[EM] Why is wikipedia so biased pro-IRV?

[Raph Frank]

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm
<km-elmet at broadpark.no> wrote:
> I'm not a UK politics expert, but it seems this is a minimal concession, of
> the sort one would see in negotiation.

Also, since the concession was for a referendum not the actual policy,
it isn't even a 100% concession.

Ironically, it allows the Conservative to say that even those arguing
for a Yes, don't really want IRV, even though the Conservatives are
the reason that PR isn't being offered.

However, if it passes, it will strengthen the Liberal Democrats in all
future elections.  This might lead to them dropping PR as a policy
objective, since IRV gives them a boost while PR will support all
parties.

There was also a suggestion of having PR for the House of Lords, not
sure what happened to that.