Alternative Vote Referendum |
Post Reply | Page <12345 8> |
Author | ||
mutley
Moderator in Command Pilot Extraordinaire! Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: uk Points: 14898 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
They used to call it proportional representation in my day, that would be "PR" but giving it a jazzy new name doesn't cut the mustard with me.
AV? I don't have an alternative vote thanks, I know my mind, I just have one vote for the party I support, one person, otherwise it just makes for a limp, diluted government that will always have someone like Cleggy biting at your ankles! The winner should be the candidate that comes first, but under AV the candidate who comes second or third can actually be elected. That’s why it is only used by just three countries in the world. Voters should decide who the best candidate is, not the voting system Vote NO!! Sorry Dodgy.
|
||
Transport Steve
P/UT Joined: 02 Apr 2010 Location: Nottingham, UK Points: 103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Yeah, I'm in agreement with Mutley, however, if I lived in Bognor Regis then dodgy Alan would sure get all of my votes anyway, not 'cos I like the LibDems, but, he's a fellow flight simmer and thoroughly all round good egg, good luck on May 5th, Squire.....
Cheerz. Transport Steve. |
||
mutley
Moderator in Command Pilot Extraordinaire! Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: uk Points: 14898 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Luckily I don't live in Bognor as I would hate not to vote for Dodgy but my vote could never go to a liberal, take a look at our last Liberal MP for Winchester, Mark Oaten, say no more!
|
||
dodgy-alan
Chief Pilot Joined: 16 May 2008 Location: bognor regis Points: 2994 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Thanks Steve. Oddly enough Ive just been reading one of my Roman History books and they had something similar in place around 50BC when they elected the new consuls,it was all done on PR and various block votes from the big governing families. |
||
The light at the end of the tunnel is a freight train coming the other way !
|
||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
That doesn't make any sense! If we stick with FPTP either the candidate you vote for gets in, or they don't. I find it hard to believe you don't have an alternative candidate you'd like to see get in if your first choice doesn't make it? I'd vote BNP before I voted Con, so where does that leave me when the Cons win? Note that under AV you can put a '1' against your first choice and leave the rest blank, but you null your vote should your first choice not make it (no change there then compared with FPTP ). The whole point about AV is to get away from who simply got more votes (e.g. Cons 50%, Lab 49% with Cons winning and the rest no say) to a system that has Cons 50%, Lab 49%, Lib Dem 20%, BNP 5%, Green 1%, and those who voted Lib Dem, BNP and Green a chance to say who they prefer next. If you voted Con, your voice was already heard (and congrats your first choice won), but if for example all of the Lib Dem, BNP and Green voters hate the Cons and would vote Lab if they had the chance, then in that case Labour would win the vote. It would be better as at least more people supported Labour overall, than having the Cons in power simply because they got more votes as a result of being only able to vote for one candidate (I'm sick of all these morons who say they vote Con or Lab or whoever simply because they have done so all their lives). It may appear to be giving a second vote, but it isn;t - it is about ensuring the candidate with the greatest support gets in. If Con or whoever can't do that on their own, then they aren't suitable to be ruling in the first place!!! As it is, the Cons couldn't do it even under FPTP so I think that argument sunk fairly substantially.
I think you need to read more - AV is NOT PR! We should change to PR regardless - this idiot Government (Cons mainly) talk about "fairness" - what is fairer than dividing Parliament up based on percentage votes? e.g. 100% of the votes represent 650 seats in Government. If 49% vote Cons, 29% Lab, 10% Lib Dem, 7% BNP, 5% Greens, then we end up with: 319 Cons 189 Lab 65 Lib Dem 45 BNP 32 Greens ...and they can run like a coalition, but with ALL parties having a say. They also represent, proportionally, the number of people who voted for them. The reason the Cons never agreed to this in the coalition deal is because they are nothing short of greedy bar stewards who want all the power for themselves. PR, AV, etc... will prevent them ever ruling on their own again (and rightly so too!). IMHO I think people are against this change because they don't understand it properly. It empowers us more than the current system, but it it is true when they say it falls short of proportional representation (THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS THEY DON'T WANT THAT, OR ANYTHING THAT MAKES IT LESS LIKELY THAT THE CONS WILL WIN, WHICH IS WHY THE CONS ARE SO ANTI-AV, THE SECOND LEAST PROPORTIONATE SYSTEM OF ANY VOTING SYSTEM NEXT TO FPTP). FPTP - most votes win. Period. Even if all the other votes (against) are 71% of electorate! AV - Breaks the problem of simply most votes winning. More likely more people support the overall winner. PR - the best system (not on offer). Real representation of EVERYONE'S position. Permanent coalition government that most broadly represents the people (and the reason we have a Government in the first place - TO WORK FOR THE PEOPLE). Something else I just considered - we should scrap the party affiliation of councils. They work for us, regardless of the ruling party of the day. None of this rubbish about how this council has more bin collections than another council, simply because one is Con and one is Lab. I'm fairly sure all this stupid bureaucracy can be cut down if we treated England as one huge council area. Everyone gets the same bin collection as everyone else. Extend this to everything else the council does. The system we have now is bloated beyond insanity. We are paying crazy sums for suits who do nothing useful. Best regards, Vulcan. |
||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Ones again I agree with Pointy.
