This electoral system is fucked

May 07, 2010 13:19

Nevermind that the Lib Dems got more votes but less seats when compared to the previous election. Something weirder ( Read more... )

election, real life

Leave a comment

almosthonest May 7 2010, 12:58:12 UTC
I agree that we have a very lossy voting system. Thanks for putting up this analysis. The one wording change I would use is "discarded" - 70% of votes were discarded once the results were known.

(The discarded votes carry a bit of information to the electorate and the parties for next time round, so they are a tiny bit not pointless.)

Reply

florain May 7 2010, 16:25:42 UTC
Thanks - I will keep it updated as more results are released.

I think I disagree about writing 'discarded' votes, but this may be a wording issue. It imples, to me, that had they not been discarded, there could have been a difference. But that is not so - all you need is 1 more than the next person and the rest is truly irrelevant/pointless from then on.

Of course an interesting point to investigate would be to work out had we had PR, would *more* people have voted and the current split would be still the same?

Reply

helbling May 7 2010, 17:04:21 UTC
I'm kinda grateful we don't have PR - if we did, we'd have about 20 BNP MPs and 12 UKIP...

Reply

same_difference May 7 2010, 18:01:14 UTC
So clearly we need something better. Any ideas? I hear tell some countries have a lower threshold for a seat with PR which helps keeps some of the more dangerous parties out.

Reply

helbling May 7 2010, 18:07:57 UTC
I heard something about how France's elections have 'knockout stages', which looked interesting. Truthfully, there's no way I've done enough research to give an informed decision.

Reply

pujaemuss May 7 2010, 19:14:51 UTC
That's the Alternative Vote System, which is the method of change which the Tories have made noises about. Instead of picking one name, you number them 1 to x. All the 1 votes are counted and, if someone gets 50%, then they win. If not, then the candidate with the lowest votes is discarded and anyone who voted for them with a 1 is then counted as their no 2 choice. If no-one gets 50% from that, then someone else is discarded, etc, etc.

It's okay in theory, but really doesn't accomplish a huge amount more fairness than FPTP.

PJW

Reply

florain May 7 2010, 19:49:46 UTC
The other option is similar to the German one, you have one vote for a person and one for a party.

Reply

pujaemuss May 7 2010, 20:04:21 UTC
The problem with that is that the vote for a person is voting for the head of state. We've got one already and I rather like having our head and representative separate from the clusterfuck that is politics.

PJW

Reply

florain May 7 2010, 20:41:55 UTC
Actually, the german person vote is *not* for the head of state. Its very much for your "local MP". The vote for the party is the vote for the party to provide the government.

There is no mechanism in germany for the general population to vote for either the president nor the chancellor.

Reply

florain May 7 2010, 19:49:06 UTC
The German system works quite well - you need 5% to get in but there are special provions "Ueberhangsmandate", in order to allow people who got good results in single constituencies to get in. This allows independent and candidates without party to get into parliament.

Reply

florain May 7 2010, 19:47:12 UTC
If 8% of the population think we should have BNP, then I do think they should have 8% of the seats.

Just because you and I and any other sane person doesn't agree with their views - if we want to live in a liberal free speech society then that involves giving a voice to the asshats too.

Otherwise - its a extremely slippery slope to go on.

Reply

pujaemuss May 7 2010, 20:05:14 UTC
{applause} goes to you.

Reply

helbling May 7 2010, 21:58:14 UTC
Oh I'm aware, and it's not that I don't think we shouldn't move more towards PR (or wholly, if someone can work out how to make it work). It's that my damned faith in humanity is rearing it's head and making me glad that system wasn't in place this election, because, surely, by the time the next one roles around, people will have come to their senses and the BNP won't get 8% of the vote, right?

Right?

*wibble*

And you can quit giving me that look.

Reply

pujaemuss May 7 2010, 23:01:45 UTC
Don't worry. That's the same little world that I like to live in as well.

PJW

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

florain May 8 2010, 10:14:16 UTC
What, an extinct flightless bird? :P

And yes - it likely means both labour and tories become more centre. It may also mean that labour for example may split up into a more "lefty" wing and a more centre wing, as suddenly you don't have to be in a party you don't agree with and have a fleeting chance of being elected.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up