First Past the Post system backward

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1266819/GENERAL-ELECTION-201...
Transcribed:
So there's been a libdem bounce, erm boing
and no one has ever heard of anything like it before appearntly
it's er an unusual phonemenum, due to the erm first time
they've had a election where the leaders, potentional leaders.
have locked heads, American style apearntly.

This is the first time it's happend and er, they all took it casual
well they were all quite stiff as a board really, but they took it
casual, but now they won't, becuase Nick Clegg got a 10 percent
bounce or something, so it's gone from about the 20s to the 30s
And they're all on about the 30 mark now, Cameron's on 30
Labour's lagging behind, about 28 29, so they're all about 30
percent of the vote, but because of the way the seats are
divided in this nation, the first past the post, they got erm,
even though Labour's last, they will have double the seats,
of those who are first, say that Liberals got 33 percent,
they would get a 100 seats, and the conservatives would
be in the middle and they would get about 100 200 seats
or something and Labour would still win with a lot more seats
even though they're last, so they can come third but
they trump all the others because they get more seats.

This is the backward first past the post system we have
and it's shows it in sharp detail, I think it's supposed to
be meant for a 2 parties, 2 party system and one is supposed to
win outright and just swallow up the other one, no matter
how many votes they get in because it's on a seat by seat basis.
and then they have a strong government but when you got
three and they got 30% they got 30% and you got 30%
having one trounce the other is just like wrong and this
has never been dealt with.

what is also does is mean Cameron has blown the election
he was in front, the conservative leader, he wanted this
punch up, meet, and it's backfired on him really, cos he was stiff
as a board, doing his wet lettuce, green hat wearing stuff.he does
"you know I ain't going to lay a glove on him or nothing"
trying to act presidential and now he's blown his election
because the way the seatings set up. Brown will get back in
again, he will have to do a deal with one of the other parties
probably the Liberals, and so eventually we might get.
It sounds that we got Brown coming back but we might get
some half decent election system put in.

The only trouble is how long it will take to get put in.
If Brown, if I know Brown he will want take to the next election
about 5 years down the road to do it.
And then promise to do it after that.
Becuase he's like really clingy on to power.
But it should be done like an automatic thing really
but there's nothing in place to do it.
Should be like oh take 6 months and then come back
and give us this proper PR election
But er that's not what Brown's going to do.

So, that's how that's gone down.
er next (this) Thursday we're going to have the next one.
And er they'll be jumping then.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• First
• Past
• the
• Post
• system
• backward

[listen2meokidoki]

Well, the answer is the so called Alternative Voting system. But 5 May 2011 the UK blew it. Absolutely amazing volume of ignorance came through loud & clear. The best result was a handful of places where up to 60% voted for Alternative Voting. The problem is, I bet, it wasn't explained proper. It is not a voting system where you vote for your favourite. It's a system where you vote for who you hate the most thru to who you hate the least. But you Brits obviously didn't understant it. I'm Aussie!

[johnspencertv]

@listen2meokidoki

Basically the libdem supporters reckoned they were traitored on

when their leadership joined the tories in power, And they did sell

out on things financial. Tories went right back to acting like nobs of course.

So libdems lost all their support and so when they got their chance

to vote, and libdems leadership wanted AV, they got hit for selling out.

Their tory partners were against AV and ran a, hard, campaign. and

Labour were meh.

[cactustactics]

@alex471996 Personally yeah, I do think the local link is important. AV isn't a move towards PR specifically, just that if people *do* want a more proportional system (not necessarily without local MPs) then our views will be better represented under AV, and a 'No' vote here will be used as proof that people never want any reform whatsoever.

The Lib Dems wanted AV+ at first (AV for local MPs, another vote for an extra group of MPs allocated proportionally) but the Conservatives didn't allow it

[alex471996]

@cactustactics Ok, last thing. Would you agree that it is important to have a physical local MP representing you who is accountable. With PR my vote goes to a party, not a person and so who can i hold to account / who to i go to to talk about an issue. Who will stand up and say in parliament "A company in my constituency wrote to me to say..."

Would you support a move to PR as AV seems to be a move to PR.

[cactustactics]

@alex471996 PR is a possibility later if people vote for AV, but not a chance if it's rejected

And yeah- in AV if someone gets 50% of the 1st preferences then they win. If not, they need other people's lower preferences, which is them saying 'if I have to choose I prefer this person'- the winner will be preferred over the other contenders, like people who don't vote Labour or Tory would probably prefer one over the other. So candidates have to appeal to people who wouldn't usually vote for them

[alex471996]

@cactustactics

I wrote that about the Libdems proposing a complete move to PR

Now you've got me slightly confused, i understand the proposals and how AV will work but are you saying get AV but not Proportional representation.

I can understand what you are saying, candidates have to appeal to everyone not just get the most 1st votes Those who are 'popular' with everyone even if not everyones preference will get the seat and this will make it a better system. Is that what you mean.

[cactustactics]

@alex471996 AV is specifically about electing MPs, nothing else. That's why it's important - we need MPs with the support of the majority of their constituency, candidates who aim to represent everyone instead of just a minority who can guarantee them victory (like in safe seats).

If you really want to get rid of party politics AV is a step in the right direction - keeping things the way they are just benefits the two main parties and gives people no real choice but to vote for one of them

[alex471996]

The first past the post system IS MORE DEMOCRATIC only if MPs do their jobs properly (to represent people) because technically in a democracy the leader and his cabinet don't matter because the Commons who vote in or out legislation are the people who matter. The LibDems want voting reform but I strongly disagree because then we will go to a US presidential system and that is much less democratic.

We need BY-Yearly MP elections

5 yearly leadership elections. GET RID OF PARTY POLITICS.