We're Doing Elections Wrong | Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj | Netflix

Summary

The script is a satirical commentary on American democracy, highlighting the divisive nature of the two-party system and the impact of winner-take-all elections. It critiques the lack of majority rule and the rise of 'negative partisanship,' where voters are driven by hatred of the opposing party rather than support for their own. The script humorously discusses the 2020 chaos, including political and social issues, and suggests ranked-choice voting as a potential solution to the current electoral problems.

Takeaways

• 😔 The script discusses the tumultuous year of 2020, mentioning police brutality, the coronavirus pandemic, impeachment, economic downturn, and the death of Mr. Peanut.
• 🗳️ It highlights that despite Americans agreeing on many issues like universal background checks and legal status for DREAMers, the current political system often fails to address these.
• 🤔 The script points out that many eligible voters choose not to vote, feeling unrepresented by a government that doesn't reflect their views.
• 🇺🇸 It critiques the winner-take-all nature of American elections, explaining how this system can lead to outcomes that don't represent the majority's will.
• 🔄 The script uses humor to illustrate the absurdity of the two-party system and the polarization it causes, comparing it to the cultural divide during the Civil War.
• 📊 It provides statistics to show how the current system has led to a more divided America, with a significant increase in political polarization.
• 😣 The script satirizes the fear within the Republican party of being primaried, which it suggests leads to extremism and far-right policies.
• 🌐 It discusses the geographical and demographic biases in the American electoral system, noting how it often favors rural white voters over urban populations.
• 🔝 The script argues that the Democratic party's need for broad appeal leads to moderate candidates and policy compromises.
• 🆚 It contrasts the big-tent approach of the Democrats with the more narrowly focused Republican party, likening them to Denny's and Chipotle respectively.
• 📝 The script ends by advocating for ranked-choice voting as a solution to the issues presented, allowing for more diverse representation and a break from the two-party system.

Q & A

What is the main issue with the American electoral system discussed in the script?

The main issue discussed is the use of winner-take-all plurality voting, which can lead to candidates winning without a majority and contributes to the two-party system and negative partisanship.

How does the script suggest that winner-take-all voting contributes to political polarization?

The script suggests that winner-take-all voting encourages negative partisanship and extreme positions because candidates are incentivized to appeal to their base rather than the broader electorate, leading to more divisive politics.

What is the significance of the 5.5% figure mentioned in the script?

The 5.5% figure refers to the percentage of all eligible voters who voted for Trump in the 2016 Republican primary, illustrating how a candidate can win a plurality without a majority and highlighting the impact of winner-take-all voting.

What is 'negative partisanship' as described in the script?

'Negative partisanship' is a phenomenon where voters are more motivated by their dislike of the opposing party than by support for their own party, leading to increased political division and animosity.

How does the script connect the concept of 'winner-take-all' to the rise of Trump?

The script connects 'winner-take-all' to the rise of Trump by arguing that the system allowed him to win the Republican primary and eventually the presidency without ever securing a majority of the vote, highlighting the potential for extreme candidates to succeed in this system.

What alternative voting system is proposed in the script as a solution to the issues with winner-take-all voting?

The script proposes 'ranked-choice voting' as an alternative to winner-take-all voting, where voters rank candidates by preference, allowing for a majority winner and reducing the impact of negative partisanship.

Why does the script mention 'Mr. Peanut's untimely demise'?

The mention of 'Mr. Peanut's untimely demise' is used as a satirical device to highlight the absurdity of certain aspects of American politics and media, by comparing it to the seriousness of other issues discussed in the script.

What is the 'Boston' phenomenon referred to in the script?

The 'Boston' phenomenon is a humorous reference to the idea that Republicans and Democrats agree on many issues, but the script uses the term to sarcastically point out that despite such agreements, little action is taken, similar to how 'Boston' can refer to both the city in Massachusetts and the band.

How does the script use humor to discuss serious political topics?

The script uses humor through exaggeration, satire, and cultural references to make light of serious political topics, making the discussion more engaging and potentially more accessible to a wider audience.

What is the significance of the 'Flavortown' reference at the end of the script?

The 'Flavortown' reference is a humorous way to suggest that despite the political divisions and the flaws in the electoral system, there is a need for unity and a call to action, even if it means rallying around an unconventional or unexpected candidate.