Don't worry, I have a little USB infrared thermometer, I'm checking my temperature now. Antibiotics may clear it up.
Sorry Uncle Mutley.
Seems to me that most people either favour AV or not, dependent on whether they are Conservatives or not or Lib Dem supporters or not.. For obvious reasons. I wouldn't have expected Uncle Mutley to favour AV as he's a Conservative.
Seems to be more to do with politics than logic for most.
By the way, it isn't strictly accurate to say only 3 countries use AV. Even the Conservatives use AV for their internal elections, hypocrisy or what. many states of the US etc, etc.
|
||
Slopey
Moderator in Command AirHauler Developer Joined: 11 Jun 2008 Points: 8280 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Does anyone else find it ironic that the Alternative Vote referendum is being conducted under First Past The Post?
|
||
AirHauler Developer
For AH2 queries - PLEASE USE THE EA Forums as the first port of call. |
||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
No candidates though Slopey, only two inanimate proposals. You could invent some more proposals though if you like, so you can vote for your favourite proposal, then your next, then your next etc.
Something like...
The voting system we have now.
AV
Robots rule and go on to rule the world.
Vulcan for UK dictator
Scratchy for PM
|
||
Slopey
Moderator in Command AirHauler Developer Joined: 11 Jun 2008 Points: 8280 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
You missed...
"Pie!" All votes need a pie option, imho! |
||
AirHauler Developer
For AH2 queries - PLEASE USE THE EA Forums as the first port of call. |
||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
And custard creams for Magic Man.
|
||
767nutter
Chief Pilot Joined: 09 Jul 2008 Location: Norfolk, UK Points: 1330 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Even though i voted for the Conservatives i am more on side with the Lib Dems on this subject, i agree more with what they say about AV than the Conservatives, i'm kind of 90% in favour of AV so when i vote there will be a good chance it will be Yes
|
||
Magic Man
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: South Wales Points: 5336 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Here here!
Answer a quick query for me. I take it that with AV, your second choice cannot be the same as your first choice? Otherwise, what's the point?
The flaws with all the systems also don't take into account the different constituent sizes. E.g. in 5 different areas you might get 2 cons, 2 lab and 1 lib dems elected for example but, because of the areas they cover and hence the populations covered, the actual individual votes for runners up in one area may actually outweigh those for winners in another area. I.e. you need PR over all the scale of voting to be trully fair.
|
||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Correct. Your first choice is your first choice, and the initial count is based on that only. If there is a win based on the first preferences alone, you basically have FPTP. Where AV differs is because you can opt to list your candidates in order of preference, your first choice can be who you truly want in, not some other choice just to stop another candidate (AKA tactical voting). Where the AV counting system kicks in is if there isn't a candidate with more than 50% of the vote. If the first choice is not enough, then they will count second preferences and re-count the totals. This will continue (3rd pref, 4th pref) until a clear winner is found. AV is better in that if your first choice doesn't win most of the vote (e.g. Lab) and say everyone put Lib Dem as their second prefs, then that could be enough to ensure Lib Dem win. This is good as whilst Lib Dem is not everyone's first choice (and hence the tie in the first place between the top two), most people favor Lib Dem as second pref, so most people get their choice. FPTP could have had Con win based purely because they got 2% more than Lab, but have the least support of the voters overall (so instead of Con winning in FPTP, Lib Dem win as they have more voters overall support ahead of Lab and Con). Best regards, Vulcan. |
||
papeg
Chief Pilot Joined: 25 Mar 2009 Location: CA Points: 1434 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Wow, so if I understand this correctly, if Martin gets 49% and Slopey get 40% and Vulcan gets 11% in the first choice, then the first choice gets cancelled and the voter's second choice is counted, this time Vulcan gets 51%, Slopey gets 30%, and Martin get 19% - and Vulcan wins. So, most people didn't want Vulcan in the first choice but he win because Martin didn't get 50%.
