Vote all the way down on the polling card or not

CheekyChops

Is it better to give a vote (1-7) to all candidates in the presidental election on Thursday

Is it better to do that becuase of the PR system or if there are certain candidates one does not like or would like to see in the role is it better not to give them a vote at all

Thanks

Liam Byrne

There's absolutely no way that McG, Gallagher or Norris are getting a vote from me.

Sunnyisland

And there is no way Gay Mitchel,David norris, mary davis, or sean gallagher is getting a vote from me.

ReefBreak

The idea of giving a vote to a person (Martin McGuinness) that was a member of the IRA - and therefore connected with the murder of innocent men, women & children - makes me want to vomit. I despise the idea of even looking at his name on the ballot, let alone putting a number beside it.

Apart from him, it'll be either MDH and Norris for either 1 or 2, not sure exactly which yet.

CheekyChops

Thanks All for replies but that wasnt question

Just wondering is it better to give a vote to all candidates on the ballot paper or just maybe do a 1 and 2 and 3 and then leave it at that

Thanks

Victor

Vote all the way - presumably you can make some choice between the candidates.

If someone is your number 7 choice, the don't benefit from your vote.

Liam Byrne

CheekyChops wrote: »

Thanks All for replies but that wasnt question

Just wondering is it better to give a vote to all candidates on the ballot paper or just maybe do a 1 and 2 and 3 and then leave it at that

Thanks

Well it was the question, really......why give someone a vote when you detest what they represent ?

RubyRoss

Well, if you have a list of preferences you are effectively saying I like this person best but failing that choice, I'll have so and so instead.

But if you don't want a particular person elected, you leave them off the ballot.

In reality, there isn't much point in filling the whole thing out unless you expect the transfers will count.
E.G if Higgins is your number 1 and Gallagher your number 2, it's very unlikely that your subsequent preferences would ever be counted. On the other hand, if Dana is your number 1 and Davis your number 2, keep filling and you might help elect someone.

Out of charity, you may want to toss to some votes to those who seem like they may not get the costs back...or you may not.

LordSutch

realies wrote: »

And there is no way Gay Mitchel,David norris, mary davis, or sean gallagher is getting a vote from me.

And there is no way Martin McGuinness is getting a vote from me.

raymon

Pinocchio Gallagher and Mc Guinness not getting anything from me

jimmycrackcorm

Back to the ops question, I've been wondering the same because I don't think that transfers are counted completely all the way. I.e. Only a percentage are actually transferred all the way down your list.

After reading the wiki on STV, your lowest vote won't count at all.

oppenheimer1

I'll be bullet voting. Very disillusioned with this election.

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Well it was the question, really......why give someone a vote when you detest what they represent ?

No it wasnt the question actually. It was a technical question the op asked but you of course choose to interpret in a different way. You sound like a political hack yourself. Aye, right, ignore the actual question and make a statement yourself. Very god.

tonycascarino

Between Higgins & McGuinness for me and Norris at 3. The rest are completely inept.

Coillte_Bhoy

CheekyChops wrote: »

Is it better to give a vote (1-7) to all candidates in the presidental election on Thursday

Is it better to do that becuase of the PR system or if there are certain candidates one does not like or would like to see in the role is it better not to give them a vote at all

Thanks

Voting all the way down wont make a bit of difference. if you dont like a particular candidate or two then dont give them a preference at all.

gregmurray

The amount of people not answering the question is astounding, no one cares who each of you are voting for.

nordydan

You should vote 1-6 on a 7 person list. Did so today, giving Gallagher a blank.
TBH I had no time for either vote 5 or vote 6, but allocated these votes based on the unlikely scenario that they would be the last two standing.

Pure point of logic here, is there any point in voting no 7 for anyone? I personally don;t see the point and would like to know if there is any benefit in doing so

sparkling sea

If you dont have a preferred candidate, vote for the person you least dislike.

Dont vote for people you dont want to get elected as no matter how far down the list you put them, your vote can have a possible influnce the outcome of the election;)

amacachi

When there's only one "seat" it's "best" not to vote all the way down, when there's more than one "seat" it's best to go all the way down to decrease the chances of someone you don't like getting a transfer from surpluses as they're divided proportionally.

sparkling sea

amacachi wrote: »

when there's more than one "seat" it's best to go all the way down to decrease the chances of someone you don't like getting a transfer from surpluses as they're divided proportionally.

