You are not logged in [login] | [register]
RSS MAD is both an RSS feed archive and online feed reader.
You can browse our categories, search for a feed, or if you already have a URL, use our online feed reader.
Simply start browsing the site, and if you find some feeds you like, register to view them on your own personalized page!
Searching 190692 articles in 8938 feeds.
Do you like RSS MAD? Why not spread the news and tell a friend about it - it's as easy as filling out this form!
added: Fri, 18th August 2006 | 1169 views | 0x in favourites
feed url: http://blog.electoralmarketing.com/xml-rss2.php
Collaborative blog about political and electoral marketing, political communication, campaigns and elections.
By John Cross
To most people democracy is about living in a country where every (or nearly every) adult is allowed to have their say by casting votes. People take the equality of voters as a given most people would be angry if they were to find out their neighbour or colleague got five votes while they had but one. Yes most of us take it for granted that because every voter has one vote it follows that every voter is treated equal and that this is a good thing. Unfortunately it simply is not true that all voters are treated equally.
It is not difficult to understand why when you think about it in a constituency of 100 voters you decide how 1% of the total vote is cast in a constituency of 150 voters you get to cast a lower percentage of the total vote (about 0.7%). So voters in the smaller constituencies get far more of a say. This of course is not a problem if all constituencies have the same or very similar number of voters. In 2005 the Isle of Wight had 108,253 residents who were entitled to vote whereas Birmingham, Yardley had 51,414. That means that voters in Birmingham, Yardley had twice as much power in the 2005 General Election.So you may be wondering why we don't we make all the constituencies the same size. Well efforts are made to make all the constituencies the same size but it never quite happens. The Isle of Wight is a good example, it just is not considered sensible to have part of the island in one constituency and part of it in another. Also rural areas have low population densities so to get say 70,000 constituents you would need to have a massive area of land in the constituency this is not considered sensible by the current government. It is worth noting that even if all boundaries were drawn up with equal populations of voters the equality would not last long as many houses are built in the years between elections.
There are however other problems with the current voting system for UK General Elections. The system is called “First past the post” because the candidate with the most votes wins just as the horse which is first to cross the finishing post wins a race. One of the problems is that many people vote for candidates who are unlikely to be placed first or even second in the election and these people often feel that their vote is “wasted” or “ineffective”. A “non-effective” vote is one which does not help a voter a candidate which they support to be elected. They are to think this since only the voters who vote for the winning candidate are represented in Parliament. In fact many of the winning candidates votes may also be ineffective as he/she would still have won had some of their supporters not voted.
The proportion of “wasted votes” under the “first past the post” system varies but it is never lower than half, and can be substantially higher. In 2005 the proportion of “wasted votes” in Dundee East was over 62%. This causes yet more inequality voters in some constituencies are far more likely to have their vote wasted than others. Supporters of Independents and smaller political parties are almost certain to have their vote wasted. Even supporters the top three political parties are not treated equally the system currently discriminates against the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and in favour of Labour Party supporters.
Supporters of the Green Party and UKIP are almost certain to be denied any representation in a Parliament with 600 seats despite the fact the Green Party received about 1 in every hundred votes cast and UKIP received roughly twice that number. We can only speculate on how many other people might have voted for them but for the fear of their vote being wasted. Party list systems are not the answer. These lists systems still result in many wasted votes (though less than under FPP) and they force voters to choose political parties rather than people to represent them. This is an important point in the recent debate in Parliament on the Education Bill most Conservative MPs voted with the Labour Government, while many Labour MPs voted against. It really is important for voters to choose individuals to represent them.
There will of course always be wasted votes. Take a very small and simple example of five voters and five candidates standing for just four positions. Suppose they get one vote each then whatever system you use four of them must be elected and one of them will be unsuccessful and the vote cast for that candidate will be ineffective. There will always be a proportion of wasted votes, so the question is how do we reduce this proportion to the absolute minimum. The answer is a voting system called Single Transferable Vote (STV). Under STV if you vote for a candidate who receives very few votes and is unlikely to win (instead of being wasted) your vote is transferred to your next preference out of the remaining candidates. If on the other hand your first choice candidate has more votes than is required to be elected a proportion of your vote is often transferred rather than wasted. STV would require around five or six Members of Parliament to be elected by each constituency and the constituencies themselves would be about five or six times larger than before. If constituencies with a smaller population were considered necessary in smaller area then the number of MPs could be reduced in the same proportion.
I believe that STV can ensure that Parliament is representative of the people and accountable to the people, and that STV is the only system that can come close to treating each voter equally and while providing all voters with the choice that they deserve.
Source of election data:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Expodata/Spreadsheets/D9233.xls UK Election Data from the National Statistics Office.
