On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 19:57:42 +0100, djc wrote:

On 15/04/11 10:25, Mark wrote:

I disagree. By allowing people to vote for multiple candidates (if
they so wish) it would eliminate tactical voting. It would also mean,
that if you don't vote for the winner, that your vote is not totally
wasted. Hopefully this will encourage more people to to vote make MPs
more accountable.

a. What's wrong with tactical voting.

What's right with tactical voting?

You vote for someone you don't want to elect in an attempt to stop
some other person you don't want to elect.

b. Why would a vote under AV be any less 'tactical'

Because you can vote for who you /really/ want to win (if there is
anyone) without losing the chance to block those who you dislike the
most.

It won't make any real difference. The same sort of people will still stand
for election, whoever you vote for the government will get in. Some
constituencies may be a little less 'safe', some marginal constituencies
will become 'safer'

All seats will become less safe. AV is likely to engage more voters
and candidates will need 50% of the vote to win.

What we have now is where a few voters in a few marginal
constituencies decide the government. The rest of the population get
virtually no say. AV is not perfect but it's a lot better than what
we have now.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.