'Should we change the general election voting system?' poll discussion

Former_MSE_Lawrence

Poll between 22-28 February 2011:

Should we change the general election voting system?

On 5 May the UK will have a referendum on whether we should switch to the the Alternative Vote (AV) system or stick with the current First-Past-the-Post.

If the election was today which would you vote for?

A. Alternative Vote (Rate the candidates you prefer in order. If your 1st gets the least votes it's transferred to your 2nd and so on until one candidate gets over 50% of the votes.) - 3,237 votes (50 %)

B. First-Past-The-Post (The current system - X marks the spot and the one with the most votes wins even if they get less than 50% of the total.) - 3,183 votes (50 %)

Voting has now closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below. Thanks

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

meher

we could do without several of the littel known lib-dem and labour candidates sneeking into the House.
voted av. hth

Saucepot

I'm sticking with the current system

Janet Daley says it all here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/8335603/A-simple-question-for-David-Cameron-are-coalitions-good-or-bad.html

Coalitions result in the horse trading of manifesto pledges & reduce accountability

"Many people are attracted to consensus – and coalitions – because they hate to hear politicians argue. They need to be told that democratic politics is all about argument: that without clear and fervently held differences between alternative solutions, there is no choice. And without choice, there is no freedom."

cat4772

There's a few things I'd like to change including making voting compulsory for all eligible but including an abstain option so that the general public can choose not to vote for the candidates available.

tomturton

The voting system should change - at the moment it creates a government whose numbers don't represent votes (see John Cleese's explanation on YouTube).

If making the voting system more democratic causes problems for governments, then its parliament that needs to change, not how are votes are counted!

omnipotentstudenttype

AV isn't going to result in more coalitions. When you look at the results for general elections since WW2 you see that the collective vote of the big two parties has been steadily decreasing. We're soon going to get to a point in time when coalitions are the norm even under FPTP, so a fear of coalitions isn't a good reason to vote no (or to vote yes for that matter).

Personally I'm a big Proportional Representation fan, and in an ideal world I'd like to vote for that. But considering it's not an option I'd rather vote for a system of government which I feel is more democratic than our current one, and I fear that if I vote 'no' because AV isn't my ideal then we won't get another chance to change the system in a generation.

Seakay

Would prefer an alternative voting system but not convinced that the one offered is the right one. Would really prefer some form of proportional representation.
Also think that voting should be compulsory and that there should always be a "no candidate acceptable" option so that so called spoiled papers can have some real meaning

Bazny

The alternative voting system is absurd. It in effect gives more than one vote to anyone who puts a member of a minor party as their first choice. Elections should be about voting for the one candidate who best represents you; not this second, third choice nonsense.

Pmarmalade

tomturton wrote: »

The voting system should change - at the moment it creates a government whose numbers don't represent votes (see John Cleese's explanation on YouTube).

If making the voting system more democratic causes problems for governments, then its parliament that needs to change, not how are votes are counted!

Agree with this completely.

Lib Dem in the 2010 general election received 23% of the total votes but less than 10% of the actual seats. They'd no doubt have had many, many more votes if tactical voting was removed from the equation completely!

I don't want to vote for who has the seat in my local constituency, I want to vote for the party I want to see run the country!

omnipotentstudenttype

Bazny wrote: »

The alternative voting system is absurd. It in effect gives more than one vote to anyone who puts a member of a minor party as their first choice. Elections should be about voting for the one candidate who best represents you; not this second, third choice nonsense.

It's not absurd at all. AV allows supporters of minority parties to express their ideal choice without worrying that they might be letting in an undesirable party as a consequence. You still only get one vote, it's simply applied to your favourite realistic choice.

Under FPTP you find some voters will vote for the least worst of the big two or three parties as they feel a vote for anything else is a wasted vote. That's not democracy.

Saucepot

For all of you voting "yes" despite accepting that AV is "absurd" but thinking this is your only chance to make a change, ask yourself why you are not being given the choice of PR. Is it because of a half @rsed comprise of coalition politics, the type of half @rsed comprise we are about to get more of and represents no one, because no one actually voted for the manifesto of a coalition government?