anonymous asked:

Do u think the voting system would be more fair if it were proportional representation?? Like I voted for labour the last election and I will again but it's really disheartening because my area is dominated by tories

I think the absolute fairest thing to do would be to have proportional representation, where one vote counts as much as every other all over the country. Any system that prioritises some votes over others cannot truly be a democratic system.

The obvious objection that people make is “what about the small parties?” And I’ll admit that when UKIP got 12% of the vote in 2015, I did think “thank god we don’t have PR.” There’s every chance it would have led to a Tory/UKIP coalition.

Looking back now though, I kinda think “so what?” We now know that the UKIP vote was always going to collapse after a Leave result. In fact, it’s possible that if UKIP had been in government, the Leave campaign wouldn’t have been able to portray itself as anti establishment. Paradoxically, if UKIP were in government, we might have remained in the EU.

I do think there’s an argument to be made here that either democracy is a good thing or its not. You can’t say it’s good but then put systems in place to stop it being TOO democratic. Who knows, proportional representation might have led to governments that truly represented the people, preventing the kind of anger that led to a UKIP vote in the first place.

The De Carrington Dressing Guide Part 3

Hey y’all, it’s part 3 of my guide to helping those that want to look elegant and well dressed, rather than a pile of soiled laundry. For those that missed them:
Part One
Part Two

Proportional Representation 

Today I’m going to be talking about proportions. That is, looking like everything is the right size and you don’t look gangly, squished, or a nightmarish combination of the two. 

So let’s get out some candles, stand in front of a mirror and whisper the words ‘Shazza and Bazza’ 3 times…. and as if by magic, our glamorous models appear. 

First up, let’s look at where the waist sits. On Shazza, our female model, the elbows and the waist are roughly in line with each other, but on Bazza, the elbows are noticeable higher than the waist. 

Bazza’s male torso is also noticeably longer than the female figure. 

How can we even this out?

Creating a waist

On my outfits I will almost always have a waist. Without this the torso has no definite ‘end point’ and will look longer. Even a simple belt breaks up the mass of the torso, and helps create more of an hourglass silhouette. Without a defined waist there is a much greater risk of looking ‘barrel-like’.

(a belt creates more of an hourglass figure and shortens the torso)

If we shift the waist up to closer where the elbows are, we can create a more feminine figure. The effect is also accentuated if you use padding and or corsetry. (Dresses with built in boning are also great for this.)

I’d also recommend tucking your top into your skirt as well, to create the contrast between the two, again creating that important waist. 

If you have the guts to try it, or rather, lack of gut, you can also use a crop top to make the torso seem a bit shorter. 

(a crop top can shorten the torso)

Do these things:

  • Wear clothes with a defined waist
  • Use a belt
  • Tuck your shirt in
  • Wear the waistband a little higher than you would in boy mode
  • Wear dark colours on the top half
  • Eat sensibly and exercise

Don’t do these things:

  • Go for empire line dresses
  • Wear anything that looks like a tent
  • Wear horizontal stripes that will make your torso seem broad
  • Wear a baggy top and tight skirt
  • Binge on pies


Right, this is one of my gripes with a lot of people that want to try and appear feminine- wearing a skirt that is far too short, especially tight ones. This will make you look very top heavy! It’s also trashy and not very classy, more Wednesday in Bognor than weekend in Paris. But here’s a simple rule to avoid looking like something that’s escaped from a 1980s Bon Jovi video..

Your skirt’s hem should be lower than your fingertips if you stand with your hands by your side.

Easy as that. This can make it harder to find skirts that fit, as we’re generally taller, but if it doesn’t fit, don’t buy it, or give it to a shorter friend. 

(I don’t go any shorter than this)

With other lengths of skirts there’s less rules, though generally I’d avoid anything that hits between your ankles and mid shin, that’s prime frump territory. 

The most flattering length on myself I find is just below the knee, as it seems to show off my frame and height, though someone shorter would probably look a bit swamped by some of these looks. Generally if you wear something below the knee I’d suggest heels, but with some more streetwear orientated looks you can get away with flats if you have cool shoes.

That’s it for the moment. Shout me if you have any questions or areas you might want me to cover.

