User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→Subsequent members elected: their) |
m (→National thresholds?: comma) |
||
| Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
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 little different to the current system in the UK. |
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 little different to the current system in the UK. |
||
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. |
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. |
||
==Why ranked ballots?== |
==Why ranked ballots?== |
||