Author Topic: The Bu****t voting System  (Read 2053 times)

BaskB

  • Posts: 915
The Bu****t voting System
« on: May 08, 2015, 08:19:31 am »
SNP 1.4 million voters 56 Seats
DUP 184,000 = 8 Seats!

LibDem - 2.2 million voters 8 Seats
UKIP 3.5 million YES 3.5 million voters......... 1SEAT!!

http://imgur.com/5mKIghn

Don't get me wrong I didn't vote UKIP (nor would I ever), and based on Numbers Cons would still get the Gov, BUT is this system REALLY a fair system representative of the people? 3.5 million voters basically have had thier votes chucked away for 1 seat? and if you include Lib Dem, thats 5.7 million people (9% of the UK population!!!) for 9 seats of the 650! 1.5% of the seats....

Bu****it system as I already said...
« Last Edit: May 08, 2015, 08:29:46 am by BaskB »
Regiment 5 - Legion

Lionbeard

  • Party - UKRP
  • Posts: 15185
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2015, 08:39:06 am »
I don't understand this argument as it ignores the system of representation we have. People elect locally, not nationally (at least they're supposed to, anyway), so the total votes a party gets is more or less an irrelevence. It would make more sense to look at the individual constituencies and ask why parties like UKIP, Green etc. weren't performing at a level that could secure them more seats.
"Authority should derive from the consent of the governed, not from the threat of force!" Barbie

RodneyMcKay

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 2901
  • The Legion Commander
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2015, 09:19:34 am »
In my area the libdems lost loads of votes to the UKIP and other small parties.

It seems like the vast majority do not understand voting tactically.


Admiral Rodney McKay DSO
Commander of The Legion
ex-ESO Party President
Admiral of the fleet (Ret.

ApronChef

  • Magick Panda
  • RP
  • Posts: 2440
  • Everything is a statistic.
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2015, 09:53:04 am »
A lot of voters have little grasp on politics, you no longer learn it in school nor is it easily accessible for most people.

The UK is heading for a shipwreck that we'll pay heavily to recover from, if we recover at all.

BaskB

  • Posts: 915
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2015, 12:56:48 pm »
I don't understand this argument as it ignores the system of representation we have. People elect locally, not nationally (at least they're supposed to, anyway), so the total votes a party gets is more or less an irrelevence. It would make more sense to look at the individual constituencies and ask why parties like UKIP, Green etc. weren't performing at a level that could secure them more seats.

Then yes let your MP win the local election and represent his area, BUT in my area for example, 26k voted Cons, 18K voted Lib Dem. Anyone who didn't vote con has basically wasted thier vote and been ignored. To put it into Numbers 46% of the area voted for Con. That means 54% DIDN'T and thus got ignored...... How is that representative of the people for the NATIONAL government?

And come on people don't realise what they are voting for anyway half the time. My missus for example when I asked her, voted Cons because she hated Milliband and didn't like Clegg...... WTF does that have to do with my local MP? She didn't even know the name of them..... How many others did the same?

UKIP are the ones most hard done by they got 3.8 Million votes (12.6% of the population) and have 1 seat? So basically were saying to the 12% your votes wasted and means nothing...
Regiment 5 - Legion

Diakun

  • Hikikomori
  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 13868
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2015, 01:29:12 pm »
indeed, its totally pointless having elections based on voting locally when an individual mp has litterally no power. since conservatives are now in government any non tory mp people have voted for is essentially useless
Nymeus - 5:56 PM
I've got a picture of diakun and his dick
he can easily make people ashamed of how small they are, cause his is big
need to know anything else?

gali2332

  • Party - UKRP
  • Posts: 183
  • 'Viking'
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2015, 03:57:52 pm »
The point of democracy is that the government is supposed to reflect on the will of the people.
 SNP getting 1.4 million votes and 56 seats, whilst UKIP had 3.6 million votes but only one seat is not reflecting the will of the people- our system is shite.
Norse News:
http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/norse-news-302816/1



"I like your ass."
-Cicero (to Pompey)

kcirp

  • Posts: 2724
  • Special
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2015, 04:31:35 pm »
A lot of people don't appreciate the reliance we as a country have on a strong govt, aka a majority govt (even in 2010 it was a majority coalition) a system based more on proportional representation would leave a govt which would find it very hard to pass much of their manifesto due to strong partisanship
Why am I still here?

