 |
 |
I think the dichotomy between 'making a point' and 'really wanting to win' isn't quite right. One may really want someone to win, but recognise that they are unlikely to do so. If one is a Green supporter, or a supporter of Socialist Action (or whatever the current name is), then a vote for one's party candidate is truly a vote really wanting to win. Under FPTP, you either vote for them and have no influence of the final result, or vote for the least bad option among the front-runners (a tactical vote). Under AV, you can vote for the candidate you want to win, but recognise is unlikely to, while your transfer through to the least bad option among the front-runners is transparent. That way, the final recipient of the vote is aware that their vote represents a coalition of voters including your opinion. If they won, they would be less able to trumpet their mandate as a licence to do anything, because their voters were a coalition. Of course, the Green Party MP was not actually elected, because in a four way marginal under FTPT no-one could be representative of the voters, unless you had a AV or related system. Paul --------------------------------------------------------- Paul Bivand Head of Analysis and Statistics Direct Line: 020 7840 8335 Inclusion 3rd floor, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP Tel: 020 7582 7221 Fax: 020 7582 6391 Inclusion website: http://www.cesi.org.uk/ Consider the environment - do you really need to print this email? The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please return the e-mail to the sender and delete from your mailbox. The Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion is a company limited by guarantee. Registered in England & Wales number 2458694. Registered address: 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP -----Original Message----- From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Whittington Sent: 11 April 2011 14:53 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: To AV or not to AV? At 14:21 11/04/2011 +0100, Christian Hennig wrote: >On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, John Whittington wrote: > >>At 13:27 11/04/2011 +0100, Christian Hennig wrote: >>>Well, if people don't vote according to their true wishes, they >>>shouldn't complain if they don't get what they want. That's democracy. >> >>True, but I don't think that's really the situation I was >>contemplating. I was talking about a situation in which people were >>exploiting the existence of an AV system, with their 'true wish' being >>that their first vote would be a gesture 'to make a point' and their >>second-choice vote being the for the candidate they actually wanted to win. > >If "making a point" is the first choice of a majority, this may well >happen under FPTP as well. Particularly in constituencies with >supposedly "safe seats" why shouldn't they "make a point" if they think >that voting for their true favourite won't make a difference anyway? It >may even happen more easily, because under AV you need 50%, including >later preferences. True - and that obviously happens. However, I still think it could become a much more prevalent practice with AV, since some voters would believe that they could 'make their point' (in relation to a candidate they didn't really want to win) and STILL be able to have an influence on who actually won, whereas with FPTP they would have to forego that latter opportunity (relying on not to many others doing the same as them) if they wanted to do that 'making a point'. Kind Regards, John ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225 Mediscience Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893 Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: [log in to unmask] Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK ---------------------------------------------------------------- ****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. ******************************************************* ****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************