___________________________________________
About the Author
John Cross is a member of the Electoral reform society. He is the founder of an electoral reform wikicity & is the author of a glosary of electoral terms for Make Votes Count in West Sussex, a group local to West Sussex campaigning for electoral reform.
Article Source: http://articles.simplysearch4it.com
by: Michael Garmahis
The president of Belarus is unable to go away. Though most people think he should. Most likely Alexander Lukashenko remains the president for unlimited term as a result of outrageous lie and falsifications of election. “For our security forces the tension is so great, that you cannot imagine”, - the president said.
Belarus is threatened with the destiny of North Korea. According to Alexander Milinkevich, one of the opposition candidates, polar night can let down the country. And the main result for opposition will be that the authority will discover a new portion of disloyal people which wait for repressions after election.
Alexander Lukashenko repeatedly declared, that he will not give out the power without fight. “We'll blow so, that it will not seem a little to them, we'll turn off heads, we'll kick from left to right and from top to down, they'll rush out in one day.” He named contenders at president election as “frozen imbeciles”. The authority equates practically the opposition to terrorists.
There are low chances that a lot of people will express against distortion of election results. Belarusians are intimidated by propaganda and existing total control and slavish contract system. Disloyal people are threatened with dismissal from work, arrest and beating.THE AUTHORITY DISCOVERED THE IMAGINARY PLOT OF OPPOSITION
They arrested first 4 heads of unregistered public association Partnership - the organizer of independent observation at election. These guys wait now for 3 years of prison. KGB declared, that Partnership was created, controlled and financed by the American organization National Democratic Institute.
One of the arrested persons Nikolay Astrejko married some days before arrest. His wife Polina speaks that KGB members threatened with a pistol to her husband. They brought with themselves witnesses which live in the other end of city. They took away Astrejko's mobile phone In the beginning of the search and replied the incoming calls. They took away all the information, even writing-books which Astrejko a long ago used in University. They took away also the money presented by guests on the wedding and keys from an apartment.
Later the president declared, that KGB discovered the plot of opposition and crushed 72 organizations which were going to observe the election and withdrew millions of dollars, PCs, mobile phones. “They prepared to make blow up in a crowd on March, 19 and then block main Minsk city structures and make revolution”, - said head of KGB Stepan Suharenko.
Representative of KGB declared, that they have also withdrawn already filled exit-polls reports prepared by the Vilnius office of Gallup which should be carried out during president election on March, 19. As though the opposition wanted to sound off these figures simultaneously with the official data and to declare their victory.
Rasa Olishovskene, the head of the Gallup Baltic office denied this statement and named it a forgery. This organization was not going to make exit-poll during president election in Belarus at all. Experts speak, that a forged documents have bad quality as there is not figures “against all candidates” and “refused to answer”.
According to Pavel Mozhejko, press secretary of Alexander Milinkevich, the authority have data of the population polls. These figures coincide with those information which authorities named as preparing provocation. According to documents withdrawn by KGB, the victor in president election is the leader of opposition Alexander Milinkevich with 53,7% voices of voters. Alexander Lukashenko has 41,3%. Another opposition candidate Alexander Kozulin 3,8%, Sergey Gajdukevich 1,2%.
THE OPPOSITION AS THOUGH TRIED TO BUST UP BELARUS WITH MOSLEMS
In absence of the editor-in-chief A.Karol, oppositional newspaper Zgoda reprinted a caricature on prophet Mohammed which already have done a lot of noise in the West. Most likely provocation has been made by the introduced employee of KGB.
The criminal case is up. The president has declared that the newspaper will be closed and guilty persons will be in prison.
THEY ARRESTED AND BEATEN OPPOSITION CANDIDATE AND JOURNALISTS
Alexander Kozulin wanted to get to All-Belarusian People's Congress which was made as Lukashenko pre-election propaganda action. By the way, speakers of this event sent their speeches in the administration of the president a week before event.
In a Railway Palace building, where Kozulin tried to be registered as member of Congress, 6 guys in black jackets and sport caps tumbled down 2 meter high candidate on the floor quickly and professionally.
“They started to beat him with fists and legs, - the head of candidate staff Mecheslav Grib speaks. We could make nothing. Journalists tried to photograph and every one got down. They pressed them to a wall. Each photographer was held by two persons. Television cameraman for Reuters was also beaten. They destroyed his camera”.
After beating, «men in black» lifted Kozulin up, drag off the building and pushed in the dark blue bus. «They jostled me as the ram under a seat in unnatural position, someone sat down from above. In this way I was driving about an hour through the city», - speaks Kozulin himself.
The crowd of people gathered at police building where they delivered Kozulin. Correspondent of KP in Belarus Oleg Ulevich was beaten when tried to photograph as the police began to detain people. The police broken his nose. Later in hospital it was found out that the journalist also have a craniocerebral injury.
