Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > nz.general > #339863

Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it

Show all headers | View raw

On Sun, 6 Sep 2026, Average Joe <average.joe@maildrop.ue> wrote:
>Willy Nilly wrote:
>>Average Joe wrote:
>>> PV forces voters to vote for all candidates (in some order). Whoever
>>> gets in can "claim" to have the votes of voters who do not want their
>>> policies.
>>
>> You are wrong.  The voter need include only those candidates that
>> he/she supports.
>
>In PV for Australia's House of Representatives, voters must mark a
>preference for every repeat every candidate.
><https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-21/how-to-preference-voting-australia-federal-election/100991154>

Well blow me down, you are right, the Aussies *do* require that, and
if the voter does not number every box, that vote does not count !!!
That's crazy!!  Why on Earth would they require that when it is
entirely unnecessary, e.g., the Wellington mayorality does not require
that.  Tell you what, I think I know why: because the vote counting
has a denominator, that being the number of ballots cast.  With their
requirement, the Aussies never need change the denominator.  Without
the requirement, you need to recalculate the denominator with each new
round of counting.  Back when they established their system (1950's),
they probably thought that would be too hard a task, and multiple
mistakes would be made, and the counting would be a real mess.  With
their restrictive system, they avoided that.  There is no excuse for
that today.  So I agree that that compulsion is absurd.

>If this were not so, it would be possible for all candidates to get less
>than 50% "support" -- and your "always" statement below would be false.
>You can't have it both ways.

I can have it with the recalculation of the denominator at each round.
It is true that a candidate can win with less than a majority of the
*first* denominator.  Every electoral system has little flaws, MMP has
its overhang which is now being weaponised by TPM.  The flaw in PV is
benign by comparison.

>> PV specifically avoids that -- electees always have majority support.
>
>False, with several errors.
>PV can be gerrymandered so a party wins without majority support. 

True, the electorates can be gerrymandered.  The best counter is to
have a electorate boundaries minimisation algorithm.  Haven't seen
that implemented anywhere, though.  You are right. 

>You are confusing parties with electees.

PV ballots show candidates, not parties, as in Australia.
  
>If (as you claim above) a voter only needs include those candidates that
>he/she supports, it is possible for no candidate to have 50% support.
>You can't have it both ways.

Dealt with above.  Every electoral system has "gotcha"s.  PV's
gothca's are small.  And PV happens to be the single-winner
simplification of STV, so I wasn't technically wrong to have labelled
the option as STV although PV is clearer.  Most NZ'ers don't really
understand these options because STV is confusing.  You know, that
1992 ballot should not have included STV -- who wants multiple winners
in a region, it's a mongrelisation of electoral methods.  It should
have had PV but not STV.  By putting them both on the ballot, and the
media pushing the confusing STV as the alternative to MMP (which had
only favourable media coverage), MMP was the assured finalist  which
was chosen by the FPP method.  I gnashed my teeth then, and I gnash my
teeth today.  Look at the mess the UK is in -- they kept FPP when they
had a chance to change it (the idiot Conservatives treated it like
poison when it was in fact their saviour), and now the right-wing will
be in feverish negotiations to partition out the electorates amongst
themselves in order to prevent Labour from winning.  What a mess.  The
Aussies still have the best electoral system -- how Labor got in over
there beats the heck outta me. 
  

Back to nz.general | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

MMP is dying, help to kill it wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) - 2026-08-18 22:43 +0000
  Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> - 2026-08-19 15:01 +1200
    Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2026-08-20 00:19 +0000
      Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> - 2026-08-20 16:58 +1200
    Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) - 2026-08-27 23:31 +0000
      Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2026-08-28 01:50 +0000
        Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it BR <blah@blah.blah> - 2026-08-28 18:42 +1200
      Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it BR <blah@blah.blah> - 2026-08-28 18:42 +1200
      Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> - 2026-08-29 08:54 +1200
  Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Average Joe <average.joe@maildrop.ue> - 2026-09-02 18:56 +1200
    Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) - 2026-09-03 07:18 +0000
      Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Average Joe <average.joe@maildrop.ue> - 2026-09-04 19:53 +1200
        Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) - 2026-09-04 08:54 +0000
          Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Average Joe <average.joe@maildrop.ue> - 2026-09-06 19:38 +1200
            Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) - 2026-09-06 08:39 +0000
              Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Average Joe <average.joe@maildrop.ue> - 2026-09-06 21:53 +1200
                Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) - 2026-09-06 20:49 +0000
                Re: MMP is dying, help to kill it Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2026-09-06 23:14 +0000
            Re: MMP is not dying, futile to kill it Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-06 22:08 +0000
              Re: MMP is not dying, futile to kill it Average Joe <average.joe@maildrop.ue> - 2026-09-07 12:00 +1200
                Re: MMP is not dying, futile to kill it Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-07 00:25 +0000

csiph-web