More realistically:
33% Chocolate Bourbon Lovers, (a third of these also like jammie dodger, a fifth custard creme, a couple pink wafers, and a few are bourbon zealots, five also like garibaldi)
32% Jammie Dodger (but half of these also like Custard Cream, a third bourbon, and the rest like garibaldi)
31% Custard Cream (but half also like Dodgers, a quarter like bourbons, and one likes wafers, another quite likes garibaldi, but also likes wafers a bit too)
3% Garibaldi, some like bourbon, some like jammie dodgers, but hate custard cremes
1% Monster Raving Pink Wafers, but also like bourbon a bit
Go on, work that one out!
But PR isn't an option. You might as well discuss who benefits from a dictatorship.
Go on, work that one out!
Dodgers win - took less than 10 seconds to work out . Which is probably quicker than you typed it.
Go on, work that one out!
I don't need to - the result is the same: under AV the majority get what they are happiest with.
"[i]Go on, work that one out! [/i]"
OK. Let's assume 100 voters. I've had to round to the nearest voter in places.
First round votes as above.
No majority. Wafers eliminated.
Second round results:
34 Bourbon (gains 1 Wafer voter)
32 Jammie Dodger
31 Custard Cream
3 Garibaldi
No majority. Garibaldi eliminated.
Third round results:
36 Bourbon (gains 2 Garibaldi voters)
33 Jammie Dodger (gains 1 Garibaldi voter)
31 Custard Cream
No majority. Custard Cream eliminated.
Fourth round results:
42 Bourbon (gains 8 Custard Cream voters)
49 Jammie Dodger (gains 16 Custard Cream voters)
(9 voters drop out due to marking no valid alternative)
Jammie Dodger is duly returned as the representative of Biscuit Tin South.
(And also has the approval of 11 of the Bourbon voters into the bargain.)
Thanks Bez - I couldn't be bothered typing all that!
Even without working through it (which really isn't hard), you can see at a glance that the Dodgers had very strong support from both the Bourbon and Custard Cream camps - presumably because they have a strong stance on defensive crunch that appeals to Bourbon voters, while maintaining the smooth creamy internal policy that the Custard Cream voters like.
Individual MPs [in the scheme of things] have very little power, so unless AV could return a radically different result - the FPTP system for choosing which party then governs will pretty much trump it
Individual MPs [in the scheme of things] have very little power, so unless AV could return a radically different result - the FPTP system for choosing which party then governs will pretty much trump it
Only about a third of existing MPs have been elected with a clear majority. So AV, if selected, will come into play in most seats.
"[i]Only about a third of existing MPs have been elected with a clear majority. So AV, if selected, will come into play in most seats. [/i]"
He means that once the seats are decided, the issue of who forms government is FPTP in terms of counting seats. Except it's not, as demonstrated at the last election.
In any case, if you think AV makes little [i]practical[/i] difference, that's not reason to walk away from the referendum. There remains the issue of keeping the debate alive. If you think whichever way you vote the actual election result won't materially or significantly change then that's fine, and may well be about right. But the secondary question is whether to send a message of discontent with the existing system, and voting for AV does that. You're in a quandary if you feel that (a) FPTP is bad [i]and[/i] (b) AV is [i]worse[/i], but I suspect that accounts for very few people. If you think [i]either[/i] (a) AV is better [i]or[/i] (b) AV is not much better or worse but there are better alternatives, voting yes is still wise.
Bez For Prez!
Spot on Bez.
This explains AV perfectly (starts at 1min 40secs)
[url=
Weidersen[/url]
(originally shown on Frank Skinner's show the other night)
So, Custard Creme was elected on 49% of the vote!
interesting - I thought we said this was impossible...
interesting - I thought we said this was impossible...
Who said it was impossible? Votes are reallocated until one candidate receives more than 50% of the vote OR no more votes can be reallocated.
"[i]So, Custard Creme was elected on 49% of the vote! interesting - I thought we said this was impossible... [/i]"
Jammie Dodger.
Read my paragraph about how you define "the vote". Once you've eliminated the least popular candidates, 9 people have decided they're not going to vote any more, and 91 votes remain. Of which 49 is more than 50%.
9 people have, by not putting any more alternatives, said "everyone I am happy to support has been eliminated, I don't care who wins, I'm going home to watch telly".
This happens at present. People abstain. By doing so they say "no-one I'm happy to support is standing, I don't care who wins, I'm staying at home to watch telly".
As I said, AV is a series of FPTP votes. You choose to turn up to each of those votes or not based on who's in them. Same as now, except currently there's only one vote and no-one knows where the post is.
interesting - I thought we said this was impossible...
Actually I think it was you that pointed out it was possible.
