we have in Germany. Not perfect, but from all videos I have seen on your channel this seems to be the most reasonable so far.
Nightyyou 5 days ago
Not bad, but sortition is the best system I've heard of.
CullTheLivingFlower 6 days ago
I'd support this over the current system in Canada.
TrueMetis 6 days ago in playlist Grey Explains (All)
As an american I have to say this will tragically just confuse everyone.
ladelame1 6 days ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
I like Kiwi :D
MoNNekoAlways 6 days ago
Video on schulze?
123easyway 6 days ago in playlist Politics in the Animal Kingdom
why is it so complicated?! D:<
dipsaucerose 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@dipsaucerose It's not.
macarion 1 week ago
The biggest problem in NZ with MMP is when it comes to coalitions, this is when a minor party gets into parliment as a part of another party therefore giving them their votes. This creates one of 2 things, 1. a big mess of parties trying to get in with the largest and most popular one, even if their opinions dont mix or 2. where a major party becomes bigger when other minor ones try and join them, making a hated-by-most party the leading one. So yeah... MMP is FAR from optimal
GlusteeXD 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@GlusteeXD well in Germany we're using MMP since 1949.
Coalitions are surely no 'problem' they're very useful in my opinion.
If you have a bunch of parties with different points of view and one decides alone, every time the ruling party changes politics is making a about-turn, but if you have coalitions legislation gets way more steady.
This is way better than one party making some laws and the next ruling one changes them right away and says the opposite.
You can't make progress like that.
Aqui1us 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (All) 7
Hahaha, the ad on the side of my video was about reviewing MMP which we have here in New Zealand (hence all the New Zealand animal names). MMP is far from a perfect system.
Sophieetta0627 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains
haha that ballet said :Lumbergh, Milton, Peter, Samir, Michael,
office space much?
ledzeppelinfan1970 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (All)
I'd shit my pants if Kakpo(es) were ever elected - only the dumbest birds around. But they are cute. Hmm...
k1awdttt 1 week ago 2
The funniest thing is that In New Zealand were MMP started and is set in the story, 46% of people wanted to have FPTP instead, Ultimately there are way too many minor parties and they all have too much control over parliment! Last year the leading party almost didnt get in because a smaller party didnt want to side with them!
GlusteeXD 1 week ago
2:45 Thumbs up if you got the Office Space reference!
grsims20 1 week ago
are you god?
TheHossaim 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
I like this idea, but I'm not happy about the party based system. Luckily, this eliminates most problems that I have with it in that if anyone does not fall under an already existant parties, a new party can be made and they can get a fair share of representation.
PYates77 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
in germany there is mmp ^^
humeNinja98 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains
I agree with your points in this video but there are some serious problems with MMP. A representative government causes parties to have to create coalitions in order to have a majority when it comes to voting on big issues, which they create by conceding to the lesser policies of smaller represented parties. This causes policy and law change to slow, and things tend to slump to the middle line, where nothing happens.
TabbyKate 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains
@TabbyKate Pretty much yea.
We have that exact system and problem in The Netherlands atm..
Iceshoot 1 week ago
@TabbyKate in germany its the same, but the good thing about this is, that the partys cant do what they want
humeNinja98 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains
or just have run off voting
MyFileVlog 1 week ago
The big problem with PR, however is in some places (eg. post WW1 Germany) there can be so many different parties that you need massive coalitions which creates massive problems...
Flubberfish96 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Isn't this Canada eh?
Simphany 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@CGPGrey
What tea do you drink, * im british* I like Earl Gray.What do you like :3?
MrThrift123 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains
i love the office space reference!
BevanstheNerd 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (All)
Go NZ theme
thomars9 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Office Space reference at 2:40. Love it
drumline17 1 week ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
Read this if you want to know more about the history of proportional representation in the United States. It's pretty interesting.
mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/articles/Brief%20History%20of%20PR.htm
macarion 1 week ago
I wish that Canada would implement this system, as it is, the political party in power (Conservative Party) has a majority rule with about 53% of the seats in parliament, but they received just under 40% of the popular vote. I'm not sure how many people voted strategically (I know I did), but I think the problem would be even more obvious if there was no strategic voting.
observatrice10 2 weeks ago
how do we get the government to change the voting system? is there a petition we can sign or something?
