4,193
edits
Disapproval voting: Difference between revisions
Renamed Category:Approval methods to Category:Approval voting
No edit summary |
(Renamed Category:Approval methods to Category:Approval voting) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Wikipedia}}
'''Disapproval voting''' is any [[voting system]] that allows many voters to express formal disapproval simultaneously, in a system where they all share some power. Unlike most voting systems, it requires that only negative measures or choices be presented to the voter or representative. If used to select candidates for an office, or for continuation to a next round of voting or play, it is either single- or multi-winner, as everyone who is not disapproved of is in effect a winner, for that round.
Line 4 ⟶ 6:
==Voting against==
It is usually functionally equivalent to a simple inverted form of another kind of voting: rather than voting "for" one votes "against" a list of candidates - usually one (as in [[first past the post]] voting)
However, the psychology of [[veto
The well-known [[lifeboat game]], is often portrayed in fiction as having a disapproval voting form, with the poor individual who is most disapproved tossed overboard.
Line 17 ⟶ 19:
Any [[voting system]] permits some expression of disapproval, but these are necessarily confused with expressions of choice or approval, leading some to conclude that separating these expressions is best:
After the U.S. presidential election, 2000, some commentators suggested that the ability to approve of a candidate, but disapprove of his or her party
A group of members of the Green Party of the United States, calling itself "Greens for Gore", made explicit the fact that they were voting for Gore but supported not the platform of the Democratic Party which nominated him, but that of their own Green Party, which they called on Gore to implement. This is an example of disapproval voting on an informal level, where voters found a way to approve of the candidate, while disapproving of party and platform - and of his key opponent, George W. Bush.
Line 52 ⟶ 54:
The premise on which the non-confidence voting is based is that it is better to have no rules than have any bad rules, at least until a new attempt to impose the rule.
Non-confidence voting is a call for non-action, that is, it can be applied only when there is no necessity for an outcome of the voting process (meaning, things can be just as they were before the vote &
The percentage which triggers a successful non-confidence vote can vary widely, from small values (like 20%) which allow minorities (particularly people with experience in the issue being voted) to decide the outcome, up to unanimity.
Line 59 ⟶ 61:
Here is an example where the non-confidence voting is applied, in the politics of Canada: "If the Commons passes a motion of no confidence in the government, the prime minister and his cabinet are expected either to resign their offices or to ask for Parliament to be dissolved so that a general election can be held."
[[Category:Approval
[[Category:Electoral systems]]
[[Category:
{{fromwikipedia}}
| |||