vindiboy Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 So what are the views on the proposed new vote counting system, good or bad ? I have received a flyer from the No's, with their opinions nothing from the Yes group. So what do you think,? I wont be around on the 5th May to vote either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Anything that hog ties the polictical parties gets my vote...........make the muppets work together, anything has got to be better than the perpetual back biting *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spospe Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Ireland, Israel and Italy all have coalition governments, all are weak, all fail to work together properly for any length of time. If you are away on the day, get a postal vote. I prefer the present system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordThornber Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm very happy with the first past the post system. I can't argue with a system that rewards the party that gets the most votes. Martyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 LordThornber - 2011-04-12 3:56 PM I'm very happy with the first past the post system. I can't argue with a system that rewards the party that gets the most votes. Martyn I may be wrong but I seem to remember that, under the current system, it is not necessarily the party with the most votes that wins, it's the party with the most seats. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGD Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 LordThornber - 2011-04-12 3:56 PM I'm very happy with the first past the post system. I can't argue with a system that rewards the party that gets the most votes. Martyn Sorry mate, I think you are confusing the two systems. Under FPTP it is NOT, I repeat NOT the party that gets the most votes that is rewarded (by getting to form the Government). It is the party which wins the most SEATS. Many times the UK has been governed by a party which didn't poll the most votes. Additionally, in all recent history, there were MORE votes cast AGAINST the Party that got to form the Government than in favour of it. The current weak, shambles of a lashed-up "Government" was of course the direct result of the inherent weaknesses in the FPTP system. If the seats in the House of Commons had been apportioned according to the ACTUAL number of votes cast for each party, the Conservatives would have had a massive overall majority. But no, because FPTP means that ALL the votes cast for anyone other than the person who got the most in that single constituency are completely wasted. That simply isn't fair. But I can fully understand why many politicians in marginal seats are now squawking about the "danger" (mainly to them and their continued ability to keep their snouts in the trough of taxpayers money!) of moving to a more democratic system. It is under the proposed AV system that ALL votes will count, including (if you choose to include them on your ballot paper....but to do so or not is entirely each voters personal choice) your second, third, fourth preferences. So if you choose to do so, you can do more than just vote for one candidate; you can in addition rank all the candidates. Thus if your first choice is not elected, you still have some influence with your second choice, etc.....until one person gets more than 50% of the preferences cast. An actual, real majority of the votes cast. Actual democracy! Many countries, including Spain, have variants of such an AV system nowadays......and it generally works very well indeed. All that people need to get their heads round is the idea of "ranking" the candidates, rather than only being able to vote for one of them. Seems a MUCH fairer and inclusive system to me. (Course, even under AV, if you still only want to vote for one candidate/Party, rather than using the option to express your views on the others too, you would be able to do that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think the party system is outdated and just ensures "yah bo" postering from the usual suspects, who would rather find a reason to object to a sensible proposal than make it work *-) AV will, I hope........ force the parties to work together B-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordThornber Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 A candidate is elected (or not) by the number of votes he or she receives. The party with the largest number of MP's (seats) forms the Government. Ergo, most votes = most MP's to me. That is how I view it. Martyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowtelse2do Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 The party that gets the most votes should be the government, but that's to complicated, isn't it. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 LordThornber - 2011-04-13 6:59 PM A candidate is elected (or not) by the number of votes he or she receives. The party with the largest number of MP's (seats) forms the Government. Ergo, most votes = most MP's to me. That is how I view it. Martyn With respect Martyn, you have described the Kingdom of Utopia, where the party with the most votes runs the country regardless of how many MPs it has and the other party with more MPs but less votes goes along with it because it is fair and just! Unfortunately in reality it does not work like that, it works exactly as Bruce has described it and it is not true democracy at work. FPTP used to work better when there were only two parties but the more parties and candidates there are the less democratic it becomes. It's not perfect but it is better - I think - so on balance I expect to vote for it - I think - unless some new revalations on the potential pitfalls convince me otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhorsf Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 All my life I have voted and still the ones that get in rob and con us with the promises they make then break as soon as they get in power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
602 Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Hi, Can somebody clarify this scenario? Its a poor turn out, and only 10 people vote, as follows..... 4 vote for A, 4 vote for B, 2 vote for C. All 10 vote D as their second choice. Who wins the seat? 602 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I don't know for sure - but I bet someone does - but it looks as if the Monster Raving Loony Party could just have won it's first ever seat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 602 - 2011-04-14 7:30 AM Hi, Can somebody clarify this scenario? Its a poor turn out, and only 10 people vote, as follows..... 4 vote for A, 4 vote for B, 2 vote for C. All 10 vote D as their second choice. Who wins the seat? 602 Dunno. Haven't received my little book of explanation yet. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGD Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Here's a little explanation of the AV system, illustrating the concept of ranking your preferences, rather than only voting for one person: See? Simples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordThornber Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Hmm, I guess it's rather evident how much attention I pay to our voting system. I have always assumed that an MP is elected (or not) by the number of votes he or she receives. Then the party with the most MP's is invited to form a Government. So allowing for my complete ignorance on this matter, under the present system, If I stand for election in Fictionville, (voting population 1000), and I receive 800 votes, I don't become the MP for the Martyn Party? Who wins the seat then in Fictionville? Martyn (to be continued) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 You get my vote your lordship :D .................................................For a small fee of course (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordThornber Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 pelmetman - 2011-04-14 7:46 PM You get my vote your lordship :D .................................................For a small fee of course (lol) Cheers Dave, actually I have been invited not once but twice to run for office. Once at local level and once for the Town. It was flattering to say the least but no thanks 8-) Martyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 LordThornber - 2011-04-14 7:52 PM pelmetman - 2011-04-14 7:46 PM You get my vote your lordship :D .................................................For a small fee of course (lol) Cheers Dave, actually I have been invited not once but twice to run for office. Once at local level and once for the Town. It was flattering to say the least but no thanks 8-) Martyn I don't see much future for the Martyn Party anyway. Your one and only policy of: " Free diesel for anyone named Martyn " is never going to get mass support. (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I've just changed my name to Martyn - just in case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Following on from Bruce's post - we all know the outcome of the last election - the first coalition government in our lifetimes. However - when you look at what happened in 2005, I for one wonder if we really deserved 5 years of New Labour muppetry when the percentage of votes was as it was:- Labour gained 413 seats with 35.2% of the vote Conservatives gained 166 seats with 31.7% of the vote Lib Dems gained 52 seats with 18.3% of the vote. ............................................. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005 So are those proponents of FPTP really saying that it is OK for the UK to be lead by a party that manipulated the constituency vote such that they gained a HUGE seat majority such that a Coalition between the two other parties was still 195 seats short EVEN THOUGH THOSE TWO PARTIES TOGETHER GAINED 50% of the votes and that was nearly 15% MORE than the party that ended up with 65% of the parliamentary seats? Whatever FPTP is - it does not give a result that I think is fair or reflects the actual votes cast. I wonder what the last five or six years would have been like if FPTP had not skewed the seat allocation in 2005 as it did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGD Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 malc d - 2011-04-14 9:39 PM LordThornber - 2011-04-14 7:52 PM pelmetman - 2011-04-14 7:46 PM You get my vote your lordship :D .................................................For a small fee of course (lol) Cheers Dave, actually I have been invited not once but twice to run for office. Once at local level and once for the Town. It was flattering to say the least but no thanks 8-) Martyn I don't see much future for the Martyn Party anyway. Your one and only policy of: " Free diesel for anyone named Martyn " is never going to get mass support. (lol) As Martyns' Election Agent , I am advising him to change his slogan to: "Free diesel for any one named Martyn, or mass." Funny old game, politics. You can change one word in your manifesto and you do get mass support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGD Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 LordThornber - 2011-04-14 7:05 PM Hmm, I guess it's rather evident how much attention I pay to our voting system. I have always assumed that an MP is elected (or not) by the number of votes he or she receives. Then the party with the most MP's is invited to form a Government. So allowing for my complete ignorance on this matter, under the present system, If I stand for election in Fictionville, (voting population 1000), and I receive 800 votes, I don't become the MP for the Martyn Party? Who wins the seat then in Fictionville? Martyn (to be continued) Indeed you do Martyn. And the votes of all the (say) 100 people who voted for the Bruce Party candidate rather than you, were totally wasted. But we need to remember that, ultimately, it is a national Government that results from all these elections around the country. So let's look at the big picture...... Because in the other two other constutuencies that make up the land of Snouts-in-the-trough, Unfairdom and SameOldSystem, the results were slightly different: In Unfairdom, 400 people voted for the Bruce Party candidate, and 390 voted for the Martyn Party candidate. 4,000 people didn't bother to vote at all, as they were so p*ssed off with the two-party, it's a Bruce party stronghold and always will be here, situation. Under FPTP, it was the Bruce Party candidate who was elected. In SameOldSystem, 700 people voted for the Bruce Party candidate, and 680 voted for the Martyn Party candidate. Another 5,000 people did not even bother to turn out, as they were so disillusioned with the system. So the total number of votes cast for the Martyn Party, for their manifesto, their policies is: 1,890. And the total number of votes cast for the Bruce Party is: only 1,200. But, HORROR of HORRORS! Despite having a THIRD LESS votes, only 1,200, it is the Bruce Party which gets to form the next Government, as it has managed to get more seats in the House of Snouts-in-the-trough. I wonder how all the 1,890 people who voted for the Martyn party, including all your supporters in Fictionville, feel about this result. How they feel about having to be governed by the party which got a third less votes across the nation than their party? FPTP. Fair? Fair my arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
602 Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 Hi, A few years ago, my mate's wife stood for a local election, possibly at "Parish" level. She did't win. However, the seat next to her's was not contested ...... no candidates, so the ruling party seconded her to fill that vacancy. Apparently this is allowed. My father told me, that way back when, he spent all night filling in voting forms. I think it was for a trade union election. 602 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave225 Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 Up here north of the Wall, we have AV voting for the Executive in Holyrood. I accept that most people really do not understand how it actually works because most put he 1st X by the one they want and then another X to anything they fancy, usually a low place Party as a sympathy type vote. However, at the end of the day it means that no Party gets an outright majority and we have had 2 lots of coalition of Lab/LibDem and the last was a minority goverment by the SNP. Ironically a lot of people are happier with the minority control bit as it still managed to get a majority of its legislation through as other Parties ahd to support it in order to avoid continual elections. It was usually the Tories supporting the SNP yet they are at opposite ends of the poltical spectrum. The LibDems took the huff because they were not in power and Labour spent 4 years opposing everything, even things they had supported while in power. Therefore you have 2 chances of getting elected as a candidate. Firstly by winning a seat with more than 50% of the vote, and secondly by being high enough up your own Party list to get elected anyway. The latter is what they all prefer as then they have no work to do, except fill in expenses of course. This time around we not only get to do it all again, but have to vote for or against the process of AV for Westminster, which I gurantee will lead to a high apathy vote up here. The Polls suggest Labour will scrape in as largest number of seats as they are arguing that a vote for them keeps the Tories out. As the Tories have no chance at all, this seems to be a bit disingenous, but a lot of voters believe it, as they still believe Maggie is in power and the Dole may be stopped. Like others we will not be here on he 5th May, so await the outcome with interest, or dread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.