TBman256 2 weeks ago
@TBman256 You can use a "voter initiative." Get a bunch of signatures, and then they have to put your measure on the ballot for everyone to vote on. This is how proposition 8 was done, for example. Changing the voting system wouldn't require a constitutional amendment. Article I section 4 of the US constitution says each state can determine the manner of its own elections. This also applies to the presidential election, since each state elects its own electors.
macarion 2 weeks ago 8
@macarion thanks :)
TBman256 2 weeks ago
@macarion That is why, despite all the issues I have with the National Popular Vote initiative, I will never say it is unconstitutional. Although I just ran down a scenario where with the NPV as it is currently written, a party can win with less than 45% of the popular vote.
pastoh1 1 day ago in playlist Grey Explains
@pastoh1 "with the NPV as it is currently written, a party can win with less than 45% of the popular vote."
That's also possible with the electoral college. Bush won in 2000 with 47.9%. Clinton won in 1992 with 43%. Nixon 1968: 43.4%. Abraham Lincoln got 39.8% in 1860 and was elected. etc
macarion 1 day ago
@macarion Very true. And I have no problem with that. I haven't looked at the numbers (partly because I try to ignore the "popular vote") but I would suspect that the norm is for the president to be elected by only a plurality of the "popular vote"
pastoh1 1 day ago in playlist Grey Explains
This has been flagged as spam show
@pastoh1 Then why did you say "Although I just ran down a scenario where with the NPV as it is currently written, a party can win with less than 45% of the popular vote"?
macarion 1 day ago
@TBman256
2nd amendment
darkblood626 2 weeks ago
@darkblood626 (sinister grin)
TBman256 1 week ago
kea happens to be the political party of Initech.
mlm382 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
beauty, true beauty
awesomeness at its finest
notpointed 2 weeks ago
Ireland has that system
Hajeh22 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
This has been flagged as spam show
lol the hearts at 2:54
kiaofz 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
lol the hearts at 2:55
kiaofz 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
politics we meet again
themass109 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Haha, I've always loved MMP, SM might be alright if we were to have gotten rid of MMP. Anyways, would MMP work in the US?
DiamondtheSimon 2 weeks ago
@DiamondtheSimon Why wouldn't MMP work in the US?
macarion 2 weeks ago
@macarion I don't know, that's why I was asking.
DiamondtheSimon 2 weeks ago
@DiamondtheSimon Yes, MMP would work in the US.
macarion 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@macarion "Yes, MMP would work in the US." If any state in the USofA wants to use MMP for their states senates and delegates, they can. If they wish to use it to pick electorial college delegates, they can. If a party wants to pick a presidential canidate's delegates in this manner, they can.
Once that's done, it's up to the electorial college... if it's the president.
That's the beauty of the 9th and 10th amendments of the US Constitution.
bsabruzzo 3 days ago
This is good if every person sided with a party, but many people I know see themselves as independents so who do they choose with their second vote? Do they just have to side with one of the given parties?
koibitooflife89 2 weeks ago
@koibitooflife89 They'd vote for the party they like the most. That's completely fair.
macarion 2 weeks ago
well I don't want the communist party gaining any seats... so no thanks I'll stick with the 5 major choices here in Canada
pineappleryan96 2 weeks ago
@pineappleryan96 That's pretty unlikely, and even if the communist party gained one or two seats, they would have absolutely no power. Come on man, the cold war has been over for a long time. Join us in the 21st century.
macarion 2 weeks ago
@macarion Still, the threat may not come from the USSR but maybe one of it's fast growing allies....
pineappleryan96 2 weeks ago
@pineappleryan96 No.
macarion 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@macarion "That's pretty unlikely, and even if the communist party gained one or two seats, they would have absolutely no power"
Not so. Here in the USofA, the Comminists have no seats in Congress, there is 1 socialist Congressman (a Senator)... but the Democrat Party votes more and more like them every day.
Never say never.
bsabruzzo 3 days ago
Vote Hedgehog!
OmniLemm 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
What happens when people start tactically voting on the 'favourite party' vote as well?
Smiffy496 3 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@Smiffy496 How could they vote tactically in that situation?
macarion 2 weeks ago
This is the system in Sweden too.
Generalizor 3 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains
Gah, the US needs to change to this system since we can't get past the stupid party systems.
KittenKoder 3 weeks ago
Will you ever make a video on range voting?
macarion 3 weeks ago
Video doesn't mention the issues of coalition governments and minor parties representing only ~5% of the voters holding the balance of power, being able to decide which major party governs and forcing their agenda (which is only supported by a tiny minority) through, holding the government to ransom.
These videos are excellent at explaining potentially confusing political systems, but need to be careful to take an impartial view - this makes MMP look perfect apart from list selection. It's not.
darthcarnate 3 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@darthcarnate That problem with coalition governments, not with MMP. Look to the UK with the Conservatives and the Lib Dems - same problems under FPP of all systems.
