> You have to face your electors with the fact that you signed on for a particular candidate, but this is almost universally seen as part of the regular flow of our elections, and very little as partisanship
To the electors perhaps, but aren't there unspoken repercussions from party leadership on not toeing the line? Also, if a particular party/ideology controls the media, it's very easy to enforce conformity with the party line.
> But I prefer that to a single person having the voting power of many.
You're fundamentally going to have that anyways. No matter what, if you have power/money, you're able to influence great quantities of the electorate by throwing around that power.
If the ruling party/entrenched elite is able to influence the elctorate like that, the tyranny of the majority is absolutely terrible. Sure, TVs were really cheap for a few days, but now no TVs are ever imported again.
To the electors perhaps, but aren't there unspoken repercussions from party leadership on not toeing the line? Also, if a particular party/ideology controls the media, it's very easy to enforce conformity with the party line.
> But I prefer that to a single person having the voting power of many.
You're fundamentally going to have that anyways. No matter what, if you have power/money, you're able to influence great quantities of the electorate by throwing around that power.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-election-idUSBRE...
If the ruling party/entrenched elite is able to influence the elctorate like that, the tyranny of the majority is absolutely terrible. Sure, TVs were really cheap for a few days, but now no TVs are ever imported again.