User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
→Simulations: Wales 2010
(→Perceptions: ref) |
(→Simulations: Wales 2010) |
||
Line 127:
==Simulations==
===National===
===Regional===
PR squared should also increase the number of voters who have an MP of their first choice party, compared to FPTP. This is due to a combination of the slight increase in the district magnitude, and the quota algorithm assigning seats more efficiently than FPTP in terms of the geography of support.
We see this quite starkly in an example from Wales.
{| class="wikitable"
|+ Wales 2010
|-
! Total Voters Represented !! Labour !! Conservative !! LidDem !! Plaid
|-
| '''FPTP'''
|-
| 42.6% || 75.7% || 35.2% || 17.6% || 21.6%
|-
| '''PR-squared'''
|-
| 72.3% || 98.8% || 83.0% || 54.4% || 34.9%
|}
Note that despite Labour obtaining five fewer seats under the PR^2 simulation (21 compared to 26 out of 40), almost all of its voters in Wales (ex ''Powys'') would have had an Labour MP.
In this respect, PR squared seems almost comparable with STV, despite a far smaller district magnitude.
==Comparison with FPTP for Westminster==
| |||