News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advis... by wwweston on Thursday September 21, 2017 @05:38AM (#15301854)
> The last election for the POTUS had the declared winner elected by an overall loss of 3mm votes.

Well, one way to address the problem of the tyranny of the majority is to make minority rule plausible. :b

> to say that that you require a "supermajority" in most western countries isn't strictly true.

A supermajority isn't necessary for many things; a plurality will do for a lot of operations, including becoming POTUS. But in the US there's also some legal concepts that you can only do away with via a supermajority and one spread out over different branches of government at that. Doing away with any of the bill of rights is not happening with a plurality in an election.... because the US already is a republic with a democratically elected representative government based on rule of law set down in a constitution that can't be changed without supermajority buy-in.

Most western democracies that I'm familiar with have some similar sets of principles that aren't up for democratic election (at least, according to the stated rules of the governance game -- unofficially, any principle is always vulnerable to contention and falling out of value, that's a reality of governing human beings, not a flaw in a system of government).

Re:Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advis... by maccard on Thursday September 21, 2017 @09:57AM (#15303413)
> Well, one way to address the problem of the tyranny of the majority is to make minority rule plausible. :b

It is in some places - the UK had it in 2010, and technically has it right now too. You can't really do miniority rule in a two party system though.

> a plurality will do for a lot of operations,

a plurality in a two party system seems ironic to me, but I understand your point.