• Baron Von J@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    17 hours ago

    There’s still incentive an to obstruct and suppress certain demographics from voting with a scheme like that. Not to mention the whole possibility that the winner could have literally received only 1 out of 17, 000, 000 votes being pretty horrible.

    • logicbomb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Oh I was thinking about it as alongside mandatory voting. I honestly don’t know that democracy really works at all without mandatory voting.

      Also, the problem with a very unpopular winner isn’t really too different from what we already have. How many times has a candidate won unopposed? How many times has a candidate been elected saying that they’d vote one way, and then immediately start voting the opposite way?

      It probably wouldn’t be great for an executive position of great power, like president or governor. Like, imagine what one moron could do with the power of pardons. But for positions where they are just a member of a large legislative body? I think the amount of damage they can do in a single term is usually somewhat limited.