[EM] Why I think IRV isn't a serious alternative 2

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 05:42 PM 12/25/2008, James Gilmour wrote:
>Abd ul-Rahman Lomax   > Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2008 8:01 PM
> > At 09:05 AM 12/25/2008, James Gilmour wrote:
> > >My personal view is that runoff is not desirable and would be an
> > >unnecessary and unwanted expense.  I know runoff voting systems are
> > >used in some other countries, but they are not used at all in the UK.
> >
> > They are used in places with strong multiparty systems. The UK is a
> > two-party system.
>
>This statement is quite simply wrong.  Two parties may (unfairly) 
>dominate the scene at Westminster (UK Parliament), but at the last
>general election those two parties received only 68% of the total vote.
>
>For details see:
> 
>http://www.jamesgilmour.f2s.com/Percentage-Votes-for-Two-Largest-Parties-UK-GEs-1945-2005.pdf 
>
>or
> 
>http://www.jamesgilmour.org.uk/Percentage-Votes-for-Two-Largest-Parties-UK-GEs-1945-2005.pdf
>
>
>In Scotland we have a four-party system (previously three-party) and 
>we don't use any form run-off for any of our public elections.
>
>
>
>  >   I am satisfied that there are perfectly adequate "vote once" systems
> > >available for all public elections, both single-office elections and
> > >assembly elections.
> >
> > If they are good for public elections, why are they *never* used for
> > smaller organizations where repeated ballot is easy? Wouldn't
> > it save time?
>
>In the UK the "smaller organisations" that have moved on from FPTP 
>would nearly all use the Alternative Vote = IRV.  I am not aware
>of any in the UK that would use any form of run-off.
>
>James
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.0/1863 - Release Date: 
>24/12/2008 11:49
>
>
>----
>Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info