Well two of the posting rules are Low effort content is not allowed and Posts must be on topic . Then again this sub is pretty lax so I ' m not sure . It ' s probably because underfireman did the same topic already though , that ' s my best guess . <| sep |>' course it is . # christrottwins <| sep |> Let ' s ice our own kicker . <| sep |> Eli because I traded Cam for luck a few hours before I learned about his concussion . <| sep |> I don ' t know why this is such a foreign concept . <| sep |> this is how college sports are in the US , which are the direct analogue to non top flight clubs in Europe <| sep |> Bear in mind that you can never have a ' perfect ' voting system . However , I ' ve long been a proponent of the idea that states at least small ones should elect all representatives at large . While there are differences between Hartford and New Haven , they aren ' t significant enough to warrant entirely different representation . So instead of chopping up a tiny state in districts and running elections in each , just run a single election for the entire state and pick to the top 5 for Connecticut vote getters . Not only is this a very simple way to vote you ' re still only voting for one person but it encourages positive campaigning . Essentially , you transform a headtohead competition where not losing equals winning into a race where someone else losing doesn ' t help you win . It also eliminates gerrymandering , since there are no districts to redraw . Lastly , it encourages representatives to actually represent people rather than terrain . That 5 seat Connecticut delegation ? It might end up with one Republican on it . But it ' s likely it would also have someone from the Green Party . While fracturing political representation can cause difficulties , having a House that contains 40 % Democrats , 40 % Republicans and 20 % ' miscellaneous other ' isn ' t going to be truly dysfunctional since you ' ve still got a twoparty Senate and Presidency . However , this doesn ' t really work for larger states . If you pick the top 53 candidates from California , you ' ll almost certainly end up with random noise towards the bottom end . To address this , you need districts albeit much larger ones . Dividing California into 6 roughly equal population sections for the purposes of the House of Representatives isn ' t unreasonable . And while it introduces the gerrymander back to the table , fewer districts means less ability to manipulate them .