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

[James Gilmour]

Raph Frank  > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 4:08 PM
> 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.

Raph, I don't think so.  See:	
  http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/blog/?p=36

I think the prospect of winning 162 seats under STV-PR compared with 79 under AV would convince any party that STV-PR was the right
long-term choice.

Other estimates of the likely AV outcome vary, but on similar assumptions from the 2010 election, they all give the LibDems around
75 to 85 seats

The ERS projection for STV-PR gives the LibDems 162 seats, but even if they won only their share in direct proportion to their votes
(23%), that would give them 150 seats.

So STV-PR is a "no brainer" for the LibDems.

James Gilmour

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3472 - Release Date: 02/27/11