Your words, Tyler. I would never say what you just said. Please read the following.
Systems are distinct. Some discriminate more and deeper than others. The winner-take-all system discriminates more than the proportional-voting system by its very nature.
In the hottest races in the winner-takes-all system, both sides are neck-and-neck. Just one person, just one single voter may decide whether it will be red or blue. Just one person thinking a man can fight better than a women is all it takes to flip the outcome.
In proportional voting, there is never a moment when a single voter decides the outcome. All voters decide the outcome together.
— -
Let me say something fundamental about the two versions of democracy: If there are two seats only, winner-takes-all has as minimum 50% of the voters being represented. Proportional voting has 66.67% of the voters represented. Minimum.
If there are nine seats, winner-takes-all has as minimum still that 50% of the voters being represented. In proportional voting, 90% of the voters can point to the person they voted for, sitting in one of the seats. That’s the minimum.
With 24 seats, it’s still 50% for winner-takes-all, but 96% for proportional voting.
You better believe it that gender discrimination is diminished in proportional voting to not being all that important because gender is less of an issue for all voters.
In winner-take-all each and every issue that is not at super-solidly-safe grounds are reasons for discrimination. Call that stupid, and I will agree with you. But it is true nevertheless. What is the dumbest thing is that a single voter can decide the hottest race. That is not what democracy should be like; that’s a cock fight. In our system, we were had. We believe the system is honest and fair. It is not.
