08-07-2020, 03:47 PM
(08-07-2020, 02:00 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Actually, going OT for a second the system makes sense if there are MORE than 2 parties.
If there are 2 parties, it should be popular vote, period.
The EC made sense when you had the Dems, Reps, Dem-Reps, Federalists, Whigs, etc., all running against each other.
It has "devolved," per se, into 2 parties, due to the funding (moreso in the modern day) required and just how certain people came to power, historically.
Here we have a similar system, in that whomever wins the most seats, wins the leadership of the country.
But we've had 4+ parties since the 1800s, so it makes sense :)
The determination of leadership imho is not similar to the US. If I'm not mistaken, you do not vote for a president like the US does in the first place. I tried to read up a bit, and to me it seems the party with the most seats is asked to form a government, but that prime minister person always has to maintain confidence in the house... meaning, there will be a partner in a coalition, right, so there's a secure majority in the house?
And if so, regarding those four parties, are there traditional pairings or is it more like an all limits off coupling?
I have to ask for just found out is that you obviously also have one seat per electoral district, and yet more than two parties. As does GB, which I should have thought of as well.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)