Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

What's your view on the UK Majority system for voting? Suitable or needs amending? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Is the current Majority rule system suitable?
    Its Fit for purpose
    66.67%
    ] Make it so voting is a legal requirement and what ever majority wins
    0
    0%
    Re-do it so that any winning vote must be by a minimum percentage
    16.67%
    Make voting a legal requirement and a threshold must be reached
    8.33%
    Other
    8.33%
    Dont care
    0
    0%

    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Please bare in mind the EU example is just being used due to eveyones familiarity with it so no admonishing people about that particular vote!

    I ask this due mainly to the contentious EU referendum debate in which [incase you live under a rock] In which; 48.1% voted Remain, 51.9% voted Leave with 72.2% of the electorate turning up.

    My question is thus this, do you think it is democratically fair our current Majority Rule system whereby if over half of the votes say yes then it happens or vice versa whilst the other percentage are left to live with it?

    Please bare in mind a couple of things though;
    1] This question is only when the vote is close say like this one
    2] One option is to do a filibuster, so to speak, and send such votes back until a clear majority have it
    3] Another option is for a minimum voter turn out to make it legitimate e.g. in this instance is like this; or similar
    Spoiler:
    Show
    The electorate is 46,500,000,001[100%] of those 33,573,000,722[72.2%] voted with 17,424,387,374[51.9%] voting leave and thus 16,148,613,347[48.1%] remain and in the whole voting public 37.5% vote leave with 62.5% thus being not represented. So whilst one side commanded a hair pin majority in the vote they command a definitive minority on the population
    So the options for the pole are;

    A] Fit for purpose
    B] Make it so voting is a legal requirement and what ever majority wins
    C] Re-do it so that any winning vote must be by a minimum percentage e.g. win by 5% more votes than the other option
    D] Make voting a legal requirement and a threshold must be reached
    E] other


    Personally i'd go with [D] as at least there it is less likely you end up with a tyranny of the majority and with current rules either a slim majority of the vote/minority of the voters which is nominally what people seek to avoid no? e.g. the figures above. But hey thats just me

    Please do share your thoughts/opinions
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Mate. 52% Voted Leave. It was democratic. What else do you want?
    If it was the other way round, I would have accepted it, and you would have too.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    There's still the 'tyranny of the majority' with a 55:45 split. A simple majority is okay.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Majority rule ftw. Speaking of which, we need to abolish the shameful first past the post system
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Keep First Past the Post.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Naveed-7)
    Mate. 52% Voted Leave. It was democratic. What else do you want?
    If it was the other way round, I would have accepted it, and you would have too.
    I Believe I said quite clearly what I want, a clear majority of the electorate not just a hair pin percentage over those that did turn out. Although I would be interested to see how a second vote would go, as history shows with Denmark and Ireland [twice] the vote flipped after people had actually thought about their actions, not saying everyone on either side didnt with this vote there was however a disgusting amount of lying and many would have voted on that, that you cannot deny.
    Either way im not particularly bothered as i have another EU passport.

    I would have said exactly what im saying now, a significant win, not a fractional one. Do you honestly believe that having almost half the population being told to do something they didnt want is good for a country as opposed to say a 5 point difference or what not..?

    Either way it was an example im interested in the principle.


    (Original post by jamestg)
    There's still the 'tyranny of the majority' with a 55:45 split. A simple majority is okay.
    Less so with such a number howeverI did clarify it by saying the entire electorate of which this was not. Again though that was given as a relateable example.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry, but there are a lot of things wrong with the voting system. But this isn't one.

    Surely the voting system we have is a major problem? Perhaps low turnout a General Elections is due to the fact people can see the current voting system is failing them? The graph below shows exactly what is wrong with our voting system.

    In Northern Ireland we use STV. It is a complicated system, but it works.

    In the 2016 election:
    DUP win 29.2% of vote- Win 35.2% of seats
    Sinn Fein win 24% of vote- Win 25.9% of seats
    UUP win 12.8% of vote- Win 14.8% of seats
    SDLP win 12% of vote- Win 11.1% of seats
    Alliance win 7% of vote- Win 6.4% of seats
    Green win 2.7% of vote- Win 1.8% of seats
    People before profit win 2% of vote- Win 1.8% of seats
    TUV win 3.4% of vote- Win 1% of seats

    Makes more sense doing it that way, yeah? The smaller parties are still slightly under-represented, but they are more represented than they would be under a FPTP system.

    Back to the topic. No, voting shouldn't be compulsory. People have the right to vote, I also believe people have the right not to vote. I think forcing people to do something is not always the best idea.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by RuWill2001)
    Sorry, but there are a lot of things wrong with the voting system. But this isn't one.

    Surely the voting system we have is a major problem? Perhaps low turnout a General Elections is due to the fact people can see the current voting system is failing them? The graph below shows exactly what is wrong with our voting system.

    In Northern Ireland we use STV. It is a complicated system, but it works.

