On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:51:37 +0000
JNugent  wrote:

> rosenstiel@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
> > In article , 
> > JN@noparticularplacetogo.com (JNugent) wrote:
> > 
> >> The whole point of "P" R is to hand seats to parties that haven't 
> >> won them.
> > 
> > Or, to put it another way, with PR you don't give 100% of
> > representation to a small minority of voters.
> 
> Au contraire - that's *exactly* what "P" R does - and it's what it's
> designed to do.
> 
> In fact, with "P" R, assuming that the candidate with the most votes
> is cheated out of his/her victory (which is the entire point of it),
> 100% of the representation in a particular electoral unit is given to
> an even smaller minority than would be the case under FPTP.

You are not an unintelligent person so why do you make such a
statement, in a multimember seat the candidate with the most votes is
almost certain to win a seat.  In a one seat contest the candidate with
the most support will win the seat.  Under first past the post the
candidate with the largest block of votes wins regardless of it they
are the most popular candidate - which frequently they aren't.  

-- 
\/ Lyn David Thomas