What other voting/demorcracy structures are available?

[jimhigham]

Yes, definitely (maybe not quite as many though). I have seen the effect here of voting for a party at a local level - if the party chooses someone the local party do not like, it results in riots and deaths (well around here anyway). You have to know who you are voting for. Yes, I know that a reaction in the UK should not be as extreme, but the principle stands

KZNSeagull touches on something worth mentioning here. The debate over electoral systems will last all the while we have elections. There are many pros and cons on either side and they have been cogently discussed here. It is worth remembering that our system, flawed as it is, is largely respected and utilised by the populace.

We go. We vote. We watch the count. The numbers are totted up. The victor gets the keys to No.10 and the loser calls up the removal men. Nobody dies on polling day. There's no intimidation. The result is accepted and even an inconclusive result is worked through until a sustainable coalition can be formed.

KZNSeagull has seen a darker side of elections. I saw similar things in India and Nigeria. As imperfect as our system is, we have so much to be grateful for.

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

Having lived in the States for some time it is obvious that their electoral system is far from perfect, however one thing they most definitely got right is limiting a President to two consecutive terms. I would like to see this in the UK, it would have stopped the excesses of both Blair and Thatcher in their third term.

 

[30209]

there's the av system - http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/alternative-vote

more and more people seem to be unhappy with fptp and rightly in my view. if only we could have a chance to change the voting system - doesn't seem fair that we've been stuck with fptp for so long without a say against it

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Sorry I can't think of the correct phraseology.

My vote in Worthing West would appear to be pointless.
Mr Tory has always got just under 50% of the votes polled, from just over 50% turn out.

So basically 'stick a blue rosette on a hat stand, and it's as good as won'.



First Past The Post would appear to not work all the time the main parties are fighting over the same 'centre right' voters.

Proportional Representation all but guarantees coalition governments, which may or may not be a bad thing.

Are there any others?
I guess the impossible system would be for every vote to be decisive.

You could smash the place up...?

 

[Wrong-Direction]

KZNSeagull touches on something worth mentioning here. The debate over electoral systems will last all the while we have elections. There are many pros and cons on either side and they have been cogently discussed here. It is worth remembering that our system, flawed as it is, is largely respected and utilised by the populace.

We go. We vote. We watch the count. The numbers are totted up. The victor gets the keys to No.10 and the loser calls up the removal men. Nobody dies on polling day. There's no intimidation. The result is accepted and even an inconclusive result is worked through until a sustainable coalition can be formed.

KZNSeagull has seen a darker side of elections. I saw similar things in India and Nigeria. As imperfect as our system is, we have so much to be grateful for.

And that's why things will never change because we all just bend over and take it no matter what

 

[GT49er]

The California thing is called "initiatives". The main argument against it is that when you take the representatives out of the equation, you can end up with 'Tyranny of the Majority' - where in a population where perhaps 60% are A's and 40% B's (A and B can be what you like - ethnic groups, religions, social groups; or more simplistic issues, e.g. people who want a pass a particular policy vs people who don't), a certain number of the A's can sign up online and trigger a referendum, and know that they are likely to win, and can impose their will on the other 40%. Whereas elected representatives of A's might realise that certain things might antagonise B's and aren't constructive, or might find a compromise over an issue.

Probably not a massive problem, here, but could cause problems in any significantly segregated society (which I would argue the USA is not a million miles from being on several levels).

Cheers - thanks for that - I only had a pretty hazy idea on the California system. Not sure that a 60-40 vote in favour of something isn't actually democracy working, rather than 'Tyranny of the majority' though. After all, the EU referendum (if we actually get one) will be a democratic process - but whichever way it goes it will leave a largish slice of the population very disgruntled indeed.

 

[ATFC Seagull]

Cheers - thanks for that - I only had a pretty hazy idea on the California system. Not sure that a 60-40 vote in favour of something isn't actually democracy working, rather than 'Tyranny of the majority' though. After all, the EU referendum (if we actually get one) will be a democratic process - but whichever way it goes it will leave a largish slice of the population very disgruntled indeed.

Indeed, although only if it's an issue that would affect everyone equally. As I say, it's hard at this moment to see a situation whereby it would be a massive issue in the UK now.

But say a country with a slight Muslim majority over Christian used an initiative to ban alcohol and pork (God, why have I thought posting a comment like that on NSC is a good idea), then countless discriminatory laws could be passed.

