|
|
|
|
|
|
by wqaatwt
420 days ago
|
|
|
> can't physically Why? There is no need to increase their number. > overshadowed by the hidden assertion Even then it’s still superior. Even if everyone ignores the individual candidates and votes for a party in e.g. a 5 member constituency where the vote is split ~70:30 the minority party would likely get at least one seat when now votes are effectively thrown into the thrash bin. > Having served as an election officer for the last 12yrs The implication being that it would make the job too hard for you? FPTP is a horrible system any way you look at it. It results in almost 50% of the votes being outright discarded and permanently entrenches a 2 party system. |
|
|
I don't see how either of these assertions follow.
The size of the mandate is important, and the connection between a 2 party "system" and FPTP is something that you'd need to elaborate upon, because there is nothing about the ballot as such stipulating the number of parties. I. Fact, other parties are frequently on the ballot, so the dominance of 2 parties is not obviously connected to FPTP as such.