And the two election in which that happened in New Zealand, if held under FPP, would have resulted in hung parliaments and exactly the same problems!
lcmortensen 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
@lcmortensen Coalition governments are more likely under MMP, as shown in the video. And New Zealand has had issues with minor parties, especially NZ First in the '90s, again and again dictating to the rest of the country. The Maori party are essentially threatening the same at present.
darthcarnate 3 weeks ago
@darthcarnate But the Maori Party are not threatening loss of confidence or supply by breaking the agreement. National can sill govern 61-60. They just have to make sure they don't lose an MP during a budget debate (vacancy or naming), otherwise we could have a loss of supply, in which case: John Key and National must resign as Prime Minister and the government, and either Labour forms a government or we go to the polls.
lcmortensen 3 weeks ago
Office space refrence
TheMrSpookyMan 3 weeks ago
Where's the image credit for the minecraft wolf? D:
Zekulio 3 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
We call this A(dditional)M(emeber)S(ystem) in the UK - Scotland uses it...
alexpbyron 3 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
The problem in America is party affiliation. This only would pit Democrats vs Republicans more against each other.
Shmiefman 4 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@Shmiefman No, it wouldn't. Other parties would gain power.
macarion 3 weeks ago
One big problem with MMP was highlighted recently with the Auckland Central electorate. The National Party candidate won because a bunch of Green Party supporters voted for their candidate rather than the Labour candidate. This meant that although the electorate had largely voted centre left, the winning candidate was centre right. A preferential electorate vote would fix this.
franzfanz 1 month ago
@franzfanz That's the problem with the FPP electorate vote. Also, imagine what would happen in Epsom under a PV electorate vote if all the Labour and green voters gave their second preference to National - ACT would be extinct and asset sales would be off the agenda (NZ First would get the ACT seat in that case according to the Electoral Commissions calculator).
lcmortensen 3 weeks ago
@CGPGrey Great videos man, keep it up! Also, loving the Office Space references :)
ryaninja0 1 month ago
Informative and interesting video, plus, the Office Space reference thrown in made me laugh.
psygaud 1 month ago in playlist Politics in the Animal Kingdom
how can the owl parrot get 3%?
cozcat42 1 month ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
This is the current system in Belgium too. Awesome :D
cyberhacker13 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
"Prevents minority rule"
WHITE POWER!?!?!
Coastergeekperson04 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
We in Sweden i kinda using this as well, right?
heuykiller 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
USA FOR MMP ??
p0wer5000 1 month ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey 22
Why do you people even question this guy? He obviously does his research. :D
TheArtificialEdge 1 month ago
I believe this is what Scotland and Wales have, but not the rest of the UK.
Wildifepro 1 month ago
As it is as far as I know to be also Finland's current system.. And propably many other countries' as well
FinestSeven 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
This is pretty much what we have going on in my country.
MrZay333 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
This reminds me of the system we've got in Denmark - Can anybody back this up? :)
B1aDK 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Office Space FTW
AvsJoe 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
The comments regarding the ineffectiveness of this system make me laugh, because I'm in New Zealand and we have some of the most effective democratic representation in the world.
There is absolutely no way to reason FPTP over MMP.
Jessesse7 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
so I get the feeling you seem to like the Schulze voting (or you were just bored and surrounded it with hearts for one frame for no reason.
care to do a video on that eventually?
Exarian 1 month ago
Could you please make videos about Party-list proportional representation system (most used according to Wikipedia), and Schulze system (best according to you).
ericnaughty 1 month ago
Just a little FYI:
Usually in the direct vote (first vote) we can only choose from so many representatives (5 I think) while for the second vote we can chose between ~ 20 parties or more (depending on where you live). So most of the parties don´t even have direct candidates for many regions. Not to say this were good or bad. Just FYI.
MellonVegan 1 month ago
Schulze is the best; wrote a paper about it <3
ElToastManz 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Are you going to make a vid for STV?
ajuk1 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains
2:45
the names of the guys in the movie Office Space lol
TnEEn 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
in a perfect world.
SmartStupidGenius 1 month ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
Hmm, I think this might be a metaphor.
PossumCuber 1 month ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
This has been flagged as spam show
ummm... just for everyones information Germany tried this after WWI in 1918-1933 and it was so ineffective and slow b/c of all the parties that it was able to be toppled by you know who BTW( it was called the Weimar Government) also wierd laws were passed b/c each party had to make deals with the other just to pass stuff. I hate to day this but thumbs up to start a flame war dicussion
cjfields2550 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@cjfields2550 This is Germany's *current* system. They're doing pretty well for themselves.