Keep it regal


Fair Vote Canada says, based on the large number of countries using proportional or fair voting systems over extended periods of time, international experience demonstrates the following benefits over winner- take- all systems:
-Wasted votes and distorted election results are reduced.
-Phoney majority governments are rare.
-Voter turnout tends to be higher.
-Parliaments are more representative of the range of political views and the composition of the electorate (gender, ethnicity, regions).
-8% more women are elected— almost any country with more than 30% women elected uses a form of PR.
-These countries maintain strong economic performance.
-Citizens tend to be more satisfied with the way democracy works.
—  Mel Hurtig - The Arrogant Autocrat

Sometime I get tired of posts encouraging those who can safely vote to do so, but then I remember that when we had the Proportional Representation referendum I asked a friend if she had voted and SHE DIDNT EVEN KNOW THERE’D BEEN A REFERENDUM. We had a bunch of local elections here yesterday, and the voting turnout was only 26%. And the conservatives won a lot of seats. Conservatives win when voters stay home.

Please for the love of everything good in the world, vote in the damn general election, UK people.

anonymous asked:

Do you think that it's better having four parties to choose from rather than the US where there are other parties but they don't get money or recognition and no one (as it stands right now) can win if they aren't with the republican or democrat party ?

In theory yes but our voting system doesnt give every party a fair chance because its not proportional representation. Over time the parties narrow down to 2 main parties which are polar opposites of each other because people who’d vote for other parties dont think their vote will make any difference since the chance of their party winning is so low. The thing I really dont like about the US system is how its all about voting for 1 person which doesnt make sense to me, especially considering that person isnt even required to have any political experience at all. The party system makes so much more sense. Rather than 1 brain leading the choices for the country its a collection of experienced brains coming to educated conclusions

weiszklee  asked:

Multi party systems are hard to realize with this "winner gets it all" BS the US has going on. You need proportional representation for that to properly work. Honestly you need proportional representation for ANYTHING to properly work but oh well ...

Yeah, I don’t know how we get from where we are now to there, because the current system seems optimized to maintain the current system.  But if I were a wizard.

…Or maybe Trump will break the GOP so badly that the US party system will actually open up for change???  I shouldn’t get my hopes up, but these haven’t been our parties forever, so who knows.

mechanomi  asked:

Hi Josh, I just wanna say I'm a huge fan and new vegas is my second favorite game of all time. One complaint I always had though was the reliance on the "tragic lesbian" trope or having lesbians be victims of assault. Obviously the game is a product of its time but did you ever think during the development about maybe having a lesbian character who could be happy? (for example, why couldn't veronica and christine see each other after dead money or even have it be mentioned by mr. perlman?)

TL; DR Version: We should have had more female characters in the game with a similar proportion of lesbians to gay men (i.e., a larger variety of lesbian characters).  However, I believe they should be as vulnerable as anyone else to the savagery of the setting.

There are technical reasons (that I’ve gone over before) for why DLC characters can’t come back into the main game/reference each other.  That’s separate from any narrative reasons why Christine and Veronica couldn’t interact, though I should also say that I conceived Veronica’s F:NV plot arc before/separately from what Chris Avellone developed for Dead Money.

I think Veronica is relatively happy (an important qualifier in setting where most things are miserable) and any tragedy in her ending slides has more to do with the state of the BoS than her personal relationships.  Most other companions don’t speak of their romantic relationships.  Arcade and Cassidy mention some in passing, but nothing in particular.  Boone’s wife is the source of a lot of personal anguish.  You could make an argument that Boone’s or Veronica’s relationships are more tragic than the other, but both of them qualify as not good.

Betsy is a victim of assault by Cook-Cook, but so is Pretty Sarah.  Christine was mutilated by the Y-17 Medical Facility, but Dog had been enslaved by Elijah for years.  Between the Mojave Wasteland and the satellite DLC areas, there are a lot of tormented survivors drifting around of various genders and sexual preferences.

I think the larger issue is that there are few points of reference for lesbians in the setting.  There’s an imbalance of male to female characters overall and non-hetero characters are in the minority.  So while you could wonder about how gay men are portrayed in F:NV based on a single character, there are far more of them to create a picture (as far as the player can discern, anyway) than there are lesbians.  You have Veronica, Betsy, Christine, and a handful of minor characters.  Based on that sample, things don’t look good for the lesbians of the Mojave.  But I would like to reiterate that Veronica’s F:NV plot arc didn’t include any particular focus on relationships and she wasn’t intended to be any more or less tragic than other F:NV companions.

Shortly after F:NV came out, there was an article by Jim Sterling celebrating Arcade as a good representation of a gay man in a video game. The original article is no longer available, unfortunately, but it was called Homosexuality and Fallout New Vegas: A gay marriage made in gay heaven.  There was one line in his article that irritated more than a few people:

“Arcade Gannon’s sexuality isn’t a big deal, and that’s how videogames should play it.”

There are certainly a lot of gay men who believe queer identity and culture should be celebrated aggressively and think it is harmful to promote attitudes that sublimate, obfuscate, or otherwise downplay queer culture.  It’s impossible to have a “perfect” representation of a gay character because each individual player will want to see different things in those representations.  Even with an understated character like Arcade, there are some players who reacted to his casual implicit mention of homosexuality as though he had taken a bullhorn and shouted, “I’M HERE! I’M QUEER! GET USED TO IT!”

With better proportional representation of women to men and more examples of lesbian and gay characters in games, people won’t need to assume that any given single character (or three characters, as the case may be) needs to stand as exemplars for everyone else.  Happiness is just a little more difficult for folks to find in the wasteland, overall.

So, I am 30 states into my proportional representation “Super District” redistricting of the US House of Represenatives (smallest 29 states + Texas).

My goal is to better represent political minorities by eliminating first-past-the-post, winner-take-all single seat districts and combining them into multi-seat districts in which seats are awarded by percentage of vote. Both for major parties gaining some representation and for minor parties to finally get SOME representation.
I can only combine existing districts, can not go across state lines, and must have all Super Districts be contiguous.

So far, it is +9 for the Democrats, -10 for the Republicans, +1 for the Libertarians (in Arkansas if anyone is curious)

I’m expecting the major parties to even out a little bit once I get to large liberal states like New York and California, but it is pretty clear that smaller red states are either highly gerrymandered or suppress Demoratic votes very effectively with tiny turnouts and some districts having as high as 93% white people.

anyway, after the shock of the Brexit referendum and US election, its hard to see the UK election as anything other than a hilarious clusterfuck. its obvious that parties are going into a change and, while this usually happens after a while anyway - single-issue politics being more important than party politics - the UK has never taken such a knock to First Past The Post before. 

im guessing that if this political turmoil continues, the question of Proportional Representation will be brought up again. Probably an Additional Vote, without the Plus at the end of it cos the major parties hate coalitions. 

im giving these things caps cos i did that for a-level politics… an AV is when you vote for a party and then for another party  in case your one loses… the expanded form of this is Single Transferrable Vote where you vote for Many parties… i dont remember it very well so this could be wrong

Wow, queue at the polling station this morning. First time I’ve seen that. Apparently they had 10 people waiting outside at 7.

There’s no excuse for not voting today, possibly the most important election for a generation. Polling is open from 7 to 10, your polling station will be local to you and if you have mobility problems and forgot to apply for a postal vote just give any one of your major parties a call, many have freephone numbers, and they’ll arrange for someone to take you - you don’t need to vote for them or tell them how you are going to vote.

This is your one constitutional responsibility in our democracy. Yes our system isn’t perfect, I’d prefer proportional representation myself, but if you don’t engage with the process at all you don’t get to comment on the outcome. There us no good reason for the vast majority of citizens not to vote.

anonymous asked:

If we got rid of first past the post how would seats be decided?

There’s multiple ways but I think having proportional representation is a pretty good system. It would certainly be more accurate to what the people want.

Since Germans have been brewing beer since the days of the Roman Empire, should we be surprised that they excel as much in this as blacks excel in basketball? Any standard based on quality will have “overrepresentation” and “under-representation” of different groups, however much such “disparate impact” may shock the editorial writers and provoke judges to rush in where angels fear to tread.
—  The Thomas Sowell Reader 60% in