Comments on: Color Me Confused On STV

By: Proportional Representation In B.C. Politics: The STV Referendum | Unambiguously Ambidextrous

Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:21:41 +0000

[...] Of course there are some concerns: So, as with most issues in BC, the truth lies somewhere in between… I am worried that if we go with STV, the sheer number of parties we have here will confuse the results even more. [...]

By: Rob Williams

Rob Williams — Fri, 01 May 2009 22:55:51 +0000

The countries of Australia, New Zealand, northern Ireland and Scotland do NOT use STV. The Republic of Ireland does but evidently are not happy with it.
Scotland uses a 2 vote system for electing MP’s no matter the number of MP’s required in any particlar riding. Some ridings need up to 7 but the voters only get 2 votes.
Tasmania, which is a state of Australia, uses STV and a modified form of STV is used to elect Senators to the Australian parliament. This is a good idea for senate election because Senators are not elected by riding in a parliamentary system.
New Zealand uses a 2 vote, 2 tier system similar to Scotland.
Malta also uses STV as we know it.

By: FredfromBC

FredfromBC — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:23:12 +0000

Sorry, but the Greens are still a ‘fringe’ party to me (as are *all* single-issue parties), and their supporters can have their point of view represented when they have gained enough support to be elected, the same way the Reform Party did. As for “forcing a false choice between two winners”, are we in elementary school again? We have to give everyone a gold star whether they earn it or not so as not to hurt anyone’s feelings? Not a chance. And don’t even get me started on the possibility of *perpetual* minority governments, which would be just as much of an economic and political disaster here as it has been everywhere else.

For the record, I’ll be voting BC Conservative this time around because I can’t vote for Campbell thanks to all the left-wing crap he’s been embracing for the last couple of years (whay happened to the practical, pragmatic manager-type guy we used to have running the province?), and I also can’t stomach the thought of voting for the NDP so they can take us back to the poorhouse again. I know that my vote won’t elect anyone (this time) but it will send a message, and that’s good enough for me.

By: Proportional Representation In B.C. Politics: The STV Referendum « Unambiguously Ambidextrous

Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:57:42 +0000

By: Frédéric Van Caenegem

Frédéric Van Caenegem — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 05:44:46 +0000

Wow! Lots of false comments here!

BC-STV is not a socialist conspiracy. It’s the work for ordinary citizens chosen at random amongst British Columbians. An initiative of a right-wing Premier.

BC-STV would not elect any fringe parties. A party would need about 7-8% support to ever think of maybe getting ONE seat. Currently, only the Green Party would have a realistic chance of getting a few MLAs. No Work Less, Communist or Marijuana will get seats under STV (unless they seriously increase their vote, which is unlikely). Malta uses STV and they have an extremely solid two-party system.

Attila, I have no idea where you get the “blitz” concept from? It’s not done under STV. You talk of balkanization and sweep in the same electoral system. These are two mutually incompatible concepts. Either an electoral system favour majority (sweep) or favour minority (balkanization), Not both!

STV is a good balance between these two extreme concept.

Read more about the referendum at stv.ca and nostv.org.

By: Mark Crowley

Mark Crowley — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:00:48 +0000

FredFromBC said “To me, the absolute best system would be this: over 50% gets you elected, otherwise drop everyone but the *top two* candidates and have a ‘runoff’ election. Simple and very democratic. I wonder why no one considered this when they were working out what system to propose?”

Actually that wouldn’t be best but they did consider, its called runoff voting. But you still waste the votes of anyone who didn’t vote for the top two candidates? And then you force a false choice between the two winners.

FPTP forces voters to vote strategically to have their voice heard by considering who is likely to win and voting to defeat their most feared choice. In BC-STV, you simply specify a full set of preferences and they will use as much of your vote as possible to elect your prefferred candidate in order.

As for “fringe” parties, the Greens are not fringe, 10% is a real point of view and it should be represented. What about the BC Conservative party, are they going to win any seats this election? Maybe, but its hard to fight that ‘don’t waste your vote argument’. Under BC-STV third parties like Green and Conservative can win. The thresholds needed to win a seat ensure that real fringe parties won’t get enough high ranked votes to win and will be eliminated to elect other. Take a look at trystv.ca to test out the vote and see what the results might look like this year if we were using it.

Just try to keep an open mind, a lot of people have thought long and hard about this and it hasn’t been chosen for some partisan, conspiricy reason. People are just fed up with wasting their votes in a system that doesn’t listen to them.