Minority representation

First Past the Post Vs. Proportional Representation in Canadian Elections Two years have passed since Canada’s last election. The 2015 Canadian election was promised to be the last election using the first-past-the-post system otherwise known as a single-member plurality system (“The Electoral System of Canada”). Proportional Representation is another system that has been touted as an alternative to Canada’s current system. While it remains to be seen if Canada’s election system will receive an

better. This is certainly not the case. The United States uses what is known as plurality voting, meaning the candidate with the largest percentage of votes wins. This is also a “winner-takes-all” system, where losers of the election receive no representation. This leads voters to compromise, not selecting their favorite because they believe him/her to be unviable, and ultimately selecting somebody they don’t like (Ossipoff). Plurality voting results in high amounts of wasted votes, making

Proportional representation system is a system in which the variety of seats held by way of contributors of a political party in a legislature (such as a parliament) is decided with the aid of the quantity of votes its candidates get hold of in an election.[ (n.d.). Retrieved September 04, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proportional representation ]With the proportional illustration system several participants of parliament are to be elected per constituency. Basically each

"The system of proportional representation ensures that virtually every constituency in the country will have a hearing in the national and provincial legislatures” (Tutu, 1994). In Humphrey's book “Proportional Representation: A Study in Methods of Election” he defines proportional representation as an electoral system where seats in a legislature or council are allocated to various interests in proportion to their strength in the electorate. He further argues that with such constituencies it would

electoral system and that many reform options will be thoroughly explored to replace it. Proportional representation (PR) systems appears to be the most beneficial and logical alternatives to our current system. However, there is variety of different forms of proportional representation and this paper will seek to explain why Single Transferable Vote is the most viable proportional representation

have been used by devolved powers throughout the U.K – like the Scottish parliament -- as well as for other votes such as the European Parliament. (Ministry of Justice, 2008, pp. 24-25) These different voting systems are based on proportional representation, a term which characterises various types of electoral system, but share one main idea – the proportion of votes received correlates directly with the amount of seats a party wins. As democracy has become more widespread, other countries within

Introduction In light of Singapore’s upcoming 2020 general elections, there are a few changes Singapore’s electoral system should embrace to ensure a more effective electoral process and accurate outcomes. A condition for democracy to occur is to have free and fair elections as it depicts popular choice and control over government. The People’s Action Party (PAP) has dominated the political playing field since 1965 and this resulted in Singapore being known as a model of ‘soft authoritarianism’

formulated three sociological laws. He concluded that a majority vote with a one-ballot formula leads to a two-party system, proportional representation tends to multipartism and a majority vote with a two-ballot formula contributes towards a multiparty system and promotes the forming of coalitions (Duverger, 1972: 23). Through the consequences of “under-representation” and “polarisation” a majority vote with a one-ballot formula badly affects third parties (and any other parties thereafter). Subsequently

Election day in Canada comes around again, but, like many others, Mr. Low decides to stay home. He thinks that there is no point in voting, since the results in his riding are always the same and the candidate he votes for never wins. One may think that he is just being a sore loser, but he has a very valid point. In Mr. Low’s riding, there are three main parties; Liberal, NDP, and Conservative. Mr. Low favours the Liberal candidate, but he knows he has no chance of winning as the outcome is usually

voters from selecting such candidates. It is a system which generally makes it difficult for smaller parties to gain influence, and which rarely provides accurate representation to the voters. A winner-take-all system is, as the name suggests, one where the winner (the majority vote in this case) is the only one selected for representation. The margin of victory does not matter; a 45 percent majority is counted the same a 60