Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis
because the votes for anyone but the winner are discarded instead of been added to the national pool. Thats not democratic. also votes above the winning margin get wasted. 19 million in 2005.
http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=48
http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=54
The fact is under FPTP only the marginal seats are important, there is occasional freak results in what should be safe seats but the marginals is where the campaigning is aimed at and where the leaders focus on. I am curious where your seat is since you defending FPTP. |
There is no "national pool" of votes, as you put it. In a general election we all elect a local representative to a national assembly. The weakness that exists in our system lies in the strength of political party machines which seek to ensure that once at Westminster, your local representative adheres to a Party line.
Proportional systems exacerbate this problem by weakening, if not entirely eliminating, the link between an individual MP and an individual constituency. AV seeks to avoid that problem but at the same time, because it is not electing one person to one post, but simultaneously many people to many posts, it is not remotely proportional either (and neither does it generate a 'national pool' of votes, or even a regional pool for that matter - election of members is still confined to one member from one constituency).