WI: The United Kingdom and the USA adopt this Electoral System instead of FPTP:

What if the United Kingdom and the United States had adopted the following Electoral System at some point during the Twentieth or Twenty-First Century?
In this system, single member constituencies/electoral districts exist just like under FPTP. The difference is that if no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, negotiations followed by an agreement between candidates who have at least 50% of the vote between them then have to occur. For example, should a candidate from party X come first in the race, but only get 42% of the vote, he will need to obtain the support from a fellow candidate in the race (Candidate Y) who has himself received more than 8% of the vote in order to be over the 50% line and become the MP. It doesn't end there however since at any time during the subsequent parliamentary term, if Y feels that X, as MP, has not been delivering on the promises that he agreed to in the negotiations, Y can withdraw his support for X and unless someone else with at least 8% of the vote from the last election can agree to support X, or another candidate can be agreed upon with enough votes between him and someone else, then a by-election has to occur and it starts again from there.
The system would be the same for Presidential races in the United States.
What do you think the consequences would be like for Politics in both the United Kingdom and the United States?
 
Sounds like a pretty bad Idea to me. While it sounds like great coalition building, there are a few major problems. A) A candidate's supporters are often varied in many ways on what they want, while ideally they would all negotiate, such a thing is not feasible. While any given candidate is supposed to represent their constituents best interests, they could easily be bribed or offered positions by their opponents to quell them/get their vote in ways that wouldn't necessarily represent their constituents. B) It gives FAR too much power to minority candidates. If you can get kicked out of your office any day by one person, they have far too much power over the person who should be running things(While someone could be a 2% candidate, they could wield something like 50% of the power). C) What are the people who lost supposed to do in the mean time, are they just supposed to go back to their jobs? How are they supposed to do that if they have to be an independent monitor of the title holder when they likely have to hold down a job as well(Which could also serve as a MASSIVE conflict of interest), or are they hired(which could be a lot of people if the candidate pool gets large). D) What happens when you suddenly have 5 by-elections in a year in some district because people can't get along.

So what would it lead to? Massive dysfunction, and corruption.
 
Top