In any election if you vote all the way down there is always a chance that your least preferred candidate will benefit from the vote you gave them.

If you really really dont want someone to get any possible benefit from your specific voting pattern, don't give them any preference.;)

Jimoslimos

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Back to the ops question, I've been wondering the same because I don't think that transfers are counted completely all the way. I.e. Only a percentage are actually transferred all the way down your list.

After reading the wiki on STV, your lowest vote won't count at all.

No they are counted all the way down. Conceivably I could vote
1) Dana
2) Davis
3) Mitchell
4) Norris
5) McGuinness
6) Higgins
7) Gallagher (or blank)

My 1st preference (judging on recent polls and assuming candidates get eliminated in roughly this fashion), would eventually find its way to Higgins - essentially an Anyone But Gallagher vote,

If you have absolutely cannot distinguish between your least preferred by all means leave them blank - but if you say despise Higgins and McGuinness but find one of them slightly less distasteful, then give one a preference above the other.

Your 'vote' for either of these only comes into play when those above on your ballot are already eliminated.

amacachi

sparkling sea wrote: »

In any election if you vote all the way down there is always a chance that your least preferred candidate will benefit from the vote you gave them.

If you really really dont want someone to get any possible benefit from your specific voting pattern, don't give them any preference.;)

If there's someone you don't want in and you only fill in number one then the surplus is divided proportionally depending on the 2nd preferences of all those who gave the elected candidate the number 1. By leaving it blank you have less influence on what happens with the transfers, by filling it all the way down you can possibly give someone other than the candidate you dislike an extra vote which will harm them. Unlikely but possible.

Jimoslimos

sparkling sea wrote: »

In any election if you vote all the way down there is always a chance that your least preferred candidate will benefit from the vote you gave them.

If you really really dont want someone to get any possible benefit from your specific voting pattern, don't give them any preference.;)

WRONG!

The presidential election comes down to a two horse race eventually. Your least preferred (if still in the running) candidate's opponent will STILL have another preference listed AHEAD (any number from 1-6).

wobblyknees

CheekyChops wrote: »

Thanks All for replies but that wasnt question

Just wondering is it better to give a vote to all candidates on the ballot paper or just maybe do a 1 and 2 and 3 and then leave it at that

Thanks

Doesn't stop peoples blind predjudices getting in the way though!

As for your question? I usually only vote for the ones I want to, in the order I want. So today just two of them. General elections might be different.

sparkling sea

Jimoslimos wrote: »

WRONG!

The presidential election comes down to a two horse race eventually. Your least preferred (if still in the running) candidate's opponent will STILL have another preference listed AHEAD (any number from 1-6).

Wrong

Your post doesn't make any sense - your least preferred candidate won't have an opponent because you will have placed everyone ahead of them - if you don't give them any preference they can't benefit from your vote in any way

If you make use of strategic voting you still shouldn't give any preference to the person you don't want to win

sparkling sea

amacachi wrote: »

If there's someone you don't want in and you only fill in number one then the surplus is divided proportionally depending on the 2nd preferences of all those who gave the elected candidate the number 1. By leaving it blank you have less influence on what happens with the transfers, by filling it all the way down you can possibly give someone other than the candidate you dislike an extra vote which will harm them. Unlikely but possible.

I haven't said anywhere that you should only vote for your 1st preference.

I have said if you really don't want a candidate to get any benefit from your vote don't vote for them.

im invisible

so, after say your first 3 preferences have been knocked out, and you have no more listed, is your ballot thrown out, or are all the ballots with no preference divided in proportion to the transferred ballots...

is what i think the OP was asking?

Jimoslimos

sparkling sea wrote: »

Wrong

Your post doesn't make any sense - your least preferred candidate won't have an opponent because you will have placed everyone ahead of them - if you don't give them any preference they can't benefit from your vote in any way

If you make use of strategic voting you still shouldn't give any preference to the person you don't want to win

Give them 7 or blank - either way it doesn't matter.

The situation I was alluding to was a response to the OP's question regarding filling ALL the way down (1-6 or 1-7) as opposed to ticking one box or giving two preferences only.

A #7 vote indicates no preference
A #6 vote ONLY indicates a preference above #7 - Nothing else and no other gains on the other candidates

sparkling sea

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Give them 7 or blank - either way it doesn't matter.

The situation I was alluding to was a response to the OP's question regarding filling ALL the way down (1-6 or 1-7) as opposed to ticking one box or giving two preferences only.

A #7 vote indicates no preference
A #6 vote ONLY indicates a preference above #7 - Nothing else and no other gains on the other candidates

We seem to have different takes on the OP's question - every candidate you give a preference to can possibile benefit from it, as was found to be the case in Wicklow not so long ago - 3 votes in the difference brought last preferences into the running.

Surplus votes wont apply in this election, as its likely to come down to 2 candidates, strategic voting which will include specifically not giving candidates votes will ensure you get as near to your preferred candidate as possible

Zubeneschamali

sparkling sea wrote: »

every candidate you give a preference to can possibile benefit from it

No, there's no way your #7 can benefit at all. The only way your #6 can benefit is if your 1-5 are already out, your #6 can help beat your #7.

Jimoslimos

sparkling sea wrote: »

We seem to have different takes on the OP's question - every candidate you give a preference to can possibile benefit from it, as was found to be the case in Wicklow not so long ago - 3 votes in the difference brought last preferences into the running.

Surplus votes wont apply in this election, as its likely to come down to 2 candidates, strategic voting which will include specifically not giving candidates votes will ensure you get as near to your preferred candidate as possible

Surplus votes don't apply BUT eliminated candidates transfers do.

Vote Dana #1 and leave the rest blank
She's eliminated on 1st count - your vote fails to transfer and essentially carries the same weighting as a vote for McGuinness, Gallagher or Higgins.

In the Wicklow case the only way your vote makes a difference if you had specified a preference for one candidate above the other - no matter how low on the ballot you placed them, all your previous choices would have either been elected or eliminated at that stage already.

nordydan

In summary force yourself to rate the candidates 1-7. Even if you find two equally distasteful force yourself prefer one over the other (bit like Hitler vs Stalin) and rank accordingly. Leaving blank entries from 2-6 achieves nothing

Victor

im invisible wrote: »

so, after say your first 3 preferences have been knocked out, and you have no more listed, is your ballot thrown out,

"Thrown out" is overstating it - they are "non transferable" and not counted anymore.

or are all the ballots with no preference divided in proportion to the transferred ballots...

No, they are not. Doing so would merely create an administrative burden, but to no benefit.

anymore

Victor wrote: »

Vote all the way - presumably you can make some choice between the candidates.

If someone is your number 7 choice, the don't benefit from your vote.

No - I have only ticked two boxes and the second was for a candiate who will be knocked eariler than the no I, i think so it probably wont matter.

anymore

nordydan wrote: »

In summary force yourself to rate the candidates 1-7. Even if you find two equally distasteful force yourself prefer one over the other (bit like Hitler vs Stalin) and rank accordingly. Leaving blank entries from 2-6 achieves nothing

The majority of candiates have so little chance that there is little point as they will be thrown out before transfers will do much good. And PR is so complicated that any individuals preferences after the first one may or may not be counted.

K-9

anymore wrote: »

No - I have only ticked two boxes and the second was for a candiate who will be knocked eariler than the no I, i think so it probably wont matter.

That's why I tend to not give my preferred candidate a No.1 if I think they are going to top the poll. To me, might as well have a first past the post system in that case.

not even wrong

It really is amazing how many people don't understand how our voting system works.

Putting a number beside someone's name doesn't mean you're voting "for" them, or endorsing them, or even that you want them to be elected -- it means that you're assigning them a preference compared to the other candidates.

That Handsome Devil

The way I see it, and I how I did it today was:

1. Vote 1,2 etc. in order of what candidates you prefer.
2. When you reach the stage that you equally dislike all of the remaining candidates, stop.

This might mean stop at 1, or fill down to seven.

sparkling sea

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Surplus votes don't apply BUT eliminated candidates transfers do.

Vote Dana #1 and leave the rest blank
She's eliminated on 1st count - your vote fails to transfer and essentially carries the same weighting as a vote for McGuinness, Gallagher or Higgins.

In the Wicklow case the only way your vote makes a difference if you had specified a preference for one candidate above the other - no matter how low on the ballot you placed them, all your previous choices would have either been elected or eliminated at that stage already.

Exactly, if you really dont want them to be elected dont give the a preference.

sparkling sea

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, there's no way your #7 can benefit at all. The only way your #6 can benefit is if your 1-5 are already out, your #6 can help beat your #7.

This is true in this case.

I think the OP would benefit from reading this, it a complete explanation how the voting system works -http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/LocalGovernment/Voting/FileDownLoad,1895,en.pdf