thanks for the addition!sydeman wrote:What a tedious posting this one is!
London Mayor Election
-
stone-penge
- Posts: 292
- Joined: 5 Nov 2004 14:40
- Location: Newlands park
-
Alex Feakes
- Posts: 27
- Joined: 3 Apr 2005 15:59
- Location: Forest Hill
Don't forget ...
... that you get to give a first and second choice in the Mayor election, as well as a vote for a constituency London Assembly candidate and the London-wide London Assembly list.
Just in case readers aren't aware of how the Mayoral preference system works, your two mayoral preference votes work like this:
If one candidate gets over 50% of first choice votes, then they win, but if that doesn't happen then voter's second choices come into play.
If your first choice candidate isn't one of the top two after the count of first preferences, but your second choice is, then your second choice vote is added - at full value - to your second choice candidate's total.
This allows you effectively to both vote for someone and against someone else. For example: if you want to back candidate C, but don't think that they will beat candidates A and B on first choice votes, and you would rather that candidate A didn't win overall, then you could give your first choice vote to candidate C, and then your second choice to candidate B.
More details of the mechanics (but not the effect) of the Mayor vote are given here: http://www.londonelects.org.uk/voting/v ... mayor.aspx
Just in case readers aren't aware of how the Mayoral preference system works, your two mayoral preference votes work like this:
If one candidate gets over 50% of first choice votes, then they win, but if that doesn't happen then voter's second choices come into play.
If your first choice candidate isn't one of the top two after the count of first preferences, but your second choice is, then your second choice vote is added - at full value - to your second choice candidate's total.
This allows you effectively to both vote for someone and against someone else. For example: if you want to back candidate C, but don't think that they will beat candidates A and B on first choice votes, and you would rather that candidate A didn't win overall, then you could give your first choice vote to candidate C, and then your second choice to candidate B.
More details of the mechanics (but not the effect) of the Mayor vote are given here: http://www.londonelects.org.uk/voting/v ... mayor.aspx
Last edited by Alex Feakes on 28 Apr 2008 11:59, edited 1 time in total.
-
georgemichael
- Posts: 51
- Joined: 28 Aug 2007 20:15
- Location: sydenham
That's very true. Very well illustrated, without mentioning any candidates, or the party you represent!
But you don't have to give a second vote. Why bother voting for C at all?!!
I would prefer not to vote for an MP but somebody who would represent their own policies and not their parties.
He certainly seems the most attractive to me!
But you don't have to give a second vote. Why bother voting for C at all?!!
I would prefer not to vote for an MP but somebody who would represent their own policies and not their parties.
He certainly seems the most attractive to me!
Let me get this straight. So, essentially, if we assume that candidates A and B are going to be the top two candidates and you want A to win, it makes tactical sense to give A your second choice vote rather than your first choice vote.
is that right?
btw, I wouldn't trust Paddick as far as I could throw him. I lived in Brixton during his cannabis experiment and he basically turned the place into a ghetto.
Liz
is that right?
btw, I wouldn't trust Paddick as far as I could throw him. I lived in Brixton during his cannabis experiment and he basically turned the place into a ghetto.
Liz