Soon two policemen from the press service came to him in hospital like to apologize, but when the journalist could not describe people which attacked him, the police assumed, that he strike with head on the fence himself.
SCANDAL CONFESSIONS OF KGB EMPLOYEES
A few days ago site www.ucpb.org received e-mail signed by staff of KGB. Here is the full text of the letter.
We are employees of Committee of State Security of Belarus and declare the following! After TV statement of opposition candidate in president Alexander Milinkevich and especially Alexander Kozulin, we started to receive messages from places that the population of Belarus actively discusses them, expresses support to those politics and negatively expresses to the side of running authority.
Our information shows, that these days the rating and trust to the working president has sharply fallen. Even in the Mogilev area (native area of Lukashenko) it does not exceed 23%. Talks about TV statements of opposition candidates and also an opinions about events are active on workplaces, in transport, in shops and the markets. The main part of people shows extreme displeasure with suppression and distortion by authority of a true state of affairs. The anxiety for result of voting on March, 19 and confidence of their falsification from authorities simultaneously grows by people.
We see that the authority is frightened. The meeting with heads of power structures carried out by Alexander Lukashenko was really hysterical. Chairman of KGB Stepan Suharenko got the sanction to immediate performance of special actions. These articles of criminal code are on the top: Action on behalf of the unregistered organization and Implication in illegal activity of minors. That's why have begun searches, checks and detentions.
Round-the-clock closer watch are established for Milinkevich, Kozulin and also for their nearest colleagues. Detachments and checks are reinforced on borders, especially with Russia. They made lists with numbers of cars of disloyal people, including members of families.
Struggle against the organization Partnership is the beginning of provocations of our department. Copies of the fabricated polls are prepared by our structure and we know those people.
And what is ahead?
1. In the day of voting Lukashenko's headquarters will be in Administration of president. This day there will be all basic heads and all power structures heads.
2. The day of election is the working day for all officials. Everyone should manage process and be at phone.
3. One day before elections - personal care of all leaders of opposition. In day of elections - keeping out leaders from people.
4. Switching-off of the Internet and mobile telecommunications is planned.
5. There will be all possible measures on denial of arriving people from places to Minsk in the day of voting. They prepare the official statement that because of probable provocations arrival to Minsk will be limited: cancellation of electric trains, buses, check of cars entrance.
6. They prepare variant of finding the weapon or an ammunition in one of offices, in garage or the car of the oppositionist. It's the basic direction of provocations.
7. Members of the election committee will instruct voters, that they will be responsible for carrying out of the bulletins (intimidation).
8. The central places of Minsk in day of voting will be closed, tightly and in various ways (in advance).
9. There is the task to find “skunk” with the big sum of dollars which he should give out to other people for coming out on the streets. Certain people will give out themselves for members of opposition.
10. In the day of voting TV all the day long will reporting about course of voting. Positively about Lukashenko and all dirty about Milinkevich. In other words: mass infringements, purchase of the voices, a drunk active, etc.
11. There will be an instructing of all power structures heads on March, 17 in a Lukashenko's cabinet according analysis of the received information. After that there will be command how to act: with whom and when.
12. The plan for oppositionists is approved: arrest, police, court,15 day in prison. 2-3 hours time for all this actions. By evening on March 19 there will be no most active members at all.
13. The task is only 1 round and more than 73% of voices to Lukashenko, Milinkevich is not the second.
14. Groups of certain sportsmen are created. They will engaged in fight with police passing themselves off as drunk opposition and also will beat members of opposition.
15. Till March 10, 2006 all members of the election committee will know about measures of their encouragement.
16. The tasks also are:
- To break utterly meetings with voters
- To release and arrest as though Milinkevich brochures
- 3 video sign against opposition are ready.
- During broadcasting of Milinkevich statements, in 2-3 areas to switch off light.
- Police should not let independent mass-media in post boxes of people.
17. They already spy on international observers.
18. Before the election, after TV statements of all candidates Lukashenko will give “estimation” and conclusion to all oppositional candidates.
The authority is ready to do anything. They afraid to lose all feeding troughs, the stolen money and power.
The most part of force and police structures are decent, patriotic people. They said years to us that coming opposition authority will dismiss everybody and the most enthusiastic will imprison.
Let's work with our colleagues and to win over to your side. We collect and analyze the information understanding essence of the today's moment and will present it to society when there will be conditions for this.
The order on beating of presidential contender Kozulin has given personally Lukashenko. And chairman of KGB went to look who is stronger: one marine or 30 special force men.
What for we need to serve to such executioners?