CGPGrey 1 month ago 84
@CGPGrey Actually, cjfields and you are both right. Both the Weimar and the Federal Republic use(d) a system with proportional representation. Back in the 20s it was ineffective and slow b/c of all the parties. Then a percentage barrier was established, meaning that only parties w/ over 5% are represented via party lists. There has been some debate on that being undemocratic because its dismisses the party votes of a fraction of citiziens, but so far it made the system work for Germany.
gesamtszenario 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@CGPGrey do you plan on making a video about list PR? and if not, what is your opinion on it?
loran1212 1 month ago
@CGPGrey
I'm German, and while I mostly agree there really are many benefits to MMP, the issues mentioned at 2:49 should really be considered: The political system will depend on parties (not a big problem), and it's VERY difficult for representatives (MPs etc.) to defy the official party line on certain issues (BIG problem) - they'd just get a lower list place, or none at all. Someone like, say, Ron Paul wouldn't stand much of a chance of getting elected here. Good or bad? You decide.
FnordPerfect 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order) 24
@FnordPerfect But if Paul were running in an MMP system, he would run in a third party. He wouldn't get elected in the main, first-half part of the election, but as a part of the party votes.
iphillip1 1 month ago
@FnordPerfect Ron Paul would have a BETTER chance of being elected, because the party system would be completely different, there wouldn't be just two
macarion 4 weeks ago
@FnordPerfect
thaths why MMP is perhaps the worst system and the least democratic
it destroys the ability to vote for a person you like rather than what is dictated by a party. this makes opinions less diverse and despite a proportional representation the people have little say in what happens
In Sweden where i lived for sometime , opinions expressed by the parties are extremly simmiliar, none ever dares to vote against their party and governments often to things against the will of the people
unfad1ng 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains
@FnordPerfect But that is where list voting comes in. In Norway the voter can change the order of the list to their preference (don't really remember the exact rules right now). That means that Ron Paul might actually get a higher spot on the list, because enough people bumped him up from last spot to first spot, and when the final tally is over he ended up somewhere in the middle.
TheAurgelmir 1 week ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Comment removed
BackupFolder 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CGPGrey We're not 'doing well'. When one thing can describe germans then it's being unsatisfied with everything :D
No, really. The germans are voting for the 'less bad alternative', because the small partys 'have no chance anyway'.
And even math can't prevent it. :(
BackupFolder 3 weeks ago
@CGPGrey At least we have no voter participation of 140%
HerrEilig 3 weeks ago
@cjfields2550 germany currently use this system and they're fine. post-1918 they used closed-list party list proportional representation, not mmp
everythoughtisyou 1 month ago 2
@cjfields2550 Um.. the global economic recession and the Versailles treaty had a lot more to do with the development of Weimar Germany than their voting system. Come on, man. History.
CrawdaddyJoe 1 month ago
@cjfields2550 You are basicly right, but among other changes a 5% rule was implemented, which means any party getting under 5% on the second vote are denied representation in congress and their seats are devided among the other parties. On the other hand representatives of those parties could be voted directly into congress, by getting a majority of first votes in their districts.
Iamgercornholio 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order) 2
@cjfields2550 . In the Weimar Republic congress was composed of so many small parties, that passing a law was impossible. Adding to that if the leading party gets under 50% of the votes (which is almost all the time) they have to form a coalition with one or more other parties to gain that majority. So basicly we put safeguards in place, to prevent anything like WW2/Hitler/Nazis/etc from happening again.
Iamgercornholio 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order) 2
politics, poli means many
tics? a blood sucking insect.
lvutodeath 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains
@heyandy889
No, because it represents the peoples views. If tiger takes 11% of the vote to decrease leopard to 40%, they can join together to beat gorilla's 49%.
Also, if a party loses it's support to another party this way, it shows the actual opinions of the people, so it's just tough luck for the losing party, but they still get a proportional amount of seats with which to beat gorilla.
adamwisdish95 1 month ago
Comment removed
haliburtondrum 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
Which countries use this method of election?
axeldamm 1 month ago in playlist Flere videoer fra CGPGrey
@axeldamm I live in the Netherlands and we have a similar system. The 3 biggest partys will create the government. And then there is the opposition wich has 150 seats, that will be devided by the percentages (as explainded in the video).
