Why our electoral system is rubbish

gambitt · 2 May 2010 at 14:50

Klo said:
My vote is worth 0.033 Super safe Conservative.

I fail to see the problem with that

rypt · 2 May 2010 at 15:19

gambitt said:
I fail to see the problem with that

Maybe he wants to vote for the REAL Tories ... aka UKIP

semi-pro waster · 2 May 2010 at 15:38

RDM said:
The problem comes when you have to accept the "personal responsibility" of living with other peoples choices.

Dolph said:
This is the big problem, and why I support strict constitutional limits on the power of government as a result.

Enforcing opinion through law and taxation should be considered unacceptable.

Sorry, I probably shouldn't have asked as I already knew what the answer would be before posting. However just because you (or I for that matter) consider a policy facile doesn't necessarily mean that it could not or should not be passed - while I'd agree that many people are stupid (and that almost certainly includes me) I don't think it entirely fair to disregard their wishes but that has to be balanced with the rights of others and the potential impact of decisions on them or to put it another way "my right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins" as Oliver Wendell Holmes posited.

Ev0 · 2 May 2010 at 15:42

I still find it funny that Brixham is not part of the Torbay constituency.

Last time I checked Brixham was, sadly, still part of Torbay

Dolph · 2 May 2010 at 15:45

semi-pro waster said:
Sorry, I probably shouldn't have asked as I already knew what the answer would be before posting. However just because you (or I for that matter) consider a policy facile doesn't necessarily mean that it could not or should not be passed - while I'd agree that many people are stupid (and that almost certainly includes me) I don't think it entirely fair to disregard their wishes but that has to be balanced with the rights of others and the potential impact of decisions on them or to put it another way "my right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins" as Oliver Wendell Holmes posited.

People's wishes must not be allowed to impact the rights of others, that's precisely why their wishes must be disregarded in lawmaking, and that should be enforced at a constitutional level.

Evidence, not opinion, should be the only thing that can impact the rights of people.

aslco · 2 May 2010 at 15:47

That's why you shoudl Vote lib dem and then hope they can do a coallitio nwith labour for voting reform fox ;0. Don't forget lib dem are actually the second biggest party in this country at the moment which will probably contribute towards a conservative majority as the first past the post system goes even more against lib dem (by a lot) than it does to the torys

Tefal · 2 May 2010 at 15:48

Dolph said:
Evidence, not opinion, should be the only thing that can impact the rights of people.

evidence can be manipulated just as much as opinion though.

dangerstat · 2 May 2010 at 15:48

The only way to be fair is proportional representation how on earth we get called a democracy without it is absurd

Yours

N. Clegg

SlyReaper · 2 May 2010 at 15:49

lozzick said:
That's why you shoudl Vote lib dem and then hope they can do a coallitio nwith labour for voting reform fox ;0. Don't forget lib dem are actually the second biggest party in this country at the moment which will probably contribute towards a conservative majority as the first past the post system goes even more against lib dem (by a lot) than it does to the torys

Except it's in neither Labour's or Conservative's interest to have such a reform. The system as it stands is heavily biased in their favour.

Dolph · 2 May 2010 at 15:51

lozzick said:
That's why you shoudl Vote lib dem and then hope they can do a coallitio nwith labour for voting reform fox ;0. Don't forget lib dem are actually the second biggest party in this country at the moment which will probably contribute towards a conservative majority as the first past the post system goes even more against lib dem (by a lot) than it does to the torys

Labour want the alternate vote system. AV is worse than the system we have now and not proportional in the slightest. It isn't even remotely considered a proportional system.

The Tories are probably more likely to allow a vote on actual PR than Labour are, but Labour have done a brilliant job of scamming people into making them believe otherwise.

Dolph · 2 May 2010 at 15:53

Tefal said:
evidence can be manipulated just as much as opinion though.

Not anywhere near as easily. You only need to look at the number of times government has commisioned reports that have gone against them (and been subsequently ignored) to see that.

I actually have it confirmed in writing from our current MP that Labour considers the opinion of ministers more important than the evidence of scientists in lawmaking, and that scares the hell out of me. It does explain why they have created such an authoritarian society though.

aslco · 2 May 2010 at 15:53

no i know labour plans are far from what we want, i was hoping clegg wouldn't have been so anti-brown and strongly hinted at a coalition if they were to take up the lib dem voting reform policy.

Whilst in this election it seems heavily bias. lib dem still can actually get a majority with the current system if they had a bit over 40% of the vote, which other parties have achieved in the past, but i'd still much prefer the systems other mentioned earlier on thats been used in sctoalnd

rypt · 2 May 2010 at 15:55

Lib Dem position is probably closer to CMD than to Labour on many issues, if anything I see a Con-LD deal

Tefal · 2 May 2010 at 15:55

Dolph said:
Not anywhere near as easily. You only need to look at the number of times government has commisioned reports that have gone against them (and been subsequently ignored) to see that.

I actually have it confirmed in writing from our current MP that Labour considers the opinion of ministers more important than the evidence of scientists in lawmaking, and that scares the hell out of me. It does explain why they have created such an authoritarian society though.

but also look at the number of reports they have used to justify laws/action that have later proved to be either fabricated or strongly manipulated.

rypt · 2 May 2010 at 15:56

Tefal said:
but also look at the number of reports they have used to justify laws/action that have later proved to be either fabricated or strongly manipulated.

So at that point you rescind the law then

Tefal · 2 May 2010 at 15:57

Rather idyllic view of politics there.

dangerstat · 2 May 2010 at 15:57

lozzick said:
no i know labour plans are far from what we want, i was hoping clegg wouldn't have been so anti-brown and strongly hinted at a coalition if they were to take up the lib dem voting reform policy.

Whilst in this election it seems heavily bias. lib dem still can actually get a majority with the current system if they had a bit over 40% of the vote, which other parties have achieved in the past, but i'd still much prefer the systems other mentioned earlier on thats been used in sctoalnd

I think Clegg has made the mistake of coupling with the scum if Labour don't get a majority. The Liberal message is a strong and fair one, and one we need. But with his statement it's a "vote for Libs = vote for converatives" one. So I have no choice. Bad move by Cleggster.

PMKeates · 2 May 2010 at 16:01

Tefal said:
Rather idyllic view of politics there.

Why should we aim for anything less? Our current system isn't exactly outstanding!

r3loaded · 2 May 2010 at 16:02

dannyjo22 said:
Why can't they just add up all the votes and whoever has the most wins.

I wonder why this is never considered. Count all the votes at the national level. Assign seats by dividing by 650, so that approximately 0.154% of the total votes for a party = 1 seat. A majority is hence obtained for 50% of the vote, or 325 seats. You can't get much fairer than that.

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with a hung parliament, despite what the scaremongerers might say. In other countries, it's known as a grand coalition government.

aslco · 2 May 2010 at 16:04

dangerstat said:
I think Clegg has made the mistake of coupling with the scum if Labour don't get a majority. The Liberal message is a strong and fair one, and one we need. But with his statement it's a "vote for Libs = vote for converatives" one. So I have no choice. Bad move by Cleggster.

yeah very true. i'm a slightly leftie liberal, Liberal in its true sense i guess would actually have more of a capitalist approach. But i assume a lot of his party and followers will feel a tad let down if he sides with Cameron just because he decided to declare his dislike for brown.

However i agree that as a lib dem it is with their ideology they should side with who has the majority (if minor) which will probably be conservatives.