    In the 2016 election:
    DUP win 29.2% of vote- Win 35.2% of seats
    Sinn Fein win 24% of vote- Win 25.9% of seats
    UUP win 12.8% of vote- Win 14.8% of seats
    SDLP win 12% of vote- Win 11.1% of seats
    Alliance win 7% of vote- Win 6.4% of seats
    Green win 2.7% of vote- Win 1.8% of seats
    People before profit win 2% of vote- Win 1.8% of seats
    TUV win 3.4% of vote- Win 1% of seats

    Makes more sense doing it that way, yeah? The smaller parties are still slightly under-represented, but they are more represented than they would be under a FPTP system.

    Back to the topic. No, voting shouldn't be compulsory. People have the right to vote, I also believe people have the right not to vote. I think forcing people to do something is not always the best idea.
    Oh i dont deny that getting the government to ever think of doing it though would be tricky..
    Indeed but for instance under the Australian model you're under no obligation to vote properly, draw a **** for all they care just so long as you turn up. Which in fairness has a point it more accuratly shows what the population want and on principle people fought for centuries to have their say and watching the footy instead is, among other things, a waste, no?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Be careful what you wish for.

    FPTP is not perfect but I am far from being convinced that the alternatives are better.

    I would not want a system that allowed a Nigel F'tang F'tang Biscuit-Barrel Smith (Pokemon Go Party) to be elected just because approximately 0.01% of the electorate thought it would be fun.

    Anyway, to your specific questions. No to compulsory voting and a majority is a majority. Think about how it might affect votes in the HoC if a minimum 'win' was required. If none of the MPs were willing (or able under a three line whip) to change their mind business could not be conducted.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I feel like FPTP does have its flaws but ultimately, it's still one of the easiest methods and everyone is able to understand it (you have to remember that there's still a large proportion of the population that are uneducated).

    However, I feel like one way of making it a bit more fair is the allocation of a point system when voting. For example, you're allocated 10 points which you're allowed to distribute freely between candidates/MPs/options etc. Obviously, this won't work for referendums such as this where only 2 options are available but I feel like something like a point system would benefit things such as the General Election. It gives the option for people to also "vote" for other candidates as well. At the moment, some people are against voting for someone who they believe in fully knowing they won't get a majority so they pick the candidate that is mostly aligned to their view but are also more likely to win (which causes the 2-party/3-party system) and a point allocation system would offset that somewhat.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viffer)
    I would not want a system that allowed a Nigel F'tang F'tang Biscuit-Barrel Smith (Pokemon Go Party) to be elected just because approximately 0.01% of the electorate thought it would be fun.
    That wouldn't happen under a PR system. You still need to have actual support. PR gives more representation to the smaller parties, but those smaller parties still need to have noticeable support, and the idea behind it is that the get the sort of representation which is fair for the share of the vote they get.

    In the European elections, which uses a PR system it generally takes around 6-8% of the vote before they get just one or two seats out of 70-something.

    (Original post by NeverLucky)
    I feel like FPTP does have its flaws but ultimately, it's still one of the easiest methods and everyone is able to understand it (you have to remember that there's still a large proportion of the population that are uneducated).
    I don't see why that would be a problem. Yes, some forms of PR are a bit more complicated, but at least with PR people will just vote for who they support most, rather than with FPTP where they'll be contemplating the impact of their vote and voting tactically based on political manouvering. So you could argue that a slightly complicated PR system makes things simpler.

    No more "well, if I vote for party A, that could eat into the vote of party B and let party C into power, should I settle for party B or is it worth voting party A. Oh, then there's party D but they're pretty much irrelevant and blah blah blah...wasted vote... blah blah blah". We'd instead have "I support party A, I'm going to vote party A".
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Naveed-7)
    Mate. 52% Voted Leave. It was democratic. What else do you want?
    If it was the other way round, I would have accepted it, and you would have too.
    I think this sums it up.

    Democracy functioned perfectly (as it can in a straight yes/no question put to the country).

    The majority spoke, end of that particular debate.

    Disappointment sucks (god knows everyone should understand and experience that sometimes life causes that), but the people genuinely calling for anti-democratic reforms, or acting as if something went wrong just because they lost is ridiculous.


    AFAIC the EU is broken, a bad idea, another example of a lot of people's good intentions being yet again peverted by those more interested in their own advancement.

    It seems the majority agreed with that assessment.

    That's how democracy works. Next time there's an issue of national importance I may well be on the losing side, sucks for me but tough luck.
    If the UK had voted Remain then I'd have to be doing what I wish a lot of Remainers would, which is suck it up and accept the majority have spoken.
    Even though I believe Remaining would be worse for the country I wouldn't be calling for the scrapping of democracy, of reforms designed to obfuscate the system.
    I'd accept the majority had spoken and the country had made it's decision. For the worst in my mind but that's the liberty we have, I can't force my desires on the country.

    Thankfully I wouldn't want to (I'm one of that rare breed of which few remain: a genuine Liberal in the literal sense), but the point is, this is how it's meant to be.

    Democracy is in rude health, it's the pro-Remain middle-class youth who need to reassess their beliefs and opinions.

    I'd happily vote for GE electoral reform though.
    I voted for it last time because it was a step in the right direction and better than FPTP, but the country in it's wisdom saw fit to shoot it down.

    Disappointment. Got on with my life.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.