ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
A designated chap?
Oxbridge has changed you
Oxbridge has changed you
A designated chap?
Oxbridge has changed you
It would doubtless help them, but a (possibly naively) don't think this is their main reason for backing it.
In a constituency in which the Lib Dems are third they will not receive negative votes against disliked parties as they have less chance of keeping out said party than the alternative with the better record, even if a voter likes the Lib Dems more. The fact that the Lib Dems got such a large proportion of the votes compared to such a small proportion of the seats merely shows that the system is broken and not particularly democratic.
On the issue of local representation: yes it's important as it gives people a designated chap through which to interact with and influence the government and it decentralizes politics away from London somewhat. However there is no reason we can't maintain local representation under a reformed, more proportional system. If that means that constituencies are larger or some MPs are not associated with a constituency then so be it; ultimately MPs vote on national issues, not local ones.
Obviously, as your opinions are that of a Labour voter and Labour benefit from the current system... but do you think the system is fair?
If anything your view is overrepresented.
I feel my individual opinion would be more represented with the current system than it would be with any other.
Have you considered alternative voting?
Are you sure?
I'm unsure how that would be better than the current system? Presumably it would just ensure that those who are in power remain in power.
MPs in the current system are elected by plurality. That is, persons receiving the most amount of votes, but not necessarily a majority.
AV amends this injustice by having a consensus determine who should be elected to Parliament. It does so easily within the current electoral framework by having the electorate rank candidates in their order of preference.
Simply because it is not the view of a more minority party? I considered the lib dems this year as a means of anti-tory but found i just didn't like some of the policies enough but i still found the system to my liking.
I understand the concept but not what difference it would actually make.
Which minority party? They are all minority parties at the moment, just some happen to gain an disproportional number of seats to votes cast.
I'm unsure as to how much you've researched the issue though, and what your personnel feelings are about the equality of voters.
I'll illustrate this in the form of an example. In Brentford & Isleworth, the Tories have won in the current system with only 37.2% of the popular vote, while Labour & Lib Dem respectively have 33.6% and 23.7%.
Lib Dem voters are generally left-leaning, so it's only natural that they would favour Labour as an alternative. Their combined votes favour Labour, and they win by a majority.
As opposed to the glorious multi-party democracy which First Past the Post has provided us with?I understand but would this not ultimately lead to a two party system?
How so? The Lib Dems would not lose any seats which they currently hold- this only grants those votes which would have been wasted anyway towards Labour- while they may even win a few Lib/Con marginals with the bonus provided by Labour voters.As an existing base for Labour which is generally higher for the lib dems means they will overtake any marginal seats, leaving the Lib Dems with less power and Labour with more seats.