After one hundred votes, half prefer the "first-past-the-post" voting system and half prefer propoportional representation of one kind or another, which break down as follows:
Multi-member constituencies - 20%
Alternative voting/AV-plus/Single transferable vote/Burda system - 12%
First-past-the-post with top-up-seats - 10%
National party lists with seats allocated by vote share - 8%
The multi-member-constituency system has a lot going for it conceptually and has been tried and tested (e.g. in the elections to EU Parliament and Northern Irish Assembly), plus you can see them as an extension of FPTP (which is just a multi-member constituency with, er, one member), so all we have to do now we have to decide the least-bad number of MPs per (suitably enlarged) constituency.
Vote here or use the widget in the sidebar.
If you like FPTP (i.e. if you are a core Tory or Labour voter) then vote for 1; if you are a Lib Dem then vote for 2 or 3; and if you'd like to see more MPs from smaller parties, then vote for 4 or 5. I'm afraid we have to do this in four successive rounds of voting, with the least-popular option being eliminated each time, as neither simple averaging for FPTP seems appropriate. I'll close each successive round after three days or as soon as twenty votes have been cast (whichever is the earlier).
Range
2 hours ago
2 comments:
Use Borda methods and this would produce a result with one count.Borda :puts the proportionality into representation;accept no complicated substitutes.
DBC, I know, but pollcode.com won't do something that complicated (maybe other poll sites do?).
You can in theory have MMC's with Borda (rather than one-person-one-vote), but that's over-egging the pudding. I am a simplification campaigner if nothing else.
Post a Comment