test first lesson later just like real life

How u doin now

The framers were used to the 'Government Elects the Leader' back then the PM was elected by the house of commons, or the UK Lower House, and the father's argued over that kind of election, or a people's vote. So they mixed them. Like there are 4 Representatives in the house for Hawaii, so if Democrats win by 12% then all four of those reps 'Vote' for that party candidate.

+Nolan Thiessen Switch to Instant Runoff Voting. That'll solve that problem. It was adopted in Australia because the conservative vote got split when the National Party appeared in the 1920s, resulting in a Labor win when they otherwise wouldn't have won.

+Roxor128 The problem with that though is that the very premis of that law is that politics is limited to a single axis and isn't multidimensional. A false assumption. A lot of political compasses uses economic left and right as one axis and libertarianism vs authoritarianism as another axis. But even that fails to pick up the nuances that actually exist out there. All major topics can have their own axis. Environmentalism vs pragmatic/grey parties, conservative or liberal religious values can be separated from the issue of personal freedom when it comes to things like spending money on religious education or not, supporting missionary work economically or not and so one. You can split parties in equality issues, immigration, taxation or a bunch of other things. A party could be supporting higher taxes and against higher immigration or the exact opposite. The only way of actual have peoples views genuinely represented in a meaningful way is with a multiparty system. Norway have a population of just a little more than 5 millions but got 26 political parties. 2 are currently in our cabinet with another 2 supporting their cabinet without choosing to join the cabinet themselves this round. 8 parties represented in the parliament. 18 eligible for parliamentary elections (but with the last 10 failing to actually get representatives at a national level. 13 held power in municipalities in 2011 (we've recently had an local election and I don't know the latest breakdown right now) Still with all of that things are working quite well I'd say. The US actually have about 30 parties at a national level (that is eligible for a federal election as far as I can gather) But I seriously doubt any of you know of even all the 5 major parties while I'd be able to name up to 18 (on a good day) parties in my own nation and hold a opinion the politics of about 16 of them (although I'll admit that I'd be unable to know more then one or two main topics for a lot of the smaller ones that they hold strong opinions on...

I wouldn't say it's that important most of the time. It only became important recently due to most of Canada being tired of Stephen Harper, which only happened because he ended up with a majority government. When it was a string of minority governments there was a lot of political shifting back and forth between different parties, which would never be possible in a two party system. As far as I know, a 'minority' government is next to impossible under the US system.

+rahn45 Well, here in Norway I got the impression that most people actually prefer a minority government as it makes things more interesting. Especially for the smaller parties. Like a coalition might come into power with support from one faction outside the coalition but then in individual issues they might get support from some other political parties who didn't support their coalitions cabinet but support that issue or at least don't care enough about it to not trade their support in favor of the cabinets support for another totally different issue. With such a system the politicians become really good at negotiating with each other. =)

rahn45 True, the US can't really have a minority government, but their system of 3 different legislative branches ensures that one man doesn't control the country. In Canada the Prime Ministers Office (PMO) can essentially pass any law they wish with a majority government.

+A_commenter Yes, that's an error. Thanks for catching it.

+Raoul Meyer Tell him what he's won!

I noticed that too

+Raoul Meyer Hey, you're that guy behind Crash Course (or one of them rather)

+A_commenter Yep!

Gotta love it.

+Evdog Music Right?

+Evdog Music We were one of the first proper democracies and it worked better than anyone else up until somewhat recently. We simply haven't updated.

+Evdog Music American never prided itself on democracy. We're a constitutional Republic. Pure Democracy is horrifying.

+Citric Thoughts no, first modern democracy was on this side of the pond, and ours has worked for centuries

+zh11147 Usually facts haha

+james frazier I think Crash Course is Feeling the Bern.

+james frazier timestamp?

+james frazier the left is on the rise again...

+james frazier Where at?

+Lildrummerboy714 6:38

Me too

+Aaron Horrell I don't understand why you need an electoral college, it seems quite undemocratic to me. The people have voted then you give the decision to a handful of people to confirm or not the winner. I may be wrong in that assessment and I would really like to know how it works.

