Thai Poll Sees Major Parties In Tight Election Finish

[whybother]

agreed - hold another election

Or just merge a couple of parties until they get a majority.

[ChiangMaiFun]

agreed - hold another election

Or just merge a couple of parties until they get a majority.

[jdinasia]

yes... BUT... if you voted Liberal you did not vote to join a Tory government and if you voted Tory you did not vote for a link with the Libs - I believe the Libs will pay a very heavy price for their dalliance at government (which they do not deserve as they got so few votes) - particularly that lier Clegg who completely backtracked on his promise of not raising University fees - until he got a taste of power and showed he had NO scruples or honesty when the puppet masters the Tories said 'we put up fees'.

What 'you' DID do is vote for a party to get into government, and they either do that by winning a majority of seats, or by forming a coalition.

Why stop smaller parties from being in government?

If the largest party gets to form a minority government, how do they enact any laws? They don't have a majority in parliament, so they get out voted in everything. It becomes a pointless government.

agreed - hold another election

By holding another election you invalidate the franchise of the voters that voted, if the second election doesn't meet your personal criteria should we hold a 3rd and 4th and 5th election?

Coalition governments (in theory) represent not only a majority, but also the possibly disenfranchised minority voters. A party with enough pull to have a significant number of MP's under your ctiteria would never have a place at the table unless they joined with the largest minority party (which they might be diametrically opposed to.)

50% +1 is a majority. 40% is never a majority. Being the largest minority party (as stated before) does not give the right to form the government as it is still a minority.

[whybother]

agreed - hold another election

Or just merge a couple of parties until they get a majority.

Well, isn't that basically what most large parties are? They're just factions that have joined together.

The TRT bought up a lot of the smaller parties to win the 2005 election. Isn't that effectively just a coalition of minority parties who come together to get into government?

[ChiangMaiFun]

a clear-cut 'winner' is monstrously more preferable (but unlikely I grant you)

[jdinasia]

a clear-cut 'winner' is monstrously more preferable (but unlikely I grant you)

I would say that is arguable as well. A clear cut winner with 50%+1 representation in parliament versus a coalition of 3 parties that in total represent 65% would suggest that the coalition is more representative of the electorate.

But back to the "largest minority wins" argument ......

[ChiangMaiFun]

a clear-cut 'winner' is monstrously more preferable (but unlikely I grant you)

I would say that is arguable as well. A clear cut winner with 50%+1 representation in parliament versus a coalition of 3 parties that in total represent 65% would suggest that the coalition is more representative of the electorate.

But back to the "largest minority wins" argument ......

you would argue with God Himself - its your nature - I am done with this now as its repetitive and boring

[jdinasia]

I really was hoping you would answer the "2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th" election question. In the instance that your conditions were not met and it went to 4 elections that would be over 6 months without an elected government!

[whybother]

I really was hoping you would answer the "2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th" election question. In the instance that your conditions were not met and it went to 4 elections that would be over 6 months without an elected government!

After the first election, two (or more) parties that would have formed a coalition, but aren't allowed to in CMF-land, would merge.

Then the merged party would win the second election, satisfying CMFs rules, but with the same result as a coalition and with the cost of a second election.

[ChiangMaiFun]

I really was hoping you would answer the "2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th" election question. In the instance that your conditions were not met and it went to 4 elections that would be over 6 months without an elected government!

After the first election, two (or more) parties that would have formed a coalition, but aren't allowed to in CMF-land, would merge.

Then the merged party would win the second election, satisfying CMFs rules, but with the same result as a coalition and with the cost of a second election.

[jdinasia]

I really was hoping you would answer the "2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th" election question. In the instance that your conditions were not met and it went to 4 elections that would be over 6 months without an elected government!

After the first election, two (or more) parties that would have formed a coalition, but aren't allowed to in CMF-land, would merge.

Then the merged party would win the second election, satisfying CMFs rules, but with the same result as a coalition and with the cost of a second election.

Probably correct, but I think he would at that point go back and say that only the largest minority from the first election had the right to make those changes!

The basic concept, particularly in parliamentary democracies, is that whoever can get the majority in Parliament has the right to govern. It is obvious that the largest minority party would have far less work to do to get a majority unless, of course, they were capable of doing so because they were extremists etc and thus not representative of the majority of the population for that reason.

I particularly see coalition governments as useful in countries with less developed democratic systems like the checks and balances needed for a democracy to work. Some very well established democracies end up with coalition governments not led by the largest party and that is probably a good thing too!

[canuckamuck]

runoffs are the answer.

[whybother]

runoffs are the answer.

Run offs are fine when you are electing an individual, but not for a government.

They should have run offs for electing MPs. Preference voting is also good - it's basically a runoff without having another election.

Actually, I reckon that's where a lot of the confusion is. An MP is elected by getting the most votes, but not a majority. A lot of people probably assume that the same should happen for the government.