If you don’t like the group of people but you still feel like you want to vote for the “party” then perhaps you need to think about what it is you’re voting for.

I suppose a lot of us think of a party as personified by the leader of that party – a party vote for national is really a vote for John Key as PM – but our responsibility as citizens in a democracy is surely to look beyond the facile images and careful branding and take notice of who and what we’re actually voting for, isn’t it?

Also, this is an issue which affects FFP elections as well as MMP. Under the old system many people were in a position of having to cast votes for candidates they didn’t like, but whose party leaders they wanted to see in power. In that sense, for a lot of voters under FPP the whole election was pretty much a party list vote.

Is it that Parliament will only be properly working and “democratic” if the 120 MPs are a perfect (or pretty close) match to the demographic breakdown of the country as a whole?

What makes you believe that will give any better outcomes to society? Is it based on a belief that only a poor Asian immigrant gives a sh1t about poor Asian immigrants, only Maori women give a sh1t about Maori women, “rich white men” are only in it to help out “rich white men”?

In a democracy such as ours, the poor Asian immigrant, Maori women, rich white men etc., each get one vote and can freely choose to only cast it in favour of their demographic twin, if they choose to do so. What’s wrong with that system?

Any move back to FPP or to its bastard half-brother SM can only mean a reversion to the old boys’ club run by the likes of Peter Shitcliffe. Remember that when he spends all that money trying to convince you to dump MMP.

And also remember that when the two major parties spend millions (legally or illegally) encouraging you to vote “Two ticks [Labour/National]” that it is simply a desire on their part to get back to a FPP situation where they can govern alone without the pesky minorities.

I didn’t say that I didn’t want the President (indirectly) elected either, I said (or meant, anyway) that it’s a huge mess where the likeability of the Presidential candidates clouds all the other issues, with even their policies taking a back seat to the media spotlight. It would sadden me greatly if that happened in New Zealand.

If it’s not undemocratic that someone I didn’t want to vote for got into parliament? If I ever voted National, I’d be very displeased if Anne Tolley or Crusher Collins came along with the package, as they’re both jokes of Ministers. I feel the same way if I vote Labour. I guess the answer to this is to get more involved in party politics, but that doesn’t extend it to the general public which is where it really should be.

The UK had some stuff about the percentage of MPs who went to “public” (= private) schools. That might be a good place to start.

FPP gives worse situations. You don’t get to choose the candidate for your favourite party that stands in your electorate but you have no choice other than to vote for that person – no matter how much you may dislike them, – if you want to support your favourite party.

In fact, in FPP the vast bulk of people’s votes are simply irrelevant because they live in safe seats for one party or the other.

I’m not sure why you wouldn’t want the President to be elected by the people, it’s a pretty powerful office.

In fact, you might not release this but the President isn’t elected by popular vote. People vote by state, the most popular candiate in each state wins the right to send a set number of representatives (loosely based on the size of the states’ populations but at least three, which favours the small states) to the electoral college and it’s the electoral college that elects the president by majority.

I think it’s worth commenting on as groups, particularly ethnic minorities, that were previously excluded from representation now have supportive MPs in Parliament.

The class/income breakdown post is one for another day, but it’ll take some actual research on my part as that data isn’t included in the Social Report.