I don't think I like it.
Greg
|
||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Nor me if Vulcan gets in. The planet will be screwed.
|
||
papeg
Chief Pilot Joined: 25 Mar 2009 Location: CA Points: 1434 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Why don't you just have a run-off election of the top 2 candidates?
|
||
Slopey
Moderator in Command AirHauler Developer Joined: 11 Jun 2008 Points: 8280 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Which is exactly why I don't like it. IMHO, whoever gets the most votes on the day wins. If that's not a majority (regardless of the number of constituents etc), then hard luck, but it's the person with the most votes on the day - and that's what the measure is. Under AV, there's every chance that the person who had the most votes on the day, but not enough to get over 50%, may not eventually win, and the winner is someone who the majority didn't vote for initially, but was a second choice. So you can get the case where the majority don't get who they voted for (as they didn't accrue the magic 50%, but still held the majority - i.e. 49%, 20%, 20%), but get a different winner based on their preference. Preferences in voting and politics seems odd to me. I prefer to pick my horse and back it rather than say - "that one", "but I wouldn't mind if it was this one, or this one". I stand by my convictions and back the single party I'd like to win, rather than trying to pick & mix. But I can easily be accommodated with AV, by only picking a 1st choice. |
||
AirHauler Developer
For AH2 queries - PLEASE USE THE EA Forums as the first port of call. |
||
UberAegis
Ground Crew Joined: 15 Jan 2010 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
"Wow, so if I understand this correctly, if Martin gets 49% and Slopey
get 40% and Vulcan gets 11% in the first choice, then the first choice
gets cancelled and the voter's second choice is counted, this time
Vulcan gets 51%, Slopey gets 30%, and Martin get 19% - and Vulcan wins.
So, most people didn't want Vulcan in the first choice but he win
because Martin didn't get 50%."
In this example after the first count if no one achieves 50% then the third place vulcans vote is discarded and anyone who voted for vulcan now has their 2nd choice added to the other two candidates and whoever gets over 50% wins. so in this case vulcan could not win however if there were four people running then there would be a possibility of whoever originally came third winning overall. |
||
If the wings are moving faster than the fuselage you`re in a helicopter and therefore unsafe
|
||
Transport Steve
P/UT Joined: 02 Apr 2010 Location: Nottingham, UK Points: 103 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I agree entirely that this nation hasn't a clue how to vote on May 5th, because The Sun readers haven't had it explained to them properly yet... The reason that PR wasn't included in this ballot, is simply because the Conservatives don't want it, whomever organised this charade of a vote has won before the electorate has even put a cross on the paper, is there any wonder that probably only 30% of the voting public will physically actually go out and vote, which is the usual percentage these days. And, even though the Australians who made it law for their citizens to vote, it would never happen in this country, because of the lethargy of voters and the encumbence of not having the correct number of choices on the ballot paper for everyone to begin with in the first place, which would surely be an incentive for folks to vote. Until the corrupt behaviour ends in Parliament, I doubt if I will ever vote again in my lifetime, and as that is hardly ever going to happen, because the Government don't want to pander to the whims of us peasants and will only look after themselves, and make decisions like this to suit their own policies and lifestyles. The number of pre-election promises that have since been renegaded by both Labour and the Conservatives over the last 30 years is quite staggering, yet, the populous can't do anything about it. Now off to watch another episode of Yes, Prime Minister..... Cheerz. Transport Steve. |
||
papeg
Chief Pilot Joined: 25 Mar 2009 Location: CA Points: 1434 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
So, in my example, if there was a fourth candidate, then the fourth candidate would be dropped (provided he had less votes than Vulcan) and only people who had voted for this person would have their second choice counted, everyone elses first choice would still stand. Correct?
|
||
Post Reply | Page <12345 8> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |