The British Voting System, Undemocratic

The election system that we currently have in the UK is a lot like marmite, you either love it or you hate it… There are many different arguments for and against this system, however people forget that within getting rid of the First Past the Post system, you will then need to then replace it. This then poses the vital question of which is the best fitting system and should we really change tradition?

The system is also disproportionate, an example of this is can be shown in a study of the 2001 General Election. From the 2001 General Election results, we can deliberately see that through our pluralist electoral system, the system is disproportionate. We can see many examples of this]. The percentage of votes to the percentage of seats is unequal, showing how its 'seats not votes that count,' and judging by labour's "landslide" victory.

Democracy in the United Kingdom has changed a lot over the years however the definition has never changed. The right for people to choose and decide how a country is run. This essay will help decide whether the United Kingdom still follows that definition of being a true democracy and analysing how this has affected the people of the UK.

The first election in British America was in 1607 by the commanders of the 105 colonist using a ballot system. There was suspicion of concealing a mutiny and since that time more individuals were asked asked to vote who they thought had a stake in the government. Individuals who were asked to participate in the voting were property owners.

In this essay I will assess the outcomes of Additional Member system, First Past the Post system and the Closed Party List system. The F-P-T-P system is used to elect the members of House of Commons and local government in England and Wales. Voters select candidates, and do so by marking his or her name with an ‘X’ on the ballot paper. This reflects the principle of ‘one person, one vote’. The Additional Members system is used in Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly, and Northern Ireland Assembly and Greater London assembly. It is a mixed system made up of F-P-T-P and party-list elements. The Regional party list (or the closed party list) is used to elect the

Every country differs in their preference of political system to govern their countries. For democratic countries, two possible choices of governing are the presidential system and the parliamentary system. Since both the presidential and the parliamentary systems have their own strengths and weaknesses, many scholars have examined these two forms of government, and debate on which political system is more successful in governance. In this paper, I will first provide a detailed analysis of both the parliamentary and the presidential system. I will also evaluate each system’s strengths and weaknesses, addressing any differences as well as any commonalities. Finally, I will conclude by using historical examples to analyze and support the

It is a proportional system, which means that the proportion of votes a party gets will largely reflect the number of seats it has in parliament.

As a citizens in the US, as soon as we turn eighteen we have the right to vote, this means we have a say in who represents us in government and whether certain issues are passed or not. We can vote in both local and national elections ranging from who’s on our school board to whom the president will be. Since this is America, we are free to complain about how the USA is today, but do we do anything to change it? Most of the USA does not actually do anything, in our generation the USA has seen the lowest voter turnout since World War 2. Some people will complain that their vote does not count but in reality it does, the local elections are based solely on the majority of the people, and in national elections the elected representatives of

When adopting plurality electoral system, many third party supporters had a strong preference for their party over all others, and therefore “reluctant to rally rather either of the top two contestants” (Blais: 2002, p.449). Moreover, many parties overestimated their chance of winning, hence did not feel that their vote would be wasted. Blais suggests that parties and political leaders are the main reasons why there are fewer parties and candidates in plurality elections, due to the fact that potential candidates perceiving their chances of winning are small and are more reluctant to run and invest a lot of money and time in their election campaign. Contrastingly, the proportional representation could demonstrate a fairer turnout for Canada, which reduces the problem of excluding candidates and lesson the problem of concentrating votes for a single candidate. For example, Chile’s reformation of adopting proportional representation demonstrates that their new electoral system have many routes to proportionality. It turned out to have “strengthen(ed) the parties” and “contribute(d) to less complex strategic coordination” (Gamboa & Morales: 2015, p.63). If our candidates are loyal to the party, the votes of candidates should not only benefit the candidates, but also the

The United States is often seen as a hallmark of democracy, due to the nature of peaceful presidential transitions along with the abundance of civil rights and liberties as outlined in the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution. However, on an average, only 60% of eligible voters participate in the presidential elections that take place every four years, and 40% turn out for the congressional midterm elections that occur every two years (Fair Vote). John Winthrop, a New England colonist during the early 17th century, told his fellow Puritans, “We shall be as a city upon a hill, the eyes of all people are upon us” (Ushistory.org), but has this really lived out its meaning if American elections do not include the voices of everyone?

In other words, it is the way that votes are translated into seats in parliament or other areas of government such as presidency (3). It is from here, where the differences in political systems between the United States and France begin to form. In the history of the 20th century there are basically three types of established democratic regimes; presidential, parliamentary and a mix of both. Though France is semi-presidential and America only presidential, they both work best for their respective socio-political contexts.

To begin, it is conceivable to start with a brief description of our current electoral system: The single member plurality (SMP) and/ or the first past

which are proportional to the shares of votes in parliament, but it still is the best electoral system for the UK general elections. There are limitless reasons for this which has already been stated in this essay. Referring back to hung parliaments, under first- past-the-post system we have been governed under a coalition government twice, but systems such as the AV system would be more likely to

This means that even though the government has more seats than the other parties, the other parties have more seats than the government combined. This is a good thing because this way government will not become a dictatorship because everyone must communicate and vote together. However, a disadvantage is that a vote of non-confidence may end the party’s rule as government. The bills created are broader, but that makes them less effective because they must please more people and it is less efficient and effective. Even though majority and minority government have many advantages, they can also lead to devastating disadvantages.

Democracy: a government by the people, in which citizens rule either directly or through elected representatives - the latter description more relevant to today’s societies. Quite evidently, democracy is not perfect; like any other political system, it is subject to a plethora of flaws. For instance, it is no secret that voters tend to make illogical decisions – not out of sheer malice, but as a result of being wrongly informed. Politicians also make erroneous choices, whether they do so because they are dishonest or simply out of touch with the true will of their constituents. Further, anyone who has studied the government of a parliamentary democracy knows gerrymandering can have a powerful say in determining elections. Despite these and