+john howe it's in the Constitution so it's not going anywhere for now. It really is an unnecessary and terrible relic. Easiest way of making it more representative of actual voting would be proportional allocation of delegates. But even that doesn't work well for smaller states. it would take power away from the swing states, but swing states don't want that. it would also mean that if you're a Republican in California or a Democrat in Texas, there is actually a point in voting

+Aaron Horrell Although I agree with you, there is one thing I feel I need to point out: Texas is turning into a purple state. Slowly but surely, the state has become more Democrat over the last decade. In another decade, we might even be a swing state. Also, another interesting tidbit of information: some polls show that there are more liberals in Texas than conservatives. While I'm not convinced that is entirely true, it is true that the media has done such a wonderful job of convincing people that Democrat votes don't matter that most people don't bother to vote.

+Nutritious Cookie Yes I agree the media in all its forms can sway an election a little. If the American press is anything like that in the UK then the majority are owned by the Murdock clan and are far right wing, unfortunately people do not think or rationalise what they read, often taking opinion dressed up as news as the political gospel.

+john howe It's worse in the US. All media is extremely biased, to the point where I actually use British media for all my world news. While most media sources balance each other out fairly well, certain organizations (like the NRA) have so much money that issues like gun control are never really pushed.

iicloudie Vibes me 😂

Me

Yes, and I'm using this to teach my students.

Ay yo, anyone from goldberg's class hit that like right here I I V

congrats

+Cycling in Edmonton from the Eyes of a Teen Why keep the bicameral legislature? It has no purpose in a modern understanding of democracy. The framers wanted it because they were hoping to blend democracy and aristocracy, but we've thrown the aristocracy out the window with the 17th. Every other country with a bicameral legislature based on the American model has collapsed, and the US itself has fallen into oligarchy. We need a parliamentary system, just like every other civilized nation.

+icedragon769 Most parlementary country's also have a bicameral system with a upper and lower house even the unitary states do. So I do not really understand what you mean.

*mug

+killerfrenchy Heh, I thought I was hallucinating and didn't go back to check until I saw your comment.

It would be very interesting, but this is for US govt and politics, so I highly doubt it.

The electoral system is pretty much the same since you guys also have FPTP, only you have more then two parties and your prime minister is by default the leader of the majority party in parliament, chosen through FPTP. Correct me if I'm wrong

+Bartholomule01 It wasn't DESIGNED for two parties, that is just the amount that naturally formed over time.

+Matthew Stickney Which was a human construct/design. Whether the inventors intention for the voting method to evolve to be bipartisanship, who knows. Hehe I hate bipartisanship, and this rat race of a country who's congress works for big money interests. Oligarchy. Manipulating democracy through political action committees and donations when the rest of the world begins to understand the average education level of an American through the Internet. Before automation, the Internet, and software engineers, there was an arms race played for power, thus represented by our military spending- greater than the next 26 countries summed together, 25 of whom are allies. In addition, oil is such a big topic in this country when we fought a war over it perhaps? Iraq? And now the right wing conservatives in congress ALL do not support motives towards cleaner energy and away from oil? They're being controlled, right? Money.... Bribery and slavery in the roots of this country: AMERICA.

+cory allen Solid response.

You need preferential/run off voting! We have it for everything in Australia. It doesn't stop the 2 party system BUT it does mean independents have a decent chance of at least being heard & generally hold the balance of power in the senate. We haven't had a situation where one party has controlled the senate that I can ever remember in my lifetime, which means you can't have an opposition party voting no just to spite the other party they hate because if they do, the third party or independents are available for the main party to negotiate with. Keeps everyone much more reasonable and gives a "protest vote" option if you're pissed off at "your" party but not willing to vote for the other party

No, you do not benefit as much with instant runoff voting like in Australia. A legislature performs poorly with this system. Executive offices can do OK with instant runoff (although I am liking directorial systems even more), but legislatures do even better with STV, which is also used for the Australian senate.

Crash course

Oh my yes, DIY would be awesome