4 ms·

> Australia has a robust ranked voting system but still has very dominant 2 major parties. Australia's top 3 parties achieved ~65% of the vote. That leaves abo

by conz 4y ago

> Australia has a robust ranked voting system but still has very dominant 2 major parties. Australia's top 3 parties achieved ~65% of the vote. That leaves about 1/3rd to minor parties and independents. Surely that's a great deal better than having just 2 parties with any real power.

plsbenice34 4y ago
The actual seats that are won are a better indication of the results and who has power. Results seem to be that the major 2 parties won 90% of the seats: https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal-election-2022-results https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal-election-2022-res...
- gonzo41 4y ago
  It's slightly more complicated, it's more like there's 3-5-ish major parties. If you take the Liberal party, the Liberal National Party of Queensland and the National Party. Those form the Coalition conservative block. Then there's Labor who form the Center Left, and the Greens who are the progressive Left. Importantly whilst 90% of the seats may be in 4 distinct parties, that form two opposing sides, The Coalition suffered the loss of seats to independents recently. Labor voters in these electorates were able to vote 1 for the ALP and then send there preference to an independent in order to tactically vote against the liberals ruling party. This effect can be seen by the reduced labor vote in these electorates.
  - femto 4y ago
    "Tactical voting" means you vote for a less preferred candidate over your preferred candidate to achieve a desired outcome. This is not the same a giving a second preference to an independent. In your example, the voter has voted for their preferred (Labor) candidate over the independent. If the Labor candidate gets knocked out then their second preference says "if I can't have Labor then I would prefer an Independent over Liberal". That's the beauty of preferential voting, you generally don't have to vote tactically. You just vote for what you really want.
    - plsbenice34 4y ago
      True, it is interesting from a game theoretic point of view. There is info about the algorithm's properties here in case anyone is interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Tactical_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Tactical...
- conz 4y ago
  > The actual seats that are won are a better indication of the results and who has power. Results seem to be that the major 2 parties won 90% of the seats: While true, that 10% allocation of parliamentary seats to independents/small parties allows for a great deal of negotiation on policy. The smaller parties, particularly if the hold a sufficient level of balance-of-power, can see some/many of their own policies reflected in the eventual policies which pass through parliament. [Edit: clarification]

by conz 4y ago

plsbenice34 4y ago

The actual seats that are won are a better indication of the results and who has power. Results seem to be that the major 2 parties won 90% of the seats: https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal-election-2022-results https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal-election-2022-res...

gonzo41 4y ago
It's slightly more complicated, it's more like there's 3-5-ish major parties. If you take the Liberal party, the Liberal National Party of Queensland and the National Party. Those form the Coalition conservative block. Then there's Labor who form the Center Left, and the Greens who are the progressive Left. Importantly whilst 90% of the seats may be in 4 distinct parties, that form two opposing sides, The Coalition suffered the loss of seats to independents recently. Labor voters in these electorates were able to vote 1 for the ALP and then send there preference to an independent in order to tactically vote against the liberals ruling party. This effect can be seen by the reduced labor vote in these electorates.
- femto 4y ago
  "Tactical voting" means you vote for a less preferred candidate over your preferred candidate to achieve a desired outcome. This is not the same a giving a second preference to an independent. In your example, the voter has voted for their preferred (Labor) candidate over the independent. If the Labor candidate gets knocked out then their second preference says "if I can't have Labor then I would prefer an Independent over Liberal". That's the beauty of preferential voting, you generally don't have to vote tactically. You just vote for what you really want.
  - plsbenice34 4y ago
    True, it is interesting from a game theoretic point of view. There is info about the algorithm's properties here in case anyone is interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Tactical_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Tactical...
conz 4y ago
> The actual seats that are won are a better indication of the results and who has power. Results seem to be that the major 2 parties won 90% of the seats: While true, that 10% allocation of parliamentary seats to independents/small parties allows for a great deal of negotiation on policy. The smaller parties, particularly if the hold a sufficient level of balance-of-power, can see some/many of their own policies reflected in the eventual policies which pass through parliament. [Edit: clarification]