Congress x6
PP of UKRP x2
Citizenship committee x1
uMoHA x2
uMoFA x1
dMoD x1





Officially dead, rotting away in some scrubland

ApronChef

  • Magick Panda
  • RP
  • Posts: 2440
  • Everything is a statistic.
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2015, 05:10:35 pm »
A lot of people don't appreciate the reliance we as a country have on a strong govt, aka a majority govt (even in 2010 it was a majority coalition) a system based more on proportional representation would leave a govt which would find it very hard to pass much of their manifesto due to strong partisanship

Well the policies it cannot pass because the rest don't agree usually says the policy shouldn't be enacted. The Tories just enact whatever they feel like and never worry about the results. The results are usually bad and at the expense of the public.

Talon Karrde

  • Party - TUP
  • Posts: 3989
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2015, 05:33:06 pm »
The point of the system isn't to be fair, it's to produce a stable government. And despite the fact that I hate the tories, I would prefer stable government to the utter chaos of PR.

Tuus in terra servus, nuntius fui; officium perfeci



Lionbeard

  • Party - UKRP
  • Posts: 15185
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2015, 06:57:50 pm »
The point of democracy is that the government is supposed to reflect on the will of the people.
 SNP getting 1.4 million votes and 56 seats, whilst UKIP had 3.6 million votes but only one seat is not reflecting the will of the people- our system is shite.

That's not a great comparison. The SNP only ran in 59 seats, whereas UKIP had candidates in 624. You could argue that FPTP has shown the will of the Scottish people reasonably well.
"Authority should derive from the consent of the governed, not from the threat of force!" Barbie

Sambo112

  • Aedile
  • Party - UKRP
  • Posts: 1154
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2015, 08:43:31 pm »
All Hail your Tory Overlords



Sambo223 k?

gali2332

  • Party - UKRP
  • Posts: 183
  • 'Viking'
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2015, 10:00:42 pm »
Bow down and prepare for Dave cutting everything, starting with his hair- he's cutting it off and selling it in order to pay for an austerity sandwich he had last month.
Norse News:
http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/norse-news-302816/1



"I like your ass."
-Cicero (to Pompey)

ApronChef

  • Magick Panda
  • RP
  • Posts: 2440
  • Everything is a statistic.
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2015, 11:25:40 pm »
The point of the system isn't to be fair, it's to produce a stable government. And despite the fact that I hate the tories, I would prefer stable government to the utter chaos of PR.

The tories wont have a stable government. Its way past stability now. The UK is heading for disaster.

Iain Keers

  • Party - TUP
  • Posts: 12057
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2015, 12:19:01 pm »
Personally I think there is a case for a regional list
"Come to me, all who labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." ~ Mt 11:28

Prof Moriarty

  • Third Place CP Election December 2013
  • RP
  • Posts: 2694
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2015, 03:25:10 pm »
Proportional Representation is the way to go. Majority Governments are never good for a country, should be more like the state of play in most other countries with coalitions of a few parties so more people's voices are heard.
Atticus Sand, Lord of Last Post Wins
Quote from: Emergy
Bit closer than I thought It would be thus far. Moriarty syphoning votes off in the all important goat demographic.
Quote from: Butjam
I voted for you, but you got a resounding chorus of 'not sure if srs' from everyone else....


Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 13994
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2015, 03:46:41 pm »
I don't understand this argument as it ignores the system of representation we have. People elect locally, not nationally (at least they're supposed to, anyway), so the total votes a party gets is more or less an irrelevence. It would make more sense to look at the individual constituencies and ask why parties like UKIP, Green etc. weren't performing at a level that could secure them more seats.

