The problems with the First Past The Post voting system explained

[andrewducker]

Next time someone says they can't see the problem with FPTP, show them this:

It highlights the main reason I'm against it - the spoiler effect, whereby under FPTP people cannot vote for the party they want to because it will mean a worse party will get in. So even if the Awesome party came into existence, who were clearly better than (say) Labour in every way, the majority wouldn't risk voting for them, because it would split the anti-Conservative vote, and let them win.

Comments

[the_future_modernes]

Oh my goodness! Thanks for introducing me to these videos!!! They are so explanatory! i am currently the mod of politics And i wonder, would you mind posting it over there, or linking to this post, whatever you might feel comfortable with?

[andrewducker]

I'm in work right now, with Dreamwidth blocked so I can only get to it on my phone.

If you'd like to link to it (or post it yourself) go ahead. Otherwise I'll do it when I get home tonight.

[andrewducker]

I've posted it on Politics!

[the_future_modernes]

thanks!

[matgb]

That's actually a quite good representation of Duverger's Law in a way that makes sense--I've done similar exercises with groups of people--tell everyone they're all candidates and the winner gets paid to organise their parties for the next month, or similar.

even if the Awesome party came into existence, who were clearly better than (say) Labour in every way, the majority wouldn't risk voting for them, because it would split the anti-Conservative vote, and let them win.

And if they hadn't been so scared in 1992, 1997, 2001 and 2005, we wouldn't have the godawful mess we're in now with Party Awesome now Party "no, I didn't vote for them, don't trust that Nick Clegg, he did exactly what he said he'd do and form a Govt with the biggest other party, that's undemocratic that is". Or words to that effect.

jonnynexus had the right idea about rereunning the '92 election...