tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7148608036370776702.post918101993792068601..comments2023-10-26T12:25:17.435+01:00Comments on Neil Stockley: Sorting the good arguments for AV from the badNeil Stockleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11049181290242914014noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7148608036370776702.post-86093940329456680682010-08-18T00:47:47.717+01:002010-08-18T00:47:47.717+01:00"The other problem of the current system that..."The other problem of the current system that AV would solve is that people often have to decide whether to vote for what they really believe, or to cast a vote that will help decide who represents the seat in Parliament (‘tactical voting)"<br /><br />But this simply isn't true. Consider, if voters truly believe as follows:<br /><br />40%: A > B > C<br />15%: B > A > C<br />10%: B > C > A<br />35%: C > B > A<br /><br />Under AV, A wins. But if more than 5% from the C > B > A camp dis-ingenuously vote B > C > A instead, then B wins. Voting for B-first instead of C-first, so that B beats A, is EXACTLY the same "lesser of two evils" choice that is made under the current system.<br /><br />AV only "works" as long as the third-party stays small and unimportant.Dale Sheldon-Hesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07974707193305445403noreply@blogger.com