UK & alternative vote

Member20832 · Feb 25th 2011, 12:13am

I found out today that the UK is due to have a referendum on the "alternative vote" in May.

Antony Green, expert election analyst has written a few pieces covering the topic if anyone is interested:
Antony Green's Election Blog: Correcting More Misrepresentations of Alternative Vote Practice in Australia
Antony Green's Election Blog: How the Alternative Vote Works
Antony Green's Election Blog: Does the Alternative Vote Bring Tyranny to Australia?
Antony Green's Election Blog: Do Australians really want to Abandon the Alternative Vote?

Comments/opinions?

Yoshi · Feb 25th 2011, 12:20am

The last election was a farce thanks to the First Past The Post system, AV seems like it'll work better. Although I haven't really researched it properly...

el caracol · Feb 25th 2011, 12:47am

rule britannia

Vice · Feb 25th 2011, 2:41am

These corrupt voting practices instituted by Barack Obama are unconstitutional. He wishes to extend more voting rights to the UK in 2012 to guarantee him another term in office against the wishes of the American people.

Esmo · Feb 25th 2011, 12:27pm

I dislike FPTP because it is very much undemocratic and I dislike AV because it remains not proportional and because it still doesn't get rid of wasted votes. If, say, 50% was to be achieved after a 2nd round, the votes of the most supported and least supported would have been the ones to have effect, an entirely arbitrary preference.

But because I'm a supporter of STV, and a rejection of AV at the referendum would throw further electoral reform into the long grass, I'll be voting yes come May.

Member20832 · Feb 26th 2011, 12:50am

It can cause pretty stark results. Be warned. In some cases, the person who got the 2nd or 3rd most amount of 1 votes wins the seat.
Your allocation of preferences is CRUCIAL in marginal seats.
eg. Melbourne in 2010 election (which had full preferences, eg you have to number EVERY candidate):
Adam Bandt won the seat but came 2nd in total first preference votes (got Liberal preferences):

And in Dennison in same election.
Andrew Wilkie came a far 3rd in first preference but won the seat on Green and Liberal preferences.

Dangermouse · Feb 26th 2011, 12:39pm

In the referendum I will instruct my family to vote yes, however my preferred long term solution is STV. AV is simply the lesser of two evils against FPTP.

Vice · Feb 26th 2011, 5:35pm

Whoever gets the most votes is the purest form of democracy there is. If you win a majority or plurality of the votes you should win.

Dangermouse · Feb 26th 2011, 6:14pm

I don't agree because then unpopular candidates are elected on about 30% of the vote. With AV the least disliked candidate wins, it's fairer. It means that controversial candidates who have a strong core support but are hated by over half the electorate are not elected.

Vice · Feb 26th 2011, 6:23pm

Lincoln won with less than 40% of the vote.

Dangermouse · Feb 26th 2011, 6:38pm

And your point is?

Vice · Feb 26th 2011, 10:10pm

It **esn't matter h*w **w *f a per*entage *f v*tes y*u get as **ng as y*u have m*re than any*ne e*se.

Dangermouse · Feb 26th 2011, 10:54pm

I am n*t in agreement, I think the m*st p*pu*ar *an*i*ate a*r*ss the **ar* sh*u** win, just my *pini*n. STV is the fairest system *ar n*ne, using the *r**p qu*ta an* *e*ima* transfers.

Member20832 · Feb 26th 2011, 11:21pm

I think it's undemocratic to elect someone with only 30-40% of the vote. What about the other 60% of voters?

Vice · Feb 27th 2011, 3:11am

Lachlan wrote:

I think it's undemocratic to elect someone with only 30-40% of the vote. What about the other 60% of voters?

The other 60% shouldn't have split their vote and wasted it.

Member20832 · Feb 27th 2011, 10:02am

Why shouldn't someone be able to vote for a minority candidate, while still being able to choose between the top 2/3 polling ones? Preferences allows people to get more use out of their vote. eg. If I wanted to support the local independent but wanted Liberal above Labor, I can.

Dangermouse · Feb 27th 2011, 10:06am

First past the post is the least fair electoral system. There's a reason why most countries use proportional representation.

Esmo · Feb 27th 2011, 3:25pm

Aleksandr wrote:

Lincoln won with less than 40% of the vote.

This is a debate about how to create the best democracy. If Lincoln won with less than 40% of the vote, that's bad democracy, and you can't turn it good with good governance.

Aleksandr wrote:

The other 60% shouldn't have split their vote and wasted it.

That's compromising people's capacity to make an individual choice. 40% get to choose the person they actually want whilst the majority have to 'get together' and get less choice. How is this the 'purest democracy'?

Yoshi · Feb 27th 2011, 3:41pm

My only real experience with proportional representation is GCSE History and that it's one of the reasons the Weimar Republic in Germany failed because there was so much disagreement between parties. But it sounds like a good idea, and plenty of countries have it now and it works...

Member20832 · Feb 27th 2011, 9:00pm

We have proportional rep. in the senate. A very confusing system, the ballot paper normally has around 50-60 candidates on it as it's done on a state by state basis, rather than on individual electorates.

UK & alternative vote

UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

SE7EN;1062659895 wrote:

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & aternative vte

Re: UK & aternative vte

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Lachlan wrote:

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Aleksandr wrote:

Aleksandr wrote:

Re: UK & alternative vote

Re: UK & alternative vote

Share