____________________________________
Article source: http://www.articlecity.com
About The Author
Michael Garmahis (28 ) is a journalist working in one of the Belarusian newspapers. Some time he was engaged in NGO work and also worked as a tutor of German and English in college.
For further information, please visit his web site: http://garmahis.worldfreeweb.com (Garmahis' Belarus stories-articles, jokes, photos, drawings, wallpapers).
By Andrea Stephenson
Starting in 2007, local elections in Scotland will be held for the first time under the single transferable vote (STV) system.
The principal of STV is simple. A person may win an election in first past the post (FPTP) elections with a small actual share of the vote. For example, if there were five candidates standing in a FPTP election, the break down could be like the one below:
Candidate one (duly elected): 500 votes (26.66%)
Candidate two: 499 votes (26.60%)
Candidate three: 450 votes (23.99%)
Candidate four: 400 votes (21.32%)
Candidate five: 27 votes (1.43%)
1376 people did not vote for candidate one but, since candidate one got the highest number of votes, they were deemed the first past the post.
Under STV even the 27 voters for candidate five matter. Wards usually become larger, with three or four councillors elected at one given election. In a three member ward, any candidate who received over twenty five percent of the vote would immediately be elected, in a four member the percentage would be reduced to over twenty. Imaging the result above was for a three member ward, candidates one and two would be successfully elected outright. Then the process of vote transferral takes place.
In a STV election an elector does not just place one cross on a ballot paper. Instead no crosses are used at all: the electors rank all the candidates standing, from favourite to least. Their first preference would receive a 1, the second preference a 2 and so forth. After any candidates had qualified outright, preference votes would be added for the remaining candidates, excluding the lowest placed candidate.
This can often produce some startling results! A minority party candidate may be very few people's first choice, but gather a significant amount of second preferences from voters across all of the major parties. Not everybody will vote for all three or four candidates of their chosen party and, indeed, some parties may not even run the full amount of candidates. In some areas, parties may run too many candidates, although this is rare as it serves no real purpose.
Through this system, even those wards considered the safest could see a split. As a result, the disenfranchisement of those voters who do not vote for a majority party will end and an increase in first votes for minority parties may ensue, once the voters understand that every voter does truly matter. No longer will political parties be able to pronounce 'X can't win here, vote Y to keep Z out."
On the other hand, STV is complicated. It takes considerable time to process and also considerable time to get used to. It is already used in Ireland and in some mayoral elections, where many people still place a cross or spoil their ballot paper as they have not read instructions clearly. For the elderly in particular it is a confusing system and, in reality, still open to tactical voting in the placing of preferences.
Its impact on Scottish democracy will be difficult to tell till after 2007 but one thing is certain. Any move to try to get the voters involved in politics and see every vote as important can only be a good thing, even if it is unsuccessful in the long run.
Andrea is an author on http://www.Writing.Com/ which is a site for Creative Writing.
She is actively involved in British politics and her online writing portfolio can be found at http://astephenson.writing.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Andrea_Stephenson
This is a picture that I took 2 years ago in Romania, during the election campaign. Actually it was the last night of the campaign, so everybody wanted to have their posters hanging for the E-Day.
It is hard to believe what kind of war started, only to “win” the special places for posters. One team was sticking, then half an hour later another team (from a different party, of course) was tearing off everything and sticking its own posters. I guess printing companies were happy...
What do you think about this?
I am somehow involved in politics and I know this makes a lot of people to already consider me “dirty”. In fact, I am very new in this “business” and, as any fool believes in the beginning, I believe that I have a chance to win the game even if I play correct.
My short story started one year ago, when some people I was speaking with suddenly asked me: “Why don't you run for elections? We would vote you to represent us”. First I took this as a joke, but then I thought more, also had some discussions with different friends and relatives and they all encouraged me to do this. So I asked myself that two classical questions: 1. why not? and 2. if not me, then who? Maybe I am naive , but in the end I decided to do this. Everything was fine until this point, but now comes the hard part of becoming a candidate. I live in Belgium, and here the members of the Parliament are elected by proportional representation and practically I have to be on a party's list. I was a party member for several years, but I never tried to compete for any position and maybe this is why I never expected to be so difficult. Some party members I've talked with told me that I would suit the job, but I have an enormous disadvantage: I'm not notorious or, like they said, “you don't have a public image”.
Last general elections in Belgium were held in 2003 (for a 4 years term), hence it is still some time to work for my public image. I am not the kind of person who gives up immediately, so I would like at least to try. And now comes the question: what should I do to be more efficient? It is a “must” to hire a political consultant? Can you offer me a piece of advice?
The Challanger
(sorry, but I hope you understand why I can't disclose my real name)
» more
» more
Is RSS MAD missing something? Tell us about new feeds here.