There are several problems:

>the parties and the national outcome is politicised vastly more than local, meaning that most people consider the national outcome rather than local when voting

>using Thanet South as an example, under FPTP the winner of the election had a share of 38.1% of votes cast (not close to a majority of total votes) where the second had 32.4% and third 23.8%. Ignoring the rest of the share for laziness, that means that 56.2% (a majority) of the electorate voted for someone who is not the winner (and, therefore, have not democratically supported them)

>FPTP is generally praised as producing stable governments and allowing electorates to kick out bad MPs and support good ones, but since elections are usually only every 5 years, this means that if an electorate want to support or get rid of their MP they often have to vote tactically (and also have to vote based on only a rough idea of how things MIGHT turn out)

>tactical voting is having to compromise on your wishes as an electorate in order to achieve this, and doing so is either:

>bad, in which case you can quite easily argue that a proportional voting system is superior, in at least allowing political beliefs to be better represented
>fine, in which case under proportional voting there is still the element of political compromise in that if your opinions are of the minority, if it is a ranked system at least your alternative (less prefereable ones) choices are more likely to win, which is compromise

In my area the libdems lost loads of votes to the UKIP and other small parties.

It seems like the vast majority do not understand voting tactically.

Good, I think voting tactically is as appalling as tribal voting and has led us to this mess to start with.

A lot of voters have little grasp on politics, you no longer learn it in school nor is it easily accessible for most people.

I don't think it's easy to say something like this. It's far more likely the case that political matters aren't politicised enough and people aren't informed on issues rather than policies, which is on the parties more than anyone. You only have to look at the AV referendum, its campaign and the voting turnout to show that.

Tribal voting is still very much a thing, which is a shame, and apathy is also a concern (and partly caused by it), but it's on the parties to politicise and campaign properly rather than simply invest time and effort into mud throwing and manifesto pledging.

A lot of people don't appreciate the reliance we as a country have on a strong govt, aka a majority govt (even in 2010 it was a majority coalition) a system based more on proportional representation would leave a govt which would find it very hard to pass much of their manifesto due to strong partisanship

The point of the system isn't to be fair, it's to produce a stable government. And despite the fact that I hate the tories, I would prefer stable government to the utter chaos of PR.

This is a valid argument against reforming the system from FPTP, but equally the state of the two major parties is such that their manifesto and voting is flawed anyway because they have expanded out into the centre so much that they're essentially coalitions themselves.

Many Conservatives are far more to the right and Eurosceptic than Cameron and the party leadership at the moment, for instance, and are often ignored in favour of appealing to centre-ground voters with compromise. To someone in the Conservative right, a lot of their manifesto would seem like a coalition compromise itself.

Equally, many in Labour are more left and some also Eurosceptic than the party leadership, and must feel ignored for the same reasons.

I would argue that the state of the parties in being so bloated, fractured and strained to the point of near-collapse has fooled the electorate and politicians that FPTP is able to produce stable government and that there is no need for political reform, but in actual fact this stability is false as it's the parties and their membership that take the strain whenever policy and manifesto needs to be decided rather than the government.

That's not a great comparison. The SNP only ran in 59 seats, whereas UKIP had candidates in 624. You could argue that FPTP has shown the will of the Scottish people reasonably well.

While this is fine and perfectly valid in the system as is, the state of Scotland in the political union is a joke. The West Lothian question needs an answer soon.

Also, with regards to the result of the country, 24.3%, 14.9% and 7.5% of the electorate are only represented by one MP each, and though only half of the electorate voted for SNP candidates, all but three constituencies are now represented by them.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2015, 03:49:42 pm by Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar »
HRH Pope Digby V, Prince of Hanover, KC, KG, KP, GBE, OGS, FRSL, BGD, PhD
Chancellor of BBH Open University


Prof Moriarty

  • Third Place CP Election December 2013
  • RP
  • Posts: 2694
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #17 on: May 09, 2015, 05:25:21 pm »
That's not a great comparison. The SNP only ran in 59 seats, whereas UKIP had candidates in 624. You could argue that FPTP has shown the will of the Scottish people reasonably well.

