Could FPTP and PR be made compatible? By: Machjo (27 replies) February 5, 2009 - 8:54pm
- Interested Observer By: Wilf Day (Feb 8 2009 - 12:05pm)
- Machjo wrote:In response to By: Interested Observer (Feb 8 2009 - 1:51am)
- Wilf Day wrote:Interested By: Interested Observer (Feb 8 2009 - 1:44am)
- In response to Stockholm's By: Machjo (Feb 7 2009 - 9:19pm)
- Stockholm wrote: "Another By: Machjo (Feb 7 2009 - 9:10pm)
- Machjo wrote:But would the By: Wilf Day (Feb 7 2009 - 5:48pm)
- Just maybe if we made the By: Assembly Talker (Feb 7 2009 - 5:11pm)
- "Another thing I've noticed By: Stockholm (Feb 7 2009 - 12:34pm)
- But would the pro-PR crowd By: Assembly Talker (Feb 7 2009 - 12:22pm)
- Machjo, It depends on how By: Interested Observer (Feb 6 2009 - 8:30pm)
- Assembly Talker wrote: By: Machjo (Feb 6 2009 - 4:38pm)
- Machjo,Citizens Assembly By: Assembly Talker (Feb 6 2009 - 3:10pm)
- mimeguy wrote:The senate By: Policywonk (Feb 6 2009 - 2:41pm)
- My personal favorite is the By: Interested Observer (Feb 6 2009 - 2:00pm)
- sorry for the multiple post By: mimeguy (Feb 6 2009 - 12:16pm)
- sorry for the multiple post By: mimeguy (Feb 6 2009 - 12:16pm)
- The senate needs reform. By: mimeguy (Feb 6 2009 - 12:14pm)
- STV isn't so bad I suppose. By: Machjo (Feb 6 2009 - 11:46am)
- There is no need to invent By: Wilf Day (Feb 5 2009 - 11:14pm)
- "One problem with MMP is By: Stockholm (Feb 5 2009 - 10:57pm)
- Thank you stockholm for the By: Machjo (Feb 5 2009 - 10:16pm)
- Stockholm wrote:The question By: Machjo (Feb 5 2009 - 10:14pm)
- Unionist wrote:Please do not By: Machjo (Feb 5 2009 - 10:03pm)
- Re: Could FPTP and PR be made compatible? By: Unionist (Feb 5 2009 - 9:42pm)
- The question is "could PR By: Stockholm (Feb 5 2009 - 9:41pm)
- Interesting. Have you got a By: Machjo (Feb 5 2009 - 9:04pm)
- It's not what I would By: Fidel (Feb 5 2009 - 9:00pm)
It's not what I would recommend, but Mohammed Elmasry did propose a PR-FPP hybrid electoral system a few years ago.