SpartanChiefNL 1 month ago in playlist Meer video's van CGPGrey
@axeldamm bolivia, Hungary, Lesotho, Germany, New Zealand, Romania and Venezuela. There is also a bunch of countries that use a form of MMP including the country i am from, Denmark.
loran1212 1 month ago
Wait, this guy is American... right? Why is he using New Zealand so much as an example then? Not that we're complaining, I'm just surprised.
kotor36 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order) 22
@kotor36 New Zealand recently had a video on MMP.
CGPGrey 1 month ago 40
@CGPGrey is that a statement?
supertroll653 2 weeks ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@kotor36 Its because we're all actually jealous of you lads and your paradise island. (shame about your last quake; youre in our prayers) :)
JCistGottMitUns 2 weeks ago in playlist All Explanation Videos
GO NEW ZEALAND! WOOO!
heath780391 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
3:23 ". . . in the local elections, citizens have to vote strategically." Agreed. This is the Spoiler Effect to which you allude in an earlier video /watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo.
3:46 "However, when it comes to voting for their favorite political party, this strategy doesn't matter. The more votes a party gets, the more representatives it has on the council." I agree that this _should_ happen. However, isn't this 2nd vote also vulnerable to the nefarious Spoiler Effect?
heyandy889 1 month ago
Not to be random or anything, but, THE KAKAPO PICTURE IS SO KYOOT.:D
dudeimamudkip 1 month ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
wait these are animals why are you talking about politics and government
cammerytzar 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains
@cammerytzar ಠ_ಠ
rewindrecolour65 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@cammerytzar Humans are animals, too... alas, it's easier to represent parties with animals from the region, more timeless and less inflammatory, too, than trying to use people and attributing this or that to them. When explaining a SYSTEM, it's far better NOT to complicate it by using politicians-minimize bias w/fluff. Easier to follow "squirrel&turtle like owl" than "Ventura&Kucinich like Paul" to learn a concept. Later, people can insert their OWN politicians worldwide.
122172639 1 month ago
I think MMP is pretty much what Germany has, correct?
tavin15 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@tavin15 It's also what us New Zealanders use, I believe we were one of the first countries to start using it :) Also he's using a bunch of native New Zealand animals (Kea, Kakapo, Kiwi, Tuatara) in his example. I don't have a clue why, though.
kotor36 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
the main problem with MMP is it practically guarantees a minority government, making government WAAAYYY more inefficient.
Trepur349 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
@Trepur349 There is such a thing as coalitions.
michaeru1 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
@michaeru1 Coalitions are worse then minority governments, because the government has to debate among themselves BEFORE taking it to the opposition.
Trepur349 2 months ago
@Trepur349 Which is a bad thing?
tavin15 1 month ago in playlist Grey Explains (chronological order)
@tavin15 I am talking about government inefficiency, and its the biggest problem with MMPR
Trepur349 1 month ago
NEEDS MORE OFFICE SPACE
atravelerstale 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
KAKAPO 2012!
piepicles 2 months ago in playlist More videos from CGPGrey
I noticed you put hearts around Schulze voting, why? Is that a well rounded voting system?
Thatguywiththelaptop 2 months ago
this is stupid. we should just vote for president by a DIRECT popular vote. no electoral collage, no representatives, no bullshit.
toSTONEiGO 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
@toSTONEiGO That's already a given, and he said that on one of his first videos on the subject. These videos are to allow other methods IF they can't get rid of electoral college.
TheEranster 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
@TheEranster i see. there is no reason the have the electoral collage in the first place, as his other video explained. except whenever banks and big corporations benefit, dont expect there to be change.
toSTONEiGO 2 months ago
@toSTONEiGO I agree, but this video has nothing to do with electing presidents
macarion 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
I suppose I'd considère myself flattered as we have exactly that system in Switzerland.
PS : it would be pretty funny if you made a video about the swiss political system, but I srrongly advise you to stay clear of guns during that time. Just my two cents.
Rockforever59 2 months ago
In your other video you make the U.S voting system seem bad, but in this you make this system seem good when the U.S system is actually VERY similar. Sooo ya
lamashla 2 months ago
2:44 Office Space reference! hahahahahahahaha love it!!
sdh106 2 months ago
Its actually a parliamentary system. Representatives are decided by overall proportion. You are simply getting rid of the boundary lines without saying so. The problem with giving the power to the parties is that it again leads to voting problems within the party since those in power have no real obligation to let others have power they can rig it. The shortest distance method is a much better system. Even if it can lead to accidental overrepresentation of a particular party.
Keeban3 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
We have this in New Zealand, it's great!
N0stalgicKuriboh 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains
my head hurts...
nialltomy15 2 months ago in playlist Grey Explains