It already has a few times… The rest of parliament has had to negotiate with small parties many times.
But it does also allow a transition to other parties. The US system does NOT. Also, I think your first preference gets the funding in our case. So, if nobody votes for the primary party as first preference they benefit less financially I think
Public funding is public money we provide to eligible political parties and independent candidates.
The amount you can receive is based on:
the amount listed in your audited statement of expenditure for the previous election
the number of votes your candidates received
the maximum legislated amounts.
You can also choose to receive advance public funding for the 2022 election. The amount you can receive in advance is calculated for each eligible candidate. It is also based on:
the number of first preference votes the candidate received at the 2018 State election
if they stood for the Legislative Assembly (lower house) or Legislative Council (upper house).
Unfortunately, a first past the post voting system always eventually results in a two party system. Rarely, a third party can rise, but always ushering the demise of one of the previous two. The only way we can escape a two party system is by reforming our voting systems to something like ranked choice or approval voting.
The only way we can escape a two party system is by reforming our voting systems to something like ranked choice or approval voting.
I agree and we see some action on small scale on that front.
My position on this issue is that as long as current two party regime gets sufficient legitimacy from clown voting process nothing changes.
You aint electing 3p under curren rules but you can deny the regime your vote.
This theory does hinge on the idea that you accept the two party regime as futile circle jerk and you are willing to “sacrifice” your vote that “your team” would get.
I don’t see that as a viable path forward. If lack of voters decide the election in favor of the opposition (from your perspective), the party most aligned with you will move away from you to stay competitive. If sufficient votes for third party decide in favor of the opposition, you might get some decent movement towards the third party. If there are so many third party votes that your favored main party loses and the third party rises, the dying party may want to enact change, but they’re out of power, and the newly entrenched party won’t want to do it because it’s now helping them.
Note that none of these result in voting reform. We know because it’s happened. It wasn’t always the Democrats and the Republicans, but it has pretty much always been a two party system once we got through a few elections.
If you want voting reform, unfortunately, the only way to make that a serious possibility is by making it a serious campaign issue and by fighting to enact it locally and work our way up to the federal level. It’ll be hard to go straight for the top, but some areas are starting to experiment and prove it’s viable. Next step is to go a little bigger or expand into new areas.
If only people could vote outside of the two party system…
Like imagine if you could go vote but when presented with two shiti choices… You write in “fuck the regime” as your choice
It is a vote but it doesn’t support the gereatric nepo baby regime.
Here in Australia we have preferential voting. It’s a much better system because you vote for exactly who you want
Good point but are you dealing with similar regime too?
Ie two party circle jerk fucking over working peasants? etc
Independents and minor parties are increasingly growing their balance of power here…
Alright that would make sense in context of better voting system. Do you think it will yield a result?
But yes overall i agree that first pass the post whatever is shite. Thus my comment above would be US centric.
It already has a few times… The rest of parliament has had to negotiate with small parties many times.
But it does also allow a transition to other parties. The US system does NOT. Also, I think your first preference gets the funding in our case. So, if nobody votes for the primary party as first preference they benefit less financially I think
what does this mean?
https://www.vec.vic.gov.au/candidates-and-parties/funding/funding-registered-political-parties/rpp-public-funding
Public funding is public money we provide to eligible political parties and independent candidates.
The amount you can receive is based on:
You can also choose to receive advance public funding for the 2022 election. The amount you can receive in advance is calculated for each eligible candidate. It is also based on:
Unfortunately, a first past the post voting system always eventually results in a two party system. Rarely, a third party can rise, but always ushering the demise of one of the previous two. The only way we can escape a two party system is by reforming our voting systems to something like ranked choice or approval voting.
I agree and we see some action on small scale on that front.
My position on this issue is that as long as current two party regime gets sufficient legitimacy from clown voting process nothing changes.
You aint electing 3p under curren rules but you can deny the regime your vote.
This theory does hinge on the idea that you accept the two party regime as futile circle jerk and you are willing to “sacrifice” your vote that “your team” would get.
I don’t see that as a viable path forward. If lack of voters decide the election in favor of the opposition (from your perspective), the party most aligned with you will move away from you to stay competitive. If sufficient votes for third party decide in favor of the opposition, you might get some decent movement towards the third party. If there are so many third party votes that your favored main party loses and the third party rises, the dying party may want to enact change, but they’re out of power, and the newly entrenched party won’t want to do it because it’s now helping them.
Note that none of these result in voting reform. We know because it’s happened. It wasn’t always the Democrats and the Republicans, but it has pretty much always been a two party system once we got through a few elections.
If you want voting reform, unfortunately, the only way to make that a serious possibility is by making it a serious campaign issue and by fighting to enact it locally and work our way up to the federal level. It’ll be hard to go straight for the top, but some areas are starting to experiment and prove it’s viable. Next step is to go a little bigger or expand into new areas.