Alt text: Infographic titled “A Simple Guide to Electoral Systems” with a light blue background. At the top, a highlighted box states: “In a healthy democracy, citizens are deserving of and entitled to representation in government. Only proportional representation can dependably get you there.”

The content is organized in two main columns. The left column labeled “Winner-Take-All Systems 🚫” (in red) describes First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) used in Canada/USA where the candidate with most votes wins but many votes don’t elect anyone, and Instant-Runoff Voting (IRV) which uses ranked ballots but still wastes votes.

The right column labeled “Proportional Representation ✓” (in green) describes Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) used in Germany/New Zealand where voters cast ballots for both local candidates and parties, and Single Transferable Vote (STV) used in Ireland which uses ranked ballots in multi-member districts. Both proportional systems ensure the percentage of votes equals percentage of seats.

A blue band across the middle highlights “Systems using Ranked Ballots: IRV and STV.”

The bottom contains three gray boxes stating: “Which electoral system is best? If you care about democracy, proportional representation is the way to go,” “Which political parties support proportional representation? Only Green🟢/NDP🟧/RPC🟨 consistently support proportional representation,” and “Share this with a pro-democracy friend!”

The content is licensed under CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0.

List of parties that support proportional representation:

Also see: Simple things you can do right now, to grow the proportional representation movement—so we never have to vote for the lesser of the evils, have a two party system, “split the vote”, or strategic vote.

  • AlolanVulpix@lemmy.caOPMEnglish
    4·
    1 month ago

    It’s a very entitled viewpoint; thinking “They need to please me”

    Yeah, that’s how representative democracy is supposed to work. Candidates are supposed to cater to their constituent’s needs. You have it the other way around.

    It’s wildly entitled to think that a candidate, who hasn’t done any work to earn my vote, should earn my vote. That’s extremely delusional thinking.

    what’s realistically best for everyone overall

    What’s best for everyone overall is a strong democracy. I’m not going to vote for a candidate that won’t advance that priority, and neither should anybody else.

    Parties who don’t manage to get in office can make no change at all.

    And parties that don’t promise any meaningful change also don’t make any change at all.

    I’ve been down this conversation before. I refuse to vote for a party that doesn’t advance proportional representation. That’s entirely in my right to do so. Do whatever mental gymnastics you want to believe that it is me the problem who is preventing the advancement of proportional representation and democracy.

    • aubeynarf@lemmynsfw.com
      12·
      1 month ago

      These talking points were widely and aggressively deployed before the US presidential election, leading to a Trump win.

      If you don’t recognize that reality, you are encouraging a similar outcome.

      • AlolanVulpix@lemmy.caOPMEnglish
        3·
        1 month ago
        1. What happened to just providing feedback to the infographic? Not that I’m against other topics of discussion, but seems a bit like an ambush.
        2. Why haven’t you responded to any of my points other than saying: that’s how Trump wins, or that’s how you split the vote? I’m seriously entertaining the points you’ve brought up, but you’ve barely even acknowledged any of mine. How is that a productive discussion? Ever heard the phrase: talking at someone rather than to someone?
        3. I’d be happy to support candidates provided they have good policies. You are trying to pressure the wrong kind of person, when you should be applying pressure to our political parties, and other voters (e.g., anti-proportional representation). In applying pressure to a PR-supporting voter, to vote non-PR, it’s not a surprise when that trends towards non-PR policies.
        4. We actually do have a viable PR-supporting alternative: the NDP. They’ve formed government on several occasions, so this is not really comparable to the US.