User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
→National thresholds?: more accurate
(→Treats third (and smaller) parties more fairly: and predecessors) |
(→National thresholds?: more accurate) |
||
Line 116:
Especially for the smaller countries, these may seem high, until it is recognised the thresholds are not absolutely "hard", nor indeed guaranteed. The additional features of the system afford an alternative route to winning a seat or seats, by virtue of topping a local poll or obtaining a quota. In this respect, the system makes it marginally easier for an independent compared to FPTP. 33.34% compared to perhaps 35-40% under FPTP.
Conversely, a national party in England on 5% could still win no seats if its vote was so uniformly distributed that it obtained no constituency first or second places. But that, of course, is
Of course if an ''explicit'' ''threshold'' was thought appropriate - say 5% in England - that could be implemented - leaving the smallest parties with their only route into the legislature being via very strong individual constituency performances.
| |||