I would argue that more broadly, we don't want any idea that can command 51% of the popular vote at any one time having a fast track to being law.

 

[Bruntburger]

How about divide the country into 6 mini countries so that everyone's general political view can be satisfied.

We could have -

London and the Home Counties declared an Islamic nation

The West a conservative and right wing haven called Wessex

Scotland as Scotland

Wales as Wales

Yorkshire and NW and NE as Old England with York as the capital and a left of middle appetite.

And finally the midlands as a Socialist state.

All independent mini nations within a Great Britain that work together on decisions of defence and foreign policy but have their own powers otherwise.

 

[beorhthelm]

The whole time that party whips exist, I'd say that the vast majority of MPs don't in any way represent their constituency as it is. At least with PR, even if you're voting for a party and not a local MP, your vote means something in Government no matter who you support.

the whips are there because the MPs are their own people. we've seen how politics has become taken over with career politicans, voting for a party, a political corporation, you just become another customer.

 

[Seagull]

Electoral Reform Society categorises systems as PR, Majotitarian or mixed see http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/voting-systems

Agree with others that the party and the whip are big problems that diminish real democracy. I think we should move to STV in first instance as FPTP is a totally broken system where only marginals count. See www.voterpower.org.uk to scare yourself!

 

[GT49er]

Indeed, although only if it's an issue that would affect everyone equally. As I say, it's hard at this moment to see a situation whereby it would be a massive issue in the UK now.

But say a country with a slight Muslim majority over Christian used an initiative to ban alcohol and pork (God, why have I thought posting a comment like that on NSC is a good idea), then countless discriminatory laws could be passed.

I would argue that more broadly, we don't want any idea that can command 51% of the popular vote at any one time having a fast track to being law.

Leaving aside the Muslim aspect (probably for the best on here; the usual suspects will be along in a minute or two anyway!) would an initiative to ban alcohol be basically any different to an initiative to ban smoking (in public places anyway) which I think they actually tried in California?

I agree it would be potentially more harmful in places other than the UK, where we have a long history of democracy (and not taking up arms if we don't get our own way in the elections).

Would be great if we could have some 'initiatives' on Thursday though -
* You must call an EU referendum (whether you want one or not).
* No more outsourcing of the NHS, and existing contracts to be brought back in-house when they expire, and
* Rebuild the line from Uckfield to Lewes in the next two years!

 

[jimhigham]

And that's why things will never change because we all just bend over and take it no matter what

You misunderstand me. I'm all for electoral reform and hope that this election leads to some meaningful proposals we might have a say on. However, that doesn't exclude being grateful that our elections don't turn into bloodbaths and that we at least have a form of democracy.

 

[Chicken Run]

It turns out I could have voted Green last time around.

As you can see, my vote isn't going to make much difference.
Even if the Tories came close to losing Worthing West, all it would mean is they'd lost every other seat, in the country.

This is as close to a carbon copy of all previous results, as you're ever likely to see.
If Zimbabwe happened to turn in results like Worthing West the UN would be up in arms.



General Election 2010: Worthing West

Conservative, Peter Bottomley 25,416, 51.7% +4.1

Liberal Democrat, Hazel Thorpe 13,687, 27.9% +1.1

Labour Ian Ross, 5,800, 11.8% -7.4

UKIP John Wallace, 2,924, 6.0% +0.7

Green David Aherne, 996, 2.0% +2.0

Christian Stuart Dearsley, 300, 0.6% +0.6
Majority 11,729 23.9%
Turnout 49,123< 64.7% +2.7

You didn't get the irony did you lol btw with nearly 52% of the vote that Tory chap has every right to call the shots. Sorry.

 

[Stat Brother]

You didn't get the irony did you lol btw with nearly 52% of the vote that Tory chap has every right to call the shots. Sorry.

Whoooosh

That's kind of the point of my question.
I can always count on Tory chap being my MP irrespective of who I want or whether I even vote or not.

I'm glad I posed the question, almost all of this thread has been enlightening with some interesting concepts and thinking.

 

[GT49er]

If Zimbabwe happened to turn in results like Worthing West the UN would be up in arms.

They do, don't they?

 

[Seagull]

Amazing that 29% of the vote is predicted to get 20 seats (Lib + Green + UKIP) while at 4% SNP will get 52 seats and a balance of power. What a system!
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html