While this is fine and perfectly valid in the system as is, the state of Scotland in the political union is a joke. The West Lothian question needs an answer soon.

Also, with regards to the result of the country, 24.3%, 14.9% and 7.5% of the electorate are only represented by one MP each, and though only half of the electorate voted for SNP candidates, all but three constituencies are now represented by them.

Regards West Lothian question, and I agree with the principal of EVEL, what constitutes a truly English only matter? Until Barnett is looked at and reviewed somehow, with I dunno a gradual push into Full Fiscal Autonomy over time (Not the push into the deep end which Labour were suggesting SNP were proposing), there are rarely any English only matters. Although devolved, the likes of Health and Education when it comes to spending does matter when it comes to Scotland because of the knock-on effects.

On the second point, and again I agree with Proportional Representation, but its interesting to note this has only become a major issue now Labour haven't got most of the seats. Its interesting that changing the voting system only seems to matter when the big guns are disadvantaged by it.
Atticus Sand, Lord of Last Post Wins
Quote from: Emergy
Bit closer than I thought It would be thus far. Moriarty syphoning votes off in the all important goat demographic.
Quote from: Butjam
I voted for you, but you got a resounding chorus of 'not sure if srs' from everyone else....


Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 13994
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #18 on: May 09, 2015, 08:05:04 pm »
Regards West Lothian question, and I agree with the principal of EVEL, what constitutes a truly English only matter? Until Barnett is looked at and reviewed somehow, with I dunno a gradual push into Full Fiscal Autonomy over time (Not the push into the deep end which Labour were suggesting SNP were proposing), there are rarely any English only matters. Although devolved, the likes of Health and Education when it comes to spending does matter when it comes to Scotland because of the knock-on effects.

On the second point, and again I agree with Proportional Representation, but its interesting to note this has only become a major issue now Labour haven't got most of the seats. Its interesting that changing the voting system only seems to matter when the big guns are disadvantaged by it.

I agree, but I think reform needs to start now towards full fiscal autonomy and some form of federalism for the UK so there can be parliaments for each country to vote on matters that affect them (with defence and foreign policy being a national matter).

Also, I think it's an utter shame that PR only became a real issue in politics when the Lib Dems brought an AV referendum into the coalition agreement. It was done hastily, sloppily and is a joke in retrospect. My fear is that the EU referendum now will be similar.
HRH Pope Digby V, Prince of Hanover, KC, KG, KP, GBE, OGS, FRSL, BGD, PhD
Chancellor of BBH Open University


Prof Moriarty

  • Third Place CP Election December 2013
  • RP
  • Posts: 2694
Re: The Bu****t voting System
« Reply #19 on: May 09, 2015, 11:09:26 pm »

I agree, but I think reform needs to start now towards full fiscal autonomy and some form of federalism for the UK so there can be parliaments for each country to vote on matters that affect them (with defence and foreign policy being a national matter).

Also, I think it's an utter shame that PR only became a real issue in politics when the Lib Dems brought an AV referendum into the coalition agreement. It was done hastily, sloppily and is a joke in retrospect. My fear is that the EU referendum now will be similar.

Definitely, I think if the Tories are serious on EVEL they should be looking at the formation of an English Parliament with equal devolution across the spectrum. Certainly, more has to be devolved, the Smith Commision's proposals were watered down enough as it was (largely down to Labour's involvement, may I add), and the limited powers promised since have been further diluted. FFA should be the end goal.

The AV referendum was a joke. At least now though people have actually woken up to why FPTP should be changed.
Atticus Sand, Lord of Last Post Wins
Quote from: Emergy
Bit closer than I thought It would be thus far. Moriarty syphoning votes off in the all important goat demographic.
Quote from: Butjam
I voted for you, but you got a resounding chorus of 'not sure if srs' from everyone else....


 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
What precious metal is a currency in erepublik?:
How do you spell 'Frerk'?:
What social MMO is this forum linked to?: