Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Zealand Voting Referendum 2011

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Zealand Voting Referendum 2011

    On November 26, New Zealand will have a referendum to change their voting system from their current mixed member proportional to another system. Hopefully they go with the only legitimately democratic voting system, which is the preferential voting system, which the UK recently failed to implement (due to David Cameron's propaganda campaign). So which system will/would you vote for?


    Here's a video explaining the preferential voting system:
    1
    Mixed Member Proportional
    0.00%
    0
    First Past the Post
    0.00%
    0
    Preferential Voting
    100.00%
    1
    Single Transferable Vote
    0.00%
    0
    Supplementary Member
    0.00%
    0
    Last edited by Ununoctium; 10-30-2011, 09:55 PM.
    Fission mailed.

  • #2
    Here in socialist Australia we have preferential voting.
    One negative effect of the system is that the parties choose which other parties give their preferences to, and that's not democratic - but that information is transparent so it can effect people's votes. But I don't know to what extent it does. You CAN do your own preferences, but it's alot more work. On election day you can either number one box with '1', and it assumes the parties default preferences for you. OR you can label all boxes 1-50something(I think it was in the election last year). And if you miss a number or it's illegible the vote isn't counted (as the counters have no way to legitimately infer your voting intentions) - Most people use the defaults.

    Here we have two main parties - and I think that preferential voting seems to work with this dichotomy. In that votes are counted until there are only two parties left. I think in the UK they have three main parties in serious contention? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't want preferential voting in that it would promote a reduction to two parties, as they would all fight each other for preferences.

    Personally, I still don't know why first past the post is all that bad. In that the party which gets the majority of votes wins. It's just that the majority isn't over 50%. I actually think having a larger proportion of people who didn't vote for the elected government could be a good thing, in that say 35% of people are always happy but 65% are demanding more. The party will want to keep their voters happy (the 35%), but also want to win over people who didn't vote for them (65%)
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      There's an actually democratic voting system out there? I thought they were all designed to give one party or another the edge.

      We have...dozens of parties, I think, but not all of them are national. There are three big ones, but only two of those are usually in serious contentions, Labour and Conservatives. The third, smaller party, the Liberal Democrats, are actually part of a coalition government with the conservatives right now because none of the parties got enough of a majority to create an effective government.

      Of course, there isn't much difference between any of them, since they'll say whatever they think will get them into power then do whatever they feel like, but that's politics.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
        There's an actually democratic voting system out there? I thought they were all designed to give one party or another the edge.

        We have...dozens of parties, I think, but not all of them are national. There are three big ones, but only two of those are usually in serious contentions, Labour and Conservatives. The third, smaller party, the Liberal Democrats, are actually part of a coalition government with the conservatives right now because none of the parties got enough of a majority to create an effective government.

        Of course, there isn't much difference between any of them, since they'll say whatever they think will get them into power then do whatever they feel like, but that's politics.
        You forgot UKIP, which has recently become larger than the LibDems and represents the views of the vast majority of British subjects.
        Fission mailed.

        Comment


        • #5
          Oh hell no. UKIP does not represent the majority, not by a loooong way...it doesn't even hold any seats in Parliament right now, if I recall correctly, and certainly hasn't taken out the Lib Dems. Most of the nation think tarring and feathering dirty foriegn dogs is a bit too much - most people who do support UKIP do so because they want reduced immigration, something the other three parties are having trouble doing.

          They've won some polls recently. That's all you can actually say. And to show how much that means - the Lib Dems won several polls before the general election. They lost seats in the actual voting.

          ...representing the views of the vast majority of British subjects? Balls to that idea. If they did they'd have at least a single MP in Parliament. Even the Green Party has an MP! No, they are soundly, and at best, 4th in the party race and currently have no real affect on our politics. Fortunately.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
            Oh hell no. UKIP does not represent the majority, not by a loooong way...it doesn't even hold any seats in Parliament right now, if I recall correctly, and certainly hasn't taken out the Lib Dems. Most of the nation think tarring and feathering dirty foriegn dogs is a bit too much - most people who do support UKIP do so because they want reduced immigration, something the other three parties are having trouble doing.

            They've won some polls recently. That's all you can actually say. And to show how much that means - the Lib Dems won several polls before the general election. They lost seats in the actual voting.

            ...representing the views of the vast majority of British subjects? Balls to that idea. If they did they'd have at least a single MP in Parliament. Even the Green Party has an MP! No, they are soundly, and at best, 4th in the party race and currently have no real affect on our politics. Fortunately.
            UKIP was ranked third by almost every single survey and poll taken in the general elections. And how you've gone bonkers and some how think that UKIP is some radical racist party just proves how ignorant you are. They have more MEPs than the LibDems as well and are the fastest growing party in the UK. Perhaps if you actually did some independent research on their history, what they stand for, and their MEPs, then you'd know that. Or you could continue to read the Daily Mail and worship the BNP.
            Fission mailed.

            Comment


            • #7
              I already have to think about this for the 26th, and I haven't fully decided.

              Prior to 1996 New Zealand used (and this was for like 80+ years) First Past the Post, and it didn't work once numerous parties started springing up frequently during the 80's and 90's, which is what forced the change. Mixed Member Parliament, or MMP, has worked reasonably well based on the number of groups however the downsides at due to fractured party seating, people entering joke political parties (such as this one) and that it does increase the possibility of a hung result if the two major parties end up with the same numbers (not going to happen this election however I'd say).

              However I strongly argue that preferential voting isn't the only purely "democratic" entry due the above point, if people legitimately feel they can make an actual change in the system here then via MMP they can potentially enter a party to be voted for. That potential is far more democratic than the potential for what I could only call a dictatorship possibly provided out of a skewed outcome on preferential. Hell look at the controversy in the 2000 US election for a great example on that one. However it's not that I don't agree that every option has it's pro's and con's. I just can't be as assured on something like Ununoctium seemingly is about everything :p
              Last edited by Rombie; 10-31-2011, 09:20 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                UKIP was ranked third by almost every single survey and poll taken in the general elections. And how you've gone bonkers and some how think that UKIP is some radical racist party just proves how ignorant you are. They have more MEPs than the LibDems as well and are the fastest growing party in the UK. Perhaps if you actually did some independent research on their history, what they stand for, and their MEPs, then you'd know that. Or you could continue to read the Daily Mail and worship the BNP.
                Or I could, I dunno, live here? UKIP does have more members in the EU, true. Because that's pretty much there entire message. To try and get out of the EU. I disagree with that policy - I think the massive loss of trade would cripple what left of our economy, causing the UK to collapse (and the loss of the UK could take Europe with it, given how much we're helping stabilize it right now...) UKIP has defeated the Lib Dems somewhat in local elections and in the polls. Again, this was happening before the general election. It did not translate into votes for UKIP during the general election. The UK public has such a desire to enact UKIP's policies that they did not vote in a single UKIP MP.

                And, yes, I've actually read what UKIP stands for. Essentially, they want to close the borders for five years to new permanent residents, massively reduce the number of immigrants that come in, stuff like that. Which I wouldn't be too bothered by. I even agree with some of there policies...but not enough of them to think of supporting them, and have found some of the statements they make racist. I also find that the distinct lack of information on there other policies off putting, finding them to be pretty much a single issue party with minimal thought placed on other major issues that can't be blamed on immigration.

                And, I'll admit, on a personal level I don't like the idea that immigrants must uphold a certain level of...Britishness or be thrown out. My wife's American.

