Evo ukrtako o razlicitim sistemima glasanja i polemikom u Britaniji (sori sto je na engleskom al tebi to nece biti problem a meni je bilo malo mrsko da prevodim):
First past the post (FPTP)
The country is divided into constituency seats. Each constituency chooses one MP. The party with a majority of seats forms a government. If no one has a majority, parliament is hung.
The Tories back this type of voting. It is used in India, Canada, and UK.
The upside – It is easy. The downside – Fails to reflect how the country votes as a whole.
Alternative vote (AV)
Like the FPTP but instead of putting a cross next to one person, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If none gets a majority of first preference vote, the candidate who comes last is eliminated.
The second preference votes on the loser’s ballot papers are then given to other candidates. This continues until one candidate has more than 50% of votes and is declared the winner.
How is this better than the FPTP? With FPTP the winner might only have 30% of the votes. With this one some kind of preference for winner is expressed by the voters.
The bad side is that seats in parliament still don’t reflect the overall share of the vote. And in some cases MPs will win seats on second and third preference votes without being anyone’s first choice. This is used in London mayoral elections, Australian House of Representatives, Irish presidential elections. This is type of voting will not be any great electoral reform.
Alternative vote + (AV+)
Like AV but as well as numbering candidates in order of preference voters also back candidates from a party list. So, parliament is mostly filed with constituency MPs elected on the AV system but is ‘topped up’ with MPs chosen from a menu of parties.
Parliament better reflects how the country as a whole voted. Representation is more proportional. The downside of this is that it is quite complicated and you get two classes of MPs – constituency ones with a direct mandate and party apparatchiks from the top up list.
No one uses it. But labour people who say they want to reform the voting system and mean it back this up.
Single transferable vote (STV)
Constituencies are bigger with more than one MP for each area. Voters rank candidates in order of preference. To be elected in that area a candidate needs to cross the threshold of votes. If not enough candidates cross the line, the one whit the fewest first preference votes is eliminated. The second, third etc preferences on his or her ballot paper are allocated to other candidates. This continues until enough candidates have crossed the threshold to allocate all seats in the area.
Although it is a bit complicated it gives a proportional parliament and keeps a link between MP and constituency. STV is used in Irish parliamentary elections, the Australian senate.
This is (sorry, this WAS) LibDems’ preferred option.
Eto zasto je tvoja prijateljica morala da glasa tako kako je glasala. Ali steta sto nije bilo vise glasova za Libdem. Ili sto nije vise mladih glasaca u Britaniji
Sto se Srbije tice - pomalo gvirnem u politiku i ekonomiju iste. Ne mogu, Simore, u jednom momentu je ozbiljna zainteresovanost za zbivanja u Srbiji pocela da mi narusava zdravlje. Al onako zapravo.
Te sam od kad je u drzavu uvedena demokratija a u skole veronauka ozbiljkno analiziranje politike u Srbiji skoro sasvim batalila.
Ali jeste onako kako si napisao. Uvek su u Srbiji isti ljudi na vlasti i cini mi se da je uvek je isti tip elite u pitanju. I nisam sigurna koliko je medju narodom razvijena drustvena svest. Da li se tu ista i kako promenilo od, recimo devedesetih.
A sto se
tice - ljubav je uzvraceta (i u mnogim drugim temama i postovima)
a zapravo su vishe u desnicharskim sivo-crnim bojama..... ) koji sve rade u korist konzervativno-kruto-kapitalistichkog SISTEMA te doprinose ogromnim kontrastima medju klasama. dakle, ni DP nije bash jedinstvena, a kamoli da je situacija predvidiva......
republicans are beyond repair. 
