AV - how to vote?

[HarrietStar]

surely degree of preference is expressed by the fact you

care strongly enough to express a 2nd, 3rd etc choice at all? doesnt someone putting another choice down give a strong enough indication (whether because they want that candidate, or whether because they don't want another one)? if you want to measure a lack of interest for a candidate, surely that's shown by the number of people who didn't vote for them whether as a first or alternative choice?

[HeadingNorth]

Under AV, in each round voters can indicate who their first choice of the remaining candidates is. A preference in the second, third, or fourth round can be just as strong or even stronger than a preference in the first round.

 

Suppose that there are three candidates in my constituency: Labour, Lib Dem, and Conservative. I hate the Conservatives, and have a slight preference for the Lib Dems over Labour.

 

You're looking at "preference" in a different light from him. He's thinking about how you might list your choices as Lib-Dem 90%, Labour 85%, Tories 0%; another person might list them as Lib-Dem 90%, Labour 2%, Tories 1%; and the AV system takes no account of that. It simply lists them as first-second-third.

[HarrietStar]

You're looking at "preference" in a different light from him. He's thinking about how you might list your choices as Lib-Dem 90%, Labour 85%, Tories 0%; another person might list them as Lib-Dem 90%, Labour 2%, Tories 1%; and the AV system takes no account of that. It simply lists them as first-second-third.

 

but isnt that enough? I mean, we need an election to find out who people want representing them and running the country. isn't it enough to find out who came first, second and third, why do we need to know by how much for each individual voter?

[Akrasia]

My point about preferences is that it's all very well having the opportunity to express multiple preferences, but there is no easy way (and no way in the system on the table) to express the degree of preference - which is key data if people are to be represented fairly. Why should someone who felt "10% positive" about their sixth choice have their approval of that person carry the same weight as someone who felt "100% positive" about their first choice.

 

I really don't see a difference between AV and FPTP here.

 

Under FPTP, some voters dislike all of the candidates, but hold their nose and vote for the one they dislike the least. Their votes are counted the same as the votes of enthusiastic followers.

 

Both AV and FPTP ask the question "Of these candidates, which would you prefer to represent you." AV sometimes asks that question several times with different sets of candidates, but neither system takes into account how much you prefer your preferred candidate.

[HeadingNorth]

but isnt that enough? I mean, we need an election to find out who people want representing them and running the country. isn't it enough to find out who came first, second and third, why do we need to know by how much for each individual voter?

 

Perhaps we don't. Although by the same token, you could argue "isn't it enough to find out who came first?" and we're back to people trying to persuade you that FPTP is best.

 

 

The point is, there really isn't a subjective best answer to the problem. Any voting system - any system at all - is inherently flawed, but no voting system would obviously be even worse. Which system you prefer depends on which flaws you think are bigger, and which flaws you think are bigger depends largely on which system you prefer.

 

In practice, most people will support the system that gives their preferred party the best chance of winning, whether or not it's a "fair" system. Hence the Lib-Dems passionately advocating PR and the Tories and Labour, historically, passionately opposing it.

[mattleonard]

You're looking at "preference" in a different light from him. He's thinking about how you might list your choices as Lib-Dem 90%, Labour 85%, Tories 0%; another person might list them as Lib-Dem 90%, Labour 2%, Tories 1%; and the AV system takes no account of that. It simply lists them as first-second-third.

 

Spot on HeadingNorth, although your summing up reveals the major flaw in any system I can think of which would quantify degree of preference, in that the first example would result in a spoilt ballot paper - I think there'd be quite a lot of these in such a scenario.

 

You seem to have a much better handle on the issues with various systems than me, or I would guess most others around here. Would you be willing to shed some light on what you think would be closest to an ideal system?

[mattleonard]

You seem to have a much better handle on the issues with various systems than me, or I would guess most others around here. Would you be willing to shed some light on what you think would be closest to an ideal system?

 

Oh, I think you just answered this.

[HarrietStar]

yes you are right, I think I'm struggling because I was once a passionate lib dem supporter and now dont know who to vote for, but let's keep parties out of this thanks for all the info!

[HarrietStar]

I'm not sure saying it's enough to know who came

first, second or third leads directly back to fptp because what we are talking about is how to determine first second or third in the first place. finding out about weight of preference

is surely a different issue.

[mattleonard]

Under AV, in each round voters can indicate who their first choice of the remaining candidates is. A preference in the second, third, or fourth round can be just as strong or even stronger than a preference in the first round.

 

Suppose that there are three candidates in my constituency: Labour, Lib Dem, and Conservative. I hate the Conservatives, and have a slight preference for the Lib Dems over Labour.

 

In the first round, I vote Lib Dem, but my candidate comes last and so is eliminated. Thankfully, although the Conservative candidate is in the lead they don't have a majority, so there's a second round of voting.

 

In the second round, I vote Labour. Whereas in the first round, I only had a slight preference, now I desperately want my candidate to win, which they do comfortably.

 

But this simply muddies the waters - how my vote is to be used to form a result is a long way off from the situation when I express it.

 

I think on reflection the most ideal scenario in terms of voter expression iss that which I seem to be remember is/was used for Tory leadership elections - ie, a round of voting resulting in an elimination if there is no majority, followed by another ballot.

 

The practicalities would be horrific, however.