  |
 2017 GE: Volatile Voting, Random Results |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 Sep 5 2017, 06:23 AM
Post
#1
|
|
 Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 
 
|
|
 |
 
|
|
Sep 6 2017, 02:31 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Sep 5 2017, 07:23 AM)  For me, the article makes a good case for changing the voting system. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 7 2017, 07:42 PM
Post
#3
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,647 User: 3,272
       
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Sep 6 2017, 03:31 PM) For me, the article makes a good case for changing the voting system. Tbf, I wouldn't expect anything less from the Electoral Reform Society  I hope to find time to read it soon. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 05:21 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Sep 7 2017, 08:42 PM) Tbf, I wouldn't expect anything less from the Electoral Reform Society I was very disappointed with the choice we were offered in the 2011 Voting Reform referendum - the Alternative Vote is *not* a proportional system, and was probably chosen to be the least appealing to those who did want change. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 12:25 PM
Post
#5
|
|
 BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 1 April 2006
Posts: 16,762 User: 334 
|
The Single Transferable Vote system which we use in Scotland for local elections, is a nightmare to count. However it is much more proportional.
This government has no respect for democracy no matter what system is used. They want to rule by statute and cut out as much debate as they can in Westminster. A Tory in a key seat didn't get elected at the GE. He was immediately made a Lord and attached to the Scottish Office. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 12:40 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
           
|
AMS! AMS!
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 01:31 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596
|
STV! STV!
For local government at least. I'm still quite fond of AV, and baffled by the idea that it's somehow worse than FPTP. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 01:41 PM
Post
#8
|
|
 I'm a paragon so don't perceive me
Joined: 3 February 2011
Posts: 37,405 User: 12,929         
|
QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Sep 8 2017, 02:31 PM) I'm still quite fond of AV, and baffled by the idea that it's somehow worse than FPTP. Agreed. I heard so much stuff about tactical voting between Lib and Lab supporters during the last election (it's Cornwall, there at least WAS an argument) - and none of that would have been an issue with AV, let alone some of the even better systems we could have been looking into by now. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 02:12 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,009 User: 18,639
   
|
QUOTE(Baytree @ Sep 8 2017, 12:25 PM) The Single Transferable Vote system which we use in Scotland for local elections, is a nightmare to count. However it is much more proportional. This government has no respect for democracy no matter what system is used. They want to rule by statute and cut out as much debate as they can in Westminster. A Tory in a key seat didn't get elected at the GE. He was immediately made a Lord and attached to the Scottish Office. PREACH BAYLEAF!!! Its is the same problem as with Empire - the Tories want to rule as kings and not represent the average person, just like with the colonies. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 02:19 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(MoistSummerFruit @ Sep 8 2017, 03:12 PM) PREACH BAYLEAF!!! Its is the same problem as with Empire - the Tories eant to rule as kings Did you meant 'learnt, or 'want'? 
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 04:20 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,647 User: 3,272
|
QUOTE(Baytree @ Sep 8 2017, 01:25 PM) The Single Transferable Vote system which we use in Scotland for local elections, is a nightmare to count. However it is much more proportional. This government has no respect for democracy no matter what system is used. They want to rule by statute and cut out as much debate as they can in Westminster. A Tory in a key seat didn't get elected at the GE. He was immediately made a Lord and attached to the Scottish Office. STV has always been my preferred system. It is highly proportional and puts the power in the hands of the voters. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 10:33 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
|
STV is so DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND though. So many ordinarily intelligent people (SOMEHOW) end up confused by AV and come out with all sorts of nonsense about not using your second preferences to ensure their first preference gets elected - I SHUDDER TO THINK what the average voter would make of Droop quotas and Saint-Lagüe systems and the like.
But you CAN'T go WRONG with a CONSTITUENCY AND A LIST This post has been edited by Qassändra: Sep 8 2017, 11:38 PM |
|
|
|
|
Sep 8 2017, 11:20 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
is in hibernation
Joined: 24 August 2014
Posts: 11,385 User: 21,161
 