                I'm not even going to try and work out how you link the idea of me not liking UKIP's desires to withdraw from the EU and cut immigration to a trickle, two policies I disagree with, with linking me to a racist organisation like the BNP. Essentially calling me racist isn't going to help your arguments - I haven't shown any sign of it, at least as far as I can see. And yes, I did call your statements racist - your were essentially calling the entire EU a hellhole for policies and a system of governing that don't, in reality, exist. I simply prefer a more open immigration policy than UKIP without the odd racist comments by the people I'm supposed to be voting for.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I was going to say this in my previous post but held off, but given that Darkmoon is getting stuck in the same pattern as last time... I say it now. I think basically, if the other thread showed, everything Ununoctium is going to say comes with some level of taint of "if you don't agree with Y you're X" labelling no matter if people don't agree with his specific views. I somehow don't see this thread working out any differently.
                  Last edited by Rombie; 10-31-2011, 09:24 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                    Or I could, I dunno, live here? UKIP does have more members in the EU, true. Because that's pretty much there entire message. To try and get out of the EU. I disagree with that policy - I think the massive loss of trade would cripple what left of our economy, causing the UK to collapse (and the loss of the UK could take Europe with it, given how much we're helping stabilize it right now...) UKIP has defeated the Lib Dems somewhat in local elections and in the polls. Again, this was happening before the general election. It did not translate into votes for UKIP during the general election. The UK public has such a desire to enact UKIP's policies that they did not vote in a single UKIP MP.
                    The fact that you think "that's their entire message" proves that you know absolutely nothing about them or their policies. They did start out as a pro-democracy anti-EU dictatorship party but that was 20 years ago, they have since become a major player in UK politics and have vastly expanded their policies since then.

                    Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                    And, yes, I've actually read what UKIP stands for. Essentially, they want to close the borders for five years to new permanent residents, massively reduce the number of immigrants that come in, stuff like that. Which I wouldn't be too bothered by. I even agree with some of there policies...but not enough of them to think of supporting them, and have found some of the statements they make racist. I also find that the distinct lack of information on there other policies off putting, finding them to be pretty much a single issue party with minimal thought placed on other major issues that can't be blamed on immigration.
                    LOL. Leaving the EU /=/ closing your borders. Also, controlling your borders like every single other country in the entire planet that isn't part of the EU dictatorship /=/ closing your borders (or as you previously inferred, "racist"). Which of their statements are "racist"? I'm something of an expert on British politics, and UKIP is by far the least racist political party you will ever find anywhere. Perhaps you've been looking up information on the BNP again? Again, the fact that you think of them as a single issue party proves that you know nothing about them.


                    Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                    And, I'll admit, on a personal level I don't like the idea that immigrants must uphold a certain level of...Britishness or be thrown out. My wife's American.
                    UKIP /=/ BNP

                    Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                    I'm not even going to try and work out how you link the idea of me not liking UKIP's desires to withdraw from the EU and cut immigration to a trickle, two policies I disagree with, with linking me to a racist organisation like the BNP. Essentially calling me racist isn't going to help your arguments - I haven't shown any sign of it, at least as far as I can see. And yes, I did call your statements racist - your were essentially calling the entire EU a hellhole for policies and a system of governing that don't, in reality, exist. I simply prefer a more open immigration policy than UKIP without the odd racist comments by the people I'm supposed to be voting for.
                    The EU is a hellhole. Also, since when is the EU a race? Did that happen sometime between Mr. Barosso's accumulation of power and the Lisbon Treaty, perhaps? You're going to have to do better than cherry picking.

                    Following that logic...
                    The Tories are racist
                    The Labour Party's racist
                    And LibDems are racist
                    Last edited by Ununoctium; 11-01-2011, 02:13 AM.
                    Fission mailed.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Rombie View Post
                      I was going to say this in my previous post but held off, but given that Darkmoon is getting stuck in the same pattern as last time... I say it now. I think basically, if the other thread showed, everything Ununoctium is going to say comes with some level of taint of "if you don't agree with Y you're X" labelling no matter if people don't agree with his specific views. I somehow don't see this thread working out any differently.
                      Thanks for the reminder, dude. Guess it just irks me that someone keeps posting such blatantly wrong information as factual. Same thing happened via a PM argument which he would not fucking drop, to the point where I basically had to go, 'Will you shut up if I say America's the best country? 'Cos it is, now leave me alone' and he posted part of it, out of context, as his signature. Classy move.

                      Still...can't resist one last shot.

                      Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                      The fact that you think "that's their entire message" proves that you know absolutely nothing about them or their policies. They did start out as a pro-democracy anti-EU dictatorship party but that was 20 years ago, they have since become a major player in UK politics and have vastly expanded their policies since then.

                      LOL. Leaving the EU /=/ closing your borders. Also, controlling your borders like every single other country in the entire planet that isn't part of the EU dictatorship /=/ closing your borders (or as you previously inferred, "racist"). Which of their statements are "racist"? I'm something of an expert on British politics, and UKIP is by far the least racist political party you will ever find anywhere. Perhaps you've been looking up information on the BNP again? Again, the fact that you think of them as a single issue party proves that you know nothing about them.
                      No. They haven't. There policy for pensions is 244 words long, and blames the EU three times for our problems. It also specifically mentions leaving the EU as part of the solution. Defence is 268. It also mentions leaving the EU. Housing is a whopping 398 words long. It mentions that our housing problems are Europe's fault two or three times, and mentions leaving Europe as part of the solution.

                      That was a random sampling. Go click on any of there things. See how many you can find where leaving Europe isn't part of there solution.

                      Again, they are not a major part of British politics. They have some power on the European Parliament, where the have MEP's, because that is where there focus lies. They do not have a single MP in Parliament.

                      I have no idea what makes you think you're an expert on British politics. I don't want to know, either. Whatever it is, it apparently gives you a better picture of Europe than actually living in it does. Plus, your information is outright wrong. And yes, shockingly, I can tell the difference between the BNP and UKIP. The BNP are the ones who try to set fire to my house. UKIP just wants everyone non-British to go away or swear to be British.

                      · End mass, uncontrolled immigration. UKIP calls for an immediate five-year freeze on immigration for permanent settlement. We aspire to ensure that any future immigration does not exceed 50,000 people p.a.
                      · Require those living in the UK under ‘Permanent Leave to Remain’ to abide by a legally binding ‘Undertaking of Residence’ ensuring they respect our laws or face deportation. Such citizens will not be eligible for benefits. People applying for British citizenship will have to have completed a period of not less then five years as a resident on ‘Permanent Leave to Remain’. New citizens should pass a citizenship test and sign a ‘Declaration of British Citizenship’ promising to uphold Britain’s democratic and tolerant way of life
                      I'm sure you recognize that, but for everyone else - the statements are both from the UKIP policy on immigration. I think refusing anything but temporary visas for five years would likely count as closing the borders. Or at least being fairly close.

                      Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                      The EU is a hellhole. Also, since when is the EU a race? Did that happen sometime between Mr. Barosso's accumulation of power and the Lisbon Treaty, perhaps? You're going to have to do better than cherry picking.
                      Not gonna bother - I've already shown you that, statiscally, America's healthcare and education systems are both often below the standards of EU countries, and that America's Electoral System is no less democratic than the EU's system for voting - and the EU is not a single nation. You don't care about evidence.

                      Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                      Interesting. They also don't involve the party leaders (I think the closest is a potential party leader may have said), just members and often just accusations rather than the statements being proven.
                      Last edited by Darkmoon; 11-01-2011, 05:25 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                        No. They haven't. There policy for pensions is 244 words long, and blames the EU three times for our problems. It also specifically mentions leaving the EU as part of the solution. Defence is 268. It also mentions leaving the EU. Housing is a whopping 398 words long. It mentions that our housing problems are Europe's fault two or three times, and mentions leaving Europe as part of the solution.

