Nicușor Dan is the new president of Romania.
-
Voting for the lesser evil: this is how to do it, USA.
I mean, it is a two-round system.
First time is voting for your favorite.
Second round is voting against the worse of the two.
The US needs this, like get rid of party primaries and have a blanket non-partisan parimary where you vote for whoever. Bernie, AOC, etc.
Or better yet: ranked-choice.
-
Nicușor Dan is the new president of Romania. Congratulations to everyone who voted!
Still crazy that 45% really think that the far right alternative was a good choice...
-
Nicușor Dan is the new president of Romania. Congratulations to everyone who voted!
I know he's waving but damn that perspective
-
I know he's waving but damn that perspective
Is that him?
-
Nicușor Dan is the new president of Romania. Congratulations to everyone who voted!
-
It's AI slop but I'll allow it. (^^)
-
Nicușor Dan is the new president of Romania. Congratulations to everyone who voted!
Ouuch fucking fantastic, thank you brothers and sisters of Romania! Your future is rich and may your sillicon valley grow even more prosperous (yes they have one)!
This is the way forward!
-
A centrist is just another goddamn neo-liberal... I think, though he did run as an independent?! Daring today, aren't we sir?
But yeah, better him than... the "alternative". It's not nice to have someone who cleans Tzar boots with his tounge as president.
Centrist, left, right, that's up to people to choose. Selling the country shouldn't be IMO.
-
I mean, it is a two-round system.
First time is voting for your favorite.
Second round is voting against the worse of the two.
The US needs this, like get rid of party primaries and have a blanket non-partisan parimary where you vote for whoever. Bernie, AOC, etc.
Or better yet: ranked-choice.
Well said. It's a band aid for first-past-the-post voting. Ranked voting already includes multiple rounds, while only doing the physical voting once.
-
Nicușor Dan is the new president of Romania. Congratulations to everyone who voted!
First of all, congratulations to the Romanian people! I hope you will thrive.
I have a question, though. There often is a huge difference how a leader is perceived nationally vs. internationally. Afaik, Macron is relatively highly regarded in Europe but many French people have their issues with him.
So, what do the Romanian people think of him? I'd be glad to hear from some! -
Still crazy that 45% really think that the far right alternative was a good choice...
Voter turnout was a record high of 62%
Why don't romanians vote?
-
First of all, congratulations to the Romanian people! I hope you will thrive.
I have a question, though. There often is a huge difference how a leader is perceived nationally vs. internationally. Afaik, Macron is relatively highly regarded in Europe but many French people have their issues with him.
So, what do the Romanian people think of him? I'd be glad to hear from some!Macron is highly regarded in Europe? That clown, really? (I'm not French)
-
Well said. It's a band aid for first-past-the-post voting. Ranked voting already includes multiple rounds, while only doing the physical voting once.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]If the voters are well informed about how their ranked-choice ballot works, then its the most ideal.
Otherwise, you could end up with idiots voting for their favorite, but not filling out the 2nd, 3rd, 4th choices, which ends up wasting a vote if their favorite gets eliminated. Of course, that would be a worse case scenario, I hope the average person is functional enough to know how to do a simple task like filling out a ballot, but honestly, the average person is so stupid (or just lazy) that I don't have such high hopes.
If the most important goal is just to elminate the spoiler effect of FPTP, using a 2 round system is the more "idiot-proof" method to do so, in my opinion. I mean, the first round is effectively just a primary election that has been practiced for a long time, just without parties this time.
-
If the voters are well informed about how their ranked-choice ballot works, then its the most ideal.
Otherwise, you could end up with idiots voting for their favorite, but not filling out the 2nd, 3rd, 4th choices, which ends up wasting a vote if their favorite gets eliminated. Of course, that would be a worse case scenario, I hope the average person is functional enough to know how to do a simple task like filling out a ballot, but honestly, the average person is so stupid (or just lazy) that I don't have such high hopes.
If the most important goal is just to elminate the spoiler effect of FPTP, using a 2 round system is the more "idiot-proof" method to do so, in my opinion. I mean, the first round is effectively just a primary election that has been practiced for a long time, just without parties this time.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]This is definitely achievable. Ireland uses STV (a type of ranked voting) and the average person expresses 3-4 preferences and these end up being deciding factors for lots of candidates, and the general public has a good understanding of how the system works.
-
First of all, congratulations to the Romanian people! I hope you will thrive.
I have a question, though. There often is a huge difference how a leader is perceived nationally vs. internationally. Afaik, Macron is relatively highly regarded in Europe but many French people have their issues with him.
So, what do the Romanian people think of him? I'd be glad to hear from some!wrote on last edited by [email protected]Depends how much propaganda they've ingested.
From my own research, there's two things that people are holding against him:
One is his refusal to sign the authorization for the building of a children's oncology hospital (his explanation was that they want to build it in the center where there's barely any parking and it's overcrowded as it is, and he finds the location illegal for approval, he'd have no problem with a different location), after some increased pressure, he finally signed.
The second being the issue of (hot) running water in Bucharest. An acquaintance has actually spoken to an employee of the hot water supplier and apparently the 60 or whatever year old plumbing that was being used was in horrible shape and it really needed changing. To me that seems more of a problem that has been ignored by previous administrations and should never had been allowed to reach that point. Imo, it's actually a point in his favour that he had the balls to cause so much trouble for the people in order to solve the issue.
Beyond that, he's praised for fighting corruption and stopping illegal constructions that had ties to some mafia and whatnot.
And lastly, a few years ago, we've had a referendum to amend the constitution to change wording from "between spouses" to "between man and woman". Same sex marriage isn't legal in Romania, but this was an attempt to make it harder for the law to change in the future. His party wanted to vote on which stance to take or something like that. And apparently he had promised when he was elected to remain neutral arguing that it wasn't an issue that needed debating and that remaining neutral would avoid division. He said he won't renew his party membership if his party takes a stance and since they did he's since been independent. And whenever he was asked about his vote he said he voted but not which way. My guess is that he's pro same sex marriage but knows that admitting it would cost him a lot of votes since Romania is still very conservative, as proven by the millions that voted for Georgescu last year and Simion this year.
-
Voting for the lesser evil: this is how to do it, USA.
If it's truly just a lesser evil, as opposed to "good", then voters will be disillusioned and the next election will result in fascism. Liberals failing to do good is the sole reason fascism is escalating worldwide.
-
If it's truly just a lesser evil, as opposed to "good", then voters will be disillusioned and the next election will result in fascism. Liberals failing to do good is the sole reason fascism is escalating worldwide.
"Better get fascism now, rather than next election" is such a dumb take
-
"Better get fascism now, rather than next election" is such a dumb take
It's not what I meant. I'm not criticizing people for voting liberal on that one -- I'm criticizing, on one hand, the lax attitude people have towards fascism before elections happen, and the unwillingness of both the prosecutors and leaders to do anything about fascism.
The attitude of the latter is why the former is so lax about fascism (imo), and they should be pressured to take actual action against fascism, as well as actually addressing popular issues. Because simple posturing is how thing don't get better for the average voter, and why that average voter might end up thinking fascism might be the actual solution
