Metropol

Further to cdd's post, it also means a much longer, more difficult to predict and more exciting election night.

That's a whole lot of bacon for Dimblebot.

I'm amazed that (as I write this) there are 15 people in our own midst who think that FPTP is fairer than AV.

marksi wrote:I'm amazed that (as I write this) there are 15 people in our own midst who think that FPTP is fairer than AV.

Perhaps they don't think its fairer. Perhaps they think its the best way to get their chosen party into power.

It's simply my wish to see natural justice, the candidate topping the poll, no matter how wide or narrow that victory is, wins simple, the others lose. Anything else is a sticth up to get not the most popular candidate elected but the least unpopular in their place.

(as I might have said many times in this thread before ... but repetition isn't too bad a thing)

Gavin Scott wrote:

marksi wrote:I'm amazed that (as I write this) there are 15 people in our own midst who think that FPTP is fairer than AV.

Perhaps they don't think its fairer. Perhaps they think its the best way to get their chosen party into power.

I am one of the people who's selected First Past the Post, simply because neither is Proportional Representation, and FPTP is the lesser of two evils.

I really haven't got a clue how I'm going to vote. I'm very tempted to vote against Clegg. But I don't want to vote with Cameron.

Of course, the constitutional effect is important too.....

bilky asko wrote:

Gavin Scott wrote:

marksi wrote:I'm amazed that (as I write this) there are 15 people in our own midst who think that FPTP is fairer than AV.

Perhaps they don't think its fairer. Perhaps they think its the best way to get their chosen party into power.

I am one of the people who's selected First Past the Post, simply because neither is Proportional Representation, and FPTP is the lesser of two evils.

Surely AV is closer to PR than FPTP? If so how is FPTP the lesser of two evils? Also, if you vote no, under what circumstances do you believe there will next be a campaign to change the voting system?

Alexia wrote:I really haven't got a clue how I'm going to vote. I'm very tempted to vote against Clegg. But I don't want to vote with Cameron.

Of course, the constitutional effect is important too.....

If you want to punish Clegg, vote Yes to AV - it will be easier to kick him out of office under AV than FPTP.

Depends on whether PR is desired in the first place, the constitutional position CURRENTLY precludes true proportionalism, which I prefer. A single member constituency should be represented by it's most popular, not least unpopular representative. More people are wholly satisfied by that solution.

If we are to elect a Parliament as a whole, the only fair way would disenfranchise representation in the devolved Nations as parties standing there would be deprived under the only true PR system i.e. a Single National Constituency with the 600 members elected under the D'hondt transfer mechanism.

DVB Cornwall wrote:A single member constituency should be represented by it's most popular, not least unpopular representative. More people are wholly satisfied by that solution.

I'm not sure this is true.

Your "most popular" person under FPTP can also be your "most unpopular" person, with a majority held by the "unpopular" group.

Under AV, this can't happen. The "least unpopular" candidate has to have a majority of voters who think they are acceptable in order to win the seat.

Therefore in my eyes at least, more people will be happier under AV, where [provided they vote for the eventual winner] they may not have got their favourite candidate winning, but it will be someone they find acceptable.