I don’t think this would ever be better than just randomizing your party registration over the distribution of how you would distribute your primary budget. Same outcomes in expectation at scale (usually?), but also more saliently, much less work, and you’re able to investigate your assigned party a lot more thoroughly than you would if you were spreading your attention over more than one.
You could maybe rationalize it by doing a quadratic voting thing, where you get vote weighted by the sqrt of your budget allocation/100, quadratic voting is usually done over different political issues rather than parties, and it has some beautiful arguemnts in that usecase. But as above, quadratic voting is also essentially a subsidy on low-information voting / spreading your vote thinly (the thinner you spread it the more influence you end up exerting in total). I’m not sure how it could be a good thing on net.
I don’t think this would ever be better than just randomizing your party registration over the distribution of how you would distribute your primary budget. Same outcomes in expectation at scale (usually?), but also more saliently, much less work, and you’re able to investigate your assigned party a lot more thoroughly than you would if you were spreading your attention over more than one.
You could maybe rationalize it by doing a quadratic voting thing, where you get vote weighted by the sqrt of your budget allocation/100, quadratic voting is usually done over different political issues rather than parties, and it has some beautiful arguemnts in that usecase. But as above, quadratic voting is also essentially a subsidy on low-information voting / spreading your vote thinly (the thinner you spread it the more influence you end up exerting in total). I’m not sure how it could be a good thing on net.