In response to:
> From: Bart Ingles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: UK - Lord Jenkin's Proposals
> David Marsay wrote:
> Good point. I bet many voters would have a problem with a winner who
> had a very small percentage of the first-choice vote.
Yes. I was trying to say that this is an issue, and so one could
'rationalise' AV, not that AV is perfect.
> If you mean that all of the parties might tend toward center, that is
> probably better than the opposite outcome, and if true would seem to
> obviate the concerns of those who believe that a method is needed to
> favor compromise candidates. Actual experience will show which is the
> greater problem.
The UK party grandees have (some time ago!) supported FPP by saying
that it leads to polarised parties who practice fighting in
parliament and hence produce a good government that can be tough with
foreigners who have namby-pamby coalitions. This minority(?)
preference for 'strong' government is possible the only serious
objection to AV+. We shall see.
> minimal IRO allowing voters first- and second-choice
> would allow up to three dominant parties to emerge, adding a third
> choice would allow four, etc.
>
> What do you think?
I like the idea. It would have the advantage of simplifying ballots.
My guess is 2 or 3 places would be about right for UK general
elections. But I'm not entirely comfortable with it.
--------------------------------------------------
Sorry folks, but apparently I have to do this. :-(
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.
