The British general election of 2010 under different voting rules |
| |
Authors: | Paul R Abramson John H Aldrich Abraham Diskin Aaron M Houck Renan Levine Thomas J Scotto |
| |
Institution: | 1. Michigan State University, United States;2. Duke University, Department of Political Science, Box 90204, Durham, NC 27708-0204, United States;3. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel;4. The Interdisciplinary Center, Herzlyia, Israel;5. Duke University, United States;6. University of Toronto-Scarborough, Canada;g University of Essex, United Kingdom |
| |
Abstract: | The 2010 British election resulted in what the British refer to as a “hung Parliament” for the first time in over a generation. This result further heightened the debate over the fairness and utility of the nation’s centuries-old first-past-the-post (FPTP) system. Survey data are used to simulate the election outcome under four different electoral systems beyond FPTP: round-robin pair-wise comparisons, the Borda count, the alternative vote, and Coombs' method. Results suggest that in 2010, the Liberal-Democrats were Condorcet preferred to all other parties and would have won a national election under every tested method except the alternative vote, the method supported by the Liberal-Democrats during the referendum in May 2011 and, of course, FPTP as actually used. |
| |
Keywords: | Electoral systems United Kingdom Alternative vote Borda count Condorcet method Coombs' method |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|