mummy2sophie
19-10-2007, 08:22
What are your thoughts on preference voting?
This is from http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/count.htm
On your ballot you have to put no. 1 for your first preferred candidate and then no.2 in the box for your next preferred candidate, and so on, until all the boxes are filled. If you do not do this, your vote does not count.
"First, all the number ‘1’ votes are counted for each candidate. If a candidate gets more than 50% of the formal first preference votes then they are immediately elected.
If no candidate has an absolute majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is excluded. These votes are then transferred to the other candidates according to the second preferences shown by voters on these ballot papers.
If still no candidate has an absolute majority, again the remaining candidate with the fewest votes is excluded and these votes are transferred. This process will continue until one candidate has more than half the total votes cast and is declared ‘elected’.
This voting system is called preferential voting and has been used in Australian federal elections since 1918."
My DH is Canadian and voting for the first time in a federal election and is unhappy about preference voting. He thinks it should be first past the post style like they have in Canada and the US. In the US you just make a tick in a box and that is your vote, regardless of how the candidate performs. Hence the view that if you don't vote Republic or Democrat then you are "throwing your vote away".
In Australia it looks like Rudd would win if it were first past the post style (he's still preferred PM). But preference voting makes it difficult to know who would actually get it. The primary vote does not necessarily indicate who will win in the end.
The question is: Should we be forced to outlay our preferences in this manner? Or would you rather have the primary vote only?
This is from http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/count.htm
On your ballot you have to put no. 1 for your first preferred candidate and then no.2 in the box for your next preferred candidate, and so on, until all the boxes are filled. If you do not do this, your vote does not count.
"First, all the number ‘1’ votes are counted for each candidate. If a candidate gets more than 50% of the formal first preference votes then they are immediately elected.
If no candidate has an absolute majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is excluded. These votes are then transferred to the other candidates according to the second preferences shown by voters on these ballot papers.
If still no candidate has an absolute majority, again the remaining candidate with the fewest votes is excluded and these votes are transferred. This process will continue until one candidate has more than half the total votes cast and is declared ‘elected’.
This voting system is called preferential voting and has been used in Australian federal elections since 1918."
My DH is Canadian and voting for the first time in a federal election and is unhappy about preference voting. He thinks it should be first past the post style like they have in Canada and the US. In the US you just make a tick in a box and that is your vote, regardless of how the candidate performs. Hence the view that if you don't vote Republic or Democrat then you are "throwing your vote away".
In Australia it looks like Rudd would win if it were first past the post style (he's still preferred PM). But preference voting makes it difficult to know who would actually get it. The primary vote does not necessarily indicate who will win in the end.
The question is: Should we be forced to outlay our preferences in this manner? Or would you rather have the primary vote only?