Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
If dissatisfaction with PP over the next few years leads to some splintering off to right wing parties, would that lead to some differences in detail but not much difference in broad measure?

While the difference in broad measure would be if an economically sane centrist seeming party could wedge some substantial portion of their vote away?

If SPOE gets 31% of deputies from 28% of the vote while IU-LV gets 3% of deputies from 6% of the vote, it would seem the general challenge for a third party is getting up to the level of support where the threshold effects are not killing their proportional representation. That is, the impact of anyone by PSOE wedging away 10% of PP's vote (4% of electorate) would be substantially watered down by threshold effects unless they were mostly going to the same place and that same party was also picking up voters from elsewhere.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Nov 20th, 2011 at 08:00:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
At the level of support the PP and PSOE get, their vote fraction losses translate pretty much proportionally to seat losses. The effect of neither of the two main parties getting more than 35% would be that smalled parties might get more seats at the margin by the d'Hondt method.

PP votes, nationally, are not going to go to IU, only to the PSOE or to UPyD.

There has been an attempt at reestablishing a European-style liberal party, but it hasn't been successful.

To err is of course human. But to mess things up spectacularly, we need an elite — Yanis Varoufakis

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Nov 21st, 2011 at 01:58:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I hadn't the impression that the notional wedge of 4% of the electorate from PP could go to IU, but thanks for confirming that. Trading voters between PP and PSOE does not change the electoral landscape, so the evolution of the electoral landscape from that direction would have to be from the Social Democrats.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon Nov 21st, 2011 at 11:23:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But my point is that if PP and PSOE vote percentages go from 44%-28% to 36%-36% a party polling at 13% would get more seats.

In a 5-seat constituency the d'Hondt quotients would be

44 22 15 11 9 -> 3 seats
28 14  9  7 6 -> 2 seats
13  7  4  3 3 -> 0 sets

36 18 12 9 7 -> 2 seats
36 18 12 9 7 -> 2 seats
13  7  4 3 3 -> 1 seat

so a vote transfer from PP to PSOE could result in a seat transfer from PP to IU.

To err is of course human. But to mess things up spectacularly, we need an elite — Yanis Varoufakis

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Nov 21st, 2011 at 11:51:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This is d'Hondt? The party with the highest V/(s+1) gets the next seat and then its quota is recalculated because it's "s" has changed?

Yes, 13% there is the d'Hondt threshold effect ... but suppose that 13% was split 8% 4% and minor parties ...

36 [1] 18 [1] 18 [2] 12 [2] 12 [3]
32 [0] 32 [1] 16 [1] 16 [2] 08 [2]
08 [0] 08 [0] 08 [0] 08 [0] 08 [0]
04 [0] 04 [0] 04 [0] 04 [0] 04 [0]

The threshold for a minor party deputy there is 12%, the largest vote share divided by the plurality of 3. Hence the "regional" 3rd parties doing better.

That's why a wedge that shifts voters from the leading party in a district to a 3rd party that already has a toehold is particularly appealing under d'Hondt, since it reduces both sides of the gap to the threshold.

That's also why Sainte-Laguë, which uses V/(1+2*s), is more favorable to medium size 3rd parties:

36 [1] 12 [1] 12.0 [2] 07.2 [2] 07.2 [2]
32 [0] 32 [1] 10.3 [1] 10.3 [2] 06.4 [2]
08 [0] 08 [0] 08.0 [0] 08.0 [0] 08.0 [1]
04 [0] 04 [0] 04.0 [0] 04.0 [0] 04.0 [0]


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon Nov 21st, 2011 at 01:31:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... mind, AFAIU, the Danes do not use the proposed 1, 3, 5, 7 ... divisors, but rather 1.4, 3, 5, 7 ... so in practice there's a higher 3rd/minor party threshold than the method as originally proposed.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon Nov 21st, 2011 at 01:50:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series