Particularly in your example where all the voters have only expressed two preferences.
Here is some positive campaigning. Vote [b]yes[/b] because:
AV is a step to Proportional Representation. The voting mechanism - marking preferences - is the same for AV and PR. So by moving to AV now, it is more possible to move to PR in the future.
Two-thirds of today's MPs took their seats supported by a minority of voters. AV will stop that.
There is a reason why some MPs of all parties, and the Tory party, don't want to change to AV: Unless they work to broaden their appeal to voters they will lose their seats in parliament. Making MPs work to satisfy the electorate is a good thing.
I have voted with my conscience for the 3rd placed party in several general elections - completely wasted votes. So with FPTF, many 3rd party voters vote "tactically", for the 1st or 2nd placed parties. This means smaller parties are consistently under represented by the vote. This slows the long-term development of alternative politics and our national politics stagnates. [i]AV improves upon this by allowing us to vote honestly, with our conscience, without our votes being completely wasted.[/i]
AV is a really simple voting system. Even Australians easily understand it. 😉
AV doesn't require expensive computers to run. Yes, the counting takes longer, but I'm happy to have an early night and wait a day for an honest result.
😀
It still urks me that omongst those that have the cognative ability to engage in this debate there is a clear majority in favour of yes; yet by all accounts the No vote will prevail by a landslid based largely on the majority of the population making up their minds based on two massively oversimplified and poorly campaigned presentations from the two camps.
If they had only explained the different systems with biscuits!
Vote NO with your first vote!!!Here is some positive campaigning. Vote yes.....
No = 1
The problem with the [b]yes[/b] campaign, is that it is leaderless. Nick Clegg is the natural leader, but he has negative political cache at the moment.
The Labour Party, esp. Milliband, boils my pee on this. They know that the Torys will be the most long-term disadvantaged by AV "fair votes" and a win for AV will damage Cameron. And still they cannot fully commit and persuade their supporters to vote [b]Yes[/b]. They seem so weak in opposition.
voting yes, but even guardian reckons no vote will win. Let's at least go down with a god showing for the yes camp.
I have voted with my conscience for the 3rd placed party in several general elections - completely wasted votes. So with FPTF, many 3rd party voters vote "tactically", for the 1st or 2nd placed parties. This means smaller parties are consistently under represented by the vote. This slows the long-term development of alternative politics and our national politics stagnates. AV improves upon this by allowing us to vote honestly, with our conscience, without our votes being completely wasted.
ditto
Luckily, I live in a constituency which was reasonably safe for my second choice so I was able to vote as I wanted. If it were tighter, I'd have had to put my X next to my second choice to keep my last choice out. Gosh, isn't FPTP simple 🙄
I'm voting No 🙂
In the referendum, I'm voting yes.
In the council elections, I'm voting against the candidate whose nomination I signed.
A friend just put a comment on my FB status that sums up a benefit of AV:
"for the (council) election I have had zero information. Does no-one want me to vote? I don't vote on party lines but for best candidate in my eyes. So all I have is a list, a blindfold and a pin."
He lives in a safe Tory council ward. I bet he'd have had more information if council elections were AV...
[s]"for the (council) election I have had zero information. Does no-one want me to vote? I don't vote on party lines but for best candidate in my eyes. So all I have is a list, a blindfold and a pin."[/s]I don't care about my vote enough to find out about the candidates
FTFH
AV wont fix apathetic voters.
To be fair, there is almost zero information about candidates in some wards. The only mentions I can see of the two Labour candidates in his ward are on the official list of candidates and in a big list in the local rag.
Given previous results, they're probably just there as names to give a choice and to allow the Labour party to say they're fielding a full list of candidates.
Frankly, many town councils have a job getting enough councilors to stand anyway so it's more a question of who's prepared to do it.
District councils are a bit better, but not much.
Having attended a couple of district council meetings lately to do with the development of a core strategy document and also a planning application for a windfarm, the ability (or rather lack of ability) of the councilors to even follow the presentations being made by the council officers was frankly embarrassing- half of them to my mind were just too stupid to do the job.
Have to say I've been less than impressed with some town councillors though some are excellent. Pondering standing myself in 2015, but it's pretty incompatible with job at the moment.
He lives in a safe Tory council ward. I bet he'd have had more information if council elections were AV...
I very much doubt it. A safe seat is a safe seat regardless of AV or FPTP.
In closer run constituencies I imagine all parties are out regardless of voting system.
very much doubt it. A safe seat is a safe seat regardless of AV or FPTP
Depends how/if the opposition vote is split
Why don't we have any Exit Poll data on AV vote yet?
They never put out exit poll info until after the polls are closed. You'll have to wait until about one minute past 10.