The first of the four systems I will analyze are the majoritarian systems. Named as such because they centre around a “winner takes all” philosophy, examples of majoritarian systems include First Past the Post/Plurality (FPTP), which is used by 43 countries worldwide including Canada, the UK and the US, Second Ballot Majority-Runoff (SBMR), which is used in 15 countries worldwide including France and Finland, and Alternative Vote (AV), used in Australia (Norris, 1997). First Past the Post is the simplest of these three, and works by electing candidates simply based on who garners the most votes in their riding, regardless of whether they receive more than 50% of the vote or not. Single Ballot Majority-Runoff differs from FPTP in that it requires
…show more content…
Voters cast ballots with very little hassle, and whoever gains either the most votes or 50% of the vote once counting is done wins. However, on the other two of my imposed conditions, majoritarian systems fall short. One of the major drawbacks of majoritarian systems is that, even assuming a candidate wins with 51% of the vote, that leaves 49% of voters unhappy. Therefore, majoritarian systems cannot guarantee a government that represents the true wishes of the people – and indeed, often results in very skewed results. Additionally, the fact that a candidate needs to win overall to have any form of representation represses smaller parties, who have shallow but widespread bases, and promotes parties who have deep bases in only a few ridings. Consequently, many minority views are either under or overrepresented. Majoritarian systems do have a few more benefits, notably that the frequency with which majority governments are formed ensure that legislation can often be passed as quickly as possible. However, by my evaluation, these benefits do not outweigh the downsides, and therefore, majoritarian systems should take a back seat to other methods of
Voters cast ballots with very little hassle, and whoever gains either the most votes or 50% of the vote once counting is done wins. However, on the other two of my imposed conditions, majoritarian systems fall short. One of the major drawbacks of majoritarian systems is that, even assuming a candidate wins with 51% of the vote, that leaves 49% of voters unhappy. Therefore, majoritarian systems cannot guarantee a government that represents the true wishes of the people – and indeed, often results in very skewed results. Additionally, the fact that a candidate needs to win overall to have any form of representation represses smaller parties, who have shallow but widespread bases, and promotes parties who have deep bases in only a few ridings. Consequently, many minority views are either under or overrepresented. Majoritarian systems do have a few more benefits, notably that the frequency with which majority governments are formed ensure that legislation can often be passed as quickly as possible. However, by my evaluation, these benefits do not outweigh the downsides, and therefore, majoritarian systems should take a back seat to other methods of