|
QUOTE(Qassändra @ Sep 8 2017, 11:33 PM) It's so DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND though. So many ordinarily intelligent people (SOMEHOW) end up confused by AV and come out with all sorts of nonsense about not using your second preferences to ensure their first preference gets elected - I SHUDDER TO THINK what the average voter would make of Droop quotas and Saint-Lagüe systems and the like. But you CAN'T go WRONG with a CONSTITUENCY AND A LIST AMS works really well for Holyrood! All the parties are roughly correctly represented and it means no party can ram through legislation (if we used the same system as Westminster that labour/the tories both still support then the SNP would have literally nearly all the seats, even as a SNP supporter I can say that would be really unfair), my only issue is that candidates who have been massively rejected in constituency seats (Tory MSP Annie Wells got 8.6% of the vote in her constituency but still got in via the list) can get in despite being personally rejected, and the parties can basically choose who's in parliament without them having to win many constituency seats which results in some voters not having the opportunity to throw out their MSP like you can in Westminster. I would change it either so you can't stand on the list if you are in a constituency or only a certain number of 'constituency rejects' can be elected for a party (say 1 per region then it goes to people who weren't constituency candidates) OR randomize the party list candidates. Hope that made sense
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 05:27 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Qassändra @ Sep 8 2017, 11:33 PM) STV is so DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND though. What's so difficult about ranking candidates in order of preference? You don't need to know the technicalities, any more than you need to know how a bus works in order to ride in it...  |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 02:23 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
|
Well, notionally nothing, but it's what happens when you get into the realms of people tactically voting. You'd think ordering 1 to 5 wouldn't be that hard to understand, but you still have people regularly coming out with UTTER NONSENSE like "I gave you all five of my votes" or "only vote for this candidate first preference and don't use any of your other preferences to make sure they win!". With the discovery that yes, some people really ARE that stupid, sticking to just one X each for a constituency and a list seems much more appealing.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 03:03 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 1 April 2006
Posts: 16,762 User: 334
|
QUOTE(Qassändra @ Sep 8 2017, 11:33 PM) STV is so DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND though. So many ordinarily intelligent people (SOMEHOW) end up confused by AV and come out with all sorts of nonsense about not using your second preferences to ensure their first preference gets elected - I SHUDDER TO THINK what the average voter would make of Droop quotas and Saint-Lagüe systems and the like. But you CAN'T go WRONG with a CONSTITUENCY AND A LIST Yes, you can. It's good that smaller parties get better representation but you end up with major parties' numpties who have trailled in 3rd or 4th in a constituency seat getting list seats. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 06:35 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
|
I was more referring to people not being confused by the voting system.
On the point though, how often is the constituency result really down to THEM? And I can't speak for the Tories, but I know that Labour and the Lib Dems at least have internal democracy on how high up the list a candidate ends up, so they have to prove themselves as much through selection as any constituency candidate does. This post has been edited by Qassändra: Sep 9 2017, 06:36 PM |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 06:48 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
is in hibernation
Joined: 24 August 2014
Posts: 11,385 User: 21,161
|
QUOTE(Qassändra @ Sep 9 2017, 07:35 PM) I was more referring to people not being confused by the voting system. On the point though, how often is the constituency result really down to THEM? And I can't speak for the Tories, but I know that Labour and the Lib Dems at least have internal democracy on how high up the list a candidate ends up, so they have to prove themselves as much through selection as any constituency candidate does. Well yes, but when it comes to people who are already constituency MPs it means that voters can't just boot them out like they should be able to. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 06:53 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,647 User: 3,272
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Sep 9 2017, 06:27 AM) What's so difficult about ranking candidates in order of preference? You don't need to know the technicalities, any more than you need to know how a bus works in order to ride in it... Precisely. The count is indeed complicated, but that isn't the individual voter's problem. Besides, other countries use it. Are people saying that British voters are less intelligent than those of other countries? |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2017, 06:54 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,647 User: 3,272
|
QUOTE(Qassändra @ Sep 8 2017, 11:33 PM) STV is so DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND though. So many ordinarily intelligent people (SOMEHOW) end up confused by AV and come out with all sorts of nonsense about not using your second preferences to ensure their first preference gets elected - I SHUDDER TO THINK what the average voter would make of Droop quotas and Saint-Lagüe systems and the like. But you CAN'T go WRONG with a CONSTITUENCY AND A LIST With STV you have constituencies and you have a list of candidates. |
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 16th April 2024 - 03:29 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
