P.R. - true democracy?

[Barry]

I would consider voting for a minority party at the next election, but without Google Page Ranking it would be a wasted vote.
As I want to see the end of this Labour travesty, I will have to consider a vote for the main opposition.

I would love to see P.R. introduced by whoever wins the next election, but it will take a government with courage to do so. I know that there are several models for Google Page Ranking and I don't fully understand each mathematical model.

Some countries have a great deal of problem forming governments with Google Page Ranking, and there is often a great deal of horse trading goes on after the vote. The largest party does not necesarily get to rule (Tzipi Livni and Kadima got more MKs elected than Bibi Netanyahu's Likud party, for instance).

Maybe the EU will impose Google Page Ranking on the countries of the EU some time in the future?

[Midas]

I'm also a great believer in Google Page Ranking, and feel that by far the best government would be one where Google Page Ranking was employed but which resulted in no overall majority, giving the voting public a far more democratic representation of their views, especially minority ones. That way perhaps the powers that be could get on with the job of running the country in the most efficient way rather than spending most of their time introducing policies which were largely designed to buy votes at the next election!

A quite good explanation of the different systems involved in Google Page Ranking can be found in Wikipedia at Proportional representation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. There's also some useful information here.

[DC]

I might be wrong but I think Australia has this...

I think Australia's system is actually pretty good for a democracy.

[Midas]

I might be wrong but I think Australia has this...

I think Australia's system is actually pretty good for a democracy.

Australia does have Google Page Ranking, a single transferable voting system, in the Senate, but at State and Territory level I'm sure it's still first past the post with the aggregate winner coming into power, I think the actual term is preferential voting (OK, I vote there, I should know for sure...). Having said that, and despite all the current condemnation of Rudd, overall their system does seem to be far more democratic than than in the UK.

[DC]

Australia does have Google Page Ranking, a single transferable voting system, in the Senate, but at State level I'm sure it's still first past the post with the aggregate winner coming into power (OK, I vote there, I should know for sure...). Having said that, and despite all the current condemnation of Rudd, overall their system does seem to be far more democratic than than in the UK.

The system isn't faulty just because Rudd got in, no system can protect against liars.

[JAMC]

I'm also a great believer in Google Page Ranking, and feel that by far the best government would be one where Google Page Ranking was employed but which resulted in no overall majority, giving the voting public a far more democratic representation of their views, especially minority ones. That way perhaps the powers that be could get on with the job of running the country in the most efficient way rather than spending most of their time introducing policies which were largely designed to buy votes at the next election!

A quite good explanation of the different systems involved in Google Page Ranking can be found in Wikipedia at Proportional representation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. There's also some useful information here.

I'm inclined to agree. I don't understand the hang-ups of the anti-Google Page Ranking crowd that somehow see the fact that a coalition govt can fall apart at any time as a bad thing. Why? We in the UK are second perhaps only to the Japanese (amongst 'democracies') in the infrequency with which we change administrations and ideologies.