                        That was a random sampling. Go click on any of there things. See how many you can find where leaving Europe isn't part of there solution.

                        Again, they are not a major part of British politics. They have some power on the European Parliament, where the have MEP's, because that is where there focus lies. They do not have a single MP in Parliament.

                        I have no idea what makes you think you're an expert on British politics. I don't want to know, either. Whatever it is, it apparently gives you a better picture of Europe than actually living in it does. Plus, your information is outright wrong. And yes, shockingly, I can tell the difference between the BNP and UKIP. The BNP are the ones who try to set fire to my house. UKIP just wants everyone non-British to go away or swear to be British.
                        To be fair the Debt Union, I mean European Union, is responsible for many of Britain's ills. And the fact that you sit down and count how many words their policies are shows that they do have them. Also, if by your intentionally misworded "force people to be British to become citizens" you mean doing what every other country does by making people who wish to become citizens swear loyalty to the country in order to become citizens? And even then, that's not anywhere in their policy or has ever been stated, you're just making things up without providing any proof again. Why don't you attend some of their meetings and conventions? And if you can't do that, I suggest you watch some videos of their meetings. For example, education:





                        Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                        I'm sure you recognize that, but for everyone else - the statements are both from the UKIP policy on immigration. I think refusing anything but temporary visas for five years would likely count as closing the borders. Or at least being fairly close.
                        Again, where do you get your false information and try to pass it off as factual?



                        Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                        Not gonna bother - I've already shown you that, statiscally, America's healthcare and education systems are both often below the standards of EU countries, and that America's Electoral System is no less democratic than the EU's system for voting - and the EU is not a single nation. You don't care about evidence.
                        There you go again falsely supporting the EU dictatorship, this isn't even a debatable statement. The EU was never intended to be democratic and it still isn't.



                        Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
                        Interesting. They also don't involve the party leaders (I think the closest is a potential party leader may have said), just members and often just accusations rather than the statements being proven.
                        Nothing you posted involved the party leaders either, I bet you couldn't even name the leader of UKIP, but that's okay because I'll remind you: Nigel Farage
                        Fission mailed.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Rombie View Post
                          I was going to say this in my previous post but held off, but given that Darkmoon is getting stuck in the same pattern as last time... I say it now. I think basically, if the other thread showed, everything Ununoctium is going to say comes with some level of taint of "if you don't agree with Y you're X" labelling no matter if people don't agree with his specific views. I somehow don't see this thread working out any differently.
                          Spoiler:


                          Also.. I have no intention of getting involved in this argument, but I will say that the UK doesn't give a shit about UKIP. UKIP and its leader were walking down my road before the election and no one even cared enough to go and speak to him, despite him being on TV. Most people don't consider them any real threat to the two major political parties - Conservatives and Labour. And before anyone tries to tell me otherwise, I live here. I have also lived here my whole life and did during the election. No one gave a shit what UKIP had to say. They didn't even get a spot on the BBC's electoral debate, it was just Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dem.
                          Last edited by Alexia_Ashford; 11-01-2011, 12:55 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                            To be fair the Debt Union, I mean European Union, is responsible for many of Britain's ills. And the fact that you sit down and count how many words their policies are shows that they do have them. Also, if by your intentionally misworded "force people to be British to become citizens" you mean doing what every other country does by making people who wish to become citizens swear loyalty to the country in order to become citizens? And even then, that's not anywhere in their policy or has ever been stated, you're just making things up without providing any proof again. Why don't you attend some of their meetings and conventions? And if you can't do that, I suggest you watch some videos of their meetings. For example, education:
                            I don't think I mentioned forced to become UK citizens anywhere - if I did, I worded the statement badly. What I think I said, and wanted to say, was that UKIP wants anyone who comes here to uphold a certain level of Britishness. Which is in there policies. On there website. Here. For those who don't feel like taking the link;
                            · Require those living in the UK under ‘Permanent Leave to Remain’ to abide by a legally binding ‘Undertaking of Residence’ ensuring they respect our laws or face deportation. Such citizens will not be eligible for benefits. People applying for British citizenship will have to have completed a period of not less then five years as a resident on ‘Permanent Leave to Remain’. New citizens should pass a citizenship test and sign a ‘Declaration of British Citizenship’ promising to uphold Britain’s democratic and tolerant way of life
                            It's rather vague about what this actually entails, however, and that concerns me.

                            And no, I have no intention of attending a UKIP meeting or convention. I don't go to the meetings of places I do like. Hell, I barely leave the house.

                            Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                            Again, where do you get your false information and try to pass it off as factual?
                            UKIP's website. That's where those quotes came from there policies on immigration, found here if you wish to check them out yourself. They want to seal the borders to everything but temporary visas for 5 years. I consider this closing the borders.

                            Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                            There you go again falsely supporting the EU dictatorship, this isn't even a debatable statement. The EU was never intended to be democratic and it still isn't.
                            Well, if you insist...

                            In the US, individuals vote for someone who then votes for them. A person does not directly vote for one candidate or another, and the person voted for is not obligated to vote the same way the people want them to, although there are laws in some States to punish them if this happens. This system is known as the electoral collage, an indirect electoral system.

                            In the EU (which is not a country or superstate, as it does not control things like economic choices, military decisions, foreign policies and such of it's member states) there are three major bodies;
                            - The European Council is actively involved in the negotiation of the treaty changes and defines the EU's policy agenda and strategies. It is made up of the Heads of State of the member states of the EU - therefore, voted into office by the public, in whatever method that country favours.
                            - The European Parliament is the one that debates and passes legislation. Including the budget. Each country votes for it's own MEP's for each region represented.
                            - The Commission is the part that proposes legislation, and the day to day running of the EU. The Commission is made up of one member for each State, chosen by a President appointed by the Council. He then choose from Candidates chosen by each member state to fill each office and takes this before Parliament - if the Parliament disagrees then he must either re-shuffle who does what job, ask for new candidates or the whole process starts again.

                            So two out of three sections are directly voted into power by the public - the third is created by those two groups. No worse than the Electoral College system, I'd say.

                            Originally posted by Ununoctium View Post
                            Nothing you posted involved the party leaders either, I bet you couldn't even name the leader of UKIP, but that's okay because I'll remind you: Nigel Farage
                            I did, unfortunately. But I did fail to care, if that makes you happier.
                            Last edited by Darkmoon; 11-01-2011, 01:09 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Is that the best you have? An allegedly fake story about how you saw someone walking down the street one day or something along those lines? Everyone is flocking to UKIP, even those who aren't even British subjects. It's the fastest growing party and everyone on the internet loves UKIP. Hell you can't even go to a British political debate site without seeing UKIP listed first and foremost ahead of all the competition and virtually everyone on the internet supports them. They're the common sense party and represent the British people.
                              Call it fake all you want, personally I'm getting tired of your bullshit attitude and aggressive tone in all of your debates. I'm not trying to prove a point to you, I couldn't care less what you think. Makes me laugh how no one in the UK gives a shit about UKIP, no one in my city gave a shit about UKIP when the main guy was walking down the street with his cronies (including knocking on my door but I ignored him), but some random American guy on the net who doesn't even live here reckons they're the best thing since sliced bread because "T3H INTERNETZ LIKES THEM" even though they hold no power in British Government.

                              Fun fact of the day: Everyone represents "the British people" when they aren't in power. I seem to recall a nice little documentary with David Cameron visiting the poor and saying how things weren't right and he'd sort everything out and everyone loved the Lib Dems/Clegg at the BBC's election debates, then as soon as they're in power, "woo UKIP".
                              Last edited by Alexia_Ashford; 11-01-2011, 01:15 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X