It has the advantage that the views of the electorate are more clearly expressed at the ballot box. For example, if under a "first-past-the-post" system a party wins 80 of 100 seats, by a small margin (say 51% to 49% per constituency), then they will hold 80% of the seats, despite garnering only 51% of the vote, leaving many voters feeling disenfranchised. Under proportional representation, they would still have won the election, but with broader representation from voters who did not support the winning party (in this case 51 seats to 49 seats). | It has the advantage that the views of the electorate are more clearly expressed at the ballot box. For example, if under a "first-past-the-post" system a party wins 80 of 100 seats, by a small margin (say 51% to 49% per constituency), then they will hold 80% of the seats, despite garnering only 51% of the vote, leaving many voters feeling disenfranchised. Under proportional representation, they would still have won the election, but with broader representation from voters who did not support the winning party (in this case 51 seats to 49 seats). |