DA is losing support under Maimane: poll

[Hamster]

But then you're stuck with a party in power whose policies you don't agree with and who might make life more difficult with their protection of white monopoly capitalism. So you would be jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

It's not DA vs ANC at all. It's DA vs ANC vs EFF vs UDM vs IFP vs APC vs Agang vs COPE vs FF+ etc, etc.

There is no need to limit your choices to the best of 2 evils.

All we need is to get to a point where NO party has an outright majority against the other parties combined. That is the best way forward, so everybody's interests are represented.

You are so missing my point. Each to their own I guess.

 

[2026]

No, I will probably reluctantly still vote for them, as there is just no other reasonable choice.
But voting for them doesn't mean we have to like them or agree with their current policies.
South Africa doesn't have much choice when it comes to good parties (but then neither does the USA - I would have the same problem in the USA - neither the Republicans or the Democrats represent me).

Democracy is flawed if you are voting for someone that does not (to a degree) mirror your own policies.

Also,this reason to vote for a party feels familiar - I'd relate it to people voting ANC in fear of (white) DA taking over...

 

[LazyLion]

Democracy is flawed if you are voting for someone that does not (to a degree) mirror your own policies.

Also,this reason to vote for a party feels familiar - I'd relate it to people voting ANC in fear of (white) DA taking over...

Our democracy is flawed, yes you are correct.

 

[LazyLion]

Democracy is flawed if you are voting for someone that does not (to a degree) mirror your own policies.

Also,this reason to vote for a party feels familiar - I'd relate it to people voting ANC in fear of (white) DA taking over...

Our democracy is flawed, yes you are correct.

 

[Hamish McPanji]

Only thing about Maimane is he sometimes comes across as too civilized, too mannered. He should try shouting as load as Julius once in a while..

This^

He's been bringing a pocket knife to a gun fight.
That will get him 10% of the electorate. The elitist intellectuals might be impressed, but that won't win him the election. He need to go full retard

 

[C4Cat]

There is no party that does that, and history in South Africa shows that even parties that are at least a little bit representative, for me, get no seats in parliament. I can say the same for other countries. Hence I'll vote to spread power in the way I consider most effective. Lots of little parties trying to take on a single large party is going to require those parties to be united in a common cause. More likely is that they'll spend their time bickering. Furthermore to co-operate it would involve horse trading, which invariably means whichever party I voted for will abandon whatever specific principles they espoused to garner my vote.

There are at least 3 parties in SA with widely divergent views DA, ANC and EFF with many shades in between. Even if you can't find a party that represents you totally accurately, you could find one that's close. Asking someone whose interests are represented by the EFF to vote for the DA, is absurd - they are totally opposite poles. Nobody who thinks the DA is on the right track is going to vote for the EFF, even if the EFF were the majority opposition, it's just a stupid idea. Bickering and horse trading would be better, because at least everybody's interests are represented when compromises are made. And it means different parties will unite around different issues so no single party has complete control all the time.

The ANC won 62.15% in the last election so they have a majority over all of the other parties combined.
That's the problem.
Giving the DA 60% will give us the same problem -
a single party with a majority over all of the other parties combined.

With the diversity of opinions here, what we need is a situation where NO party has more than 49%, IMO. If, for example the ANC got 49% in the last election, and the remaining 51% was a combination of other parties, Zuma would still be president and the ANC would still be the majority party. However, no bills could be passed without some co-operation from other parties. A vote to get rid of Zuma would be successful if all the opposition agreed.

 

[Pitbull]

In the absence of such a party, it is also quite acceptable to spoil your vote.

This is not quite how it works though. Mathematically....

Let's say you have 10 voters.

All 10 people vote for different parties:

2/10 vote for the one party (20%)
2/10 vote for the other party (20%)
6/10 vote for the another party (60%)

10/10 votes right?

Now let's assume the following:

Only 8 people out of 10 vote:

2/8 = 25%
1/8 = 12.5%
5/8 = 62.5%

Even with losing 1 vote the majority party's percentage went