What if the length of a term was proportional to the amount you won by in the election? - eviltoast

Seems odd that if you win by 0.001% that’s treated the same as if you win by 50%. “You barely won, here’s the same mandate as someone who won soundly”

Probably a bad idea, but there’s an idea in there that isn’t dumb.

  • m15otw@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Short sightedness in politics is already painful for all of us.

    Nobody’s tackling climate change, nobody’s building anything fairer for younger generations, especially in places without enough housing (and what there is owned by older generations).

    I won’t list all the problems this would make worse, but for example, do you really want a government with only 6 months to do 2-3 extreme populist things, hoping to dredge up enough support to get a larger mandate next time?