Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
24 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
FPTP- How does it work?
|
650 constituencies who each elect an MP Winning candidate is the one with the most votes (not majority) For a party to form a government, they must get majority of seats |
|
|
FPTP- Where is it used?
|
Used to elect MPs to the Commons
|
|
|
FPTP-Advantages
|
Simplicity- obvious results, government can get straight into it, no demand for reform (Electoral Reform Society contradicts this) Strong-allows a single party to rule Representative- Each constituency is represented via their MP |
|
|
FPTP-Disadvantages
|
Two-party System- Labour vs Conservative. 1997- Labour won 63.2% of seats with just 43.2% of votes Winner's bonus-In 2010, the Liberal Democrats won 23% of the vote but only received 8.8% of the seats (57 out of 650). Plurality system Tactical and wasted votes-safe seats Divisive |
|
|
AV-How does it work?
|
Preferential system Voter asked to rank candidates in order of preference Candidates are elected outright if they gain more than half the votes as first preferences. If not, the candidate who lost (the one with least first preferences) is eliminated and their votes move to the second preference marked on the ballot papers. This process continues until one candidate has half of the votes and is elected. - |
|
|
AV-Where is it used?
|
Labour leadership elections Liberal Democrats leadership elections By-elections for House of Lords |
|
|
AV- Advantages
|
Elected candidate is broadly popular with all members of a constituency MP-Constituency link It works- used in Australian GEs since 1924 Removes tactical voting |
|
|
AV-Disadvantages
|
Not a proportional system-if used in 1997, Labour would have received an even larger majority (77% of seats) Candidate with most 1st Preference isn't guaranteed victory Small chance that extreme 4th and 5th choice candidates and voters may hold the balance of power More Complex-time consuming |
|
|
SV-How does it work?
|
Shortened version of AV Must gain over 50% to win If a majority is not received straight away, all other candidates are removed apart form 1st and 2nd. The removed candidates second preference is then added if appropriate |
|
|
SV-Where is it used?
|
Used for the election of Mayors Police and Crime Commissioners in the England and Wales |
|
|
SV-Advantages
|
Winning candidate must have a broad 50% of support across the electorate Eliminates the risk of 3rd Choice parties sneaking in It works-used widely in the UK and Europe Strong mandate |
|
|
SV-Disadvantages
|
Winner might not have the most 2nd choice votes, but wins as has the most 1st votes-Boris Johnson in 2008 If used in GEs, it would further exaggerate the majorities that parties get. Punishing to minor parties such as UKIP or the Greens, whose second preference status is usually ignored |
|
|
STV-How does it work?
|
Voters put numbers next to candidates in order of preference. To get elected, candidates need to reach a set share of the votes, determined by the number of positions to be filled. Each voter gets one vote, which can transfer from their first-preference to their second-preference, so if your preferred candidate has no chance of being elected or has enough votes already, your vote is transferred to your second choice candidate in accordance with your instructions. |
|
|
STV-Where is it used?
|
All elections in the Republic of Ireland, except elections for the presidency and by-elections which are both conducted using the Alternative Vote. Assembly, European and local government elections in Northern Ireland. Local elections in Scotland. The Australian Senate |
|
|
STV-Advantages
|
Proportional Fair Choice-most voters can identify a representative that they personally helped to elect Representation Successful |
|
|
STV-Disadvantages
|
Accuracy-Quota calculated via the Droop Formula-could lead to inaccuracies Candidates more aligned to parties so may lose touch with the constituency Coalitions Complex -difficult to explain to the electorate |
|
|
AMS-How does it work?
|
Hybrid system of FPTP and PR Voters fill in 2 slips, one for their MP (FPTP) and one for their preferred party(PR) Second slips are counted and the remaining seats are allocated based n their share of the vote (D'Hondt formula) |
|
|
AMS-Where is it used?
|
Scotland Holyrood elections Welsh Assembly |
|
|
AMS-Advantages
|
Proportional Representative Choice-rewards parties that struggle in FPTP Simple-easy to explain to the electorate Threshold-legitimacy of each party |
|
|
AMS-Disadvantages
|
Two-tier-instability, inaccuracy, slow Weak-representatives and government Under-representation Uncertainty Accuracy |
|
|
PR-How does it work?
|
Parties present lists of candidates and seats are awarded according to their party’s share of the vote Open List: Voters choose individual candidates from the list provided by each party and individual candidates are elected according to the popular vote. Closed List: Voters vote for the party and therefore the list as a whole. Candidates are elected in the order they appear on the list (as decided by the party) until all the seats have been filled. Semi-open lists: This gives voters some influence over who is elected, but most of the candidates will be elected in list order. |
|
|
PR-Where is it used?
|
British elections to the European Parliament (excluding Northern Ireland) Over 80 countries including Israel, Brazil, Austria, Denmark, Russia and South Africa |
|
|
PR-Advantages
|
Most proportional of all systems-more votes the party gets, the more seats they gain Smaller parties can gain seats at a European Level Allows parties to naturally increase ethnic minorities and female candidates |
|
|
PR-Disadvantages
|
Don't know exactly who you are voting for Poor MP and Constituency link Parties control who get picked-most loyal Regions are of different sizes, meaning it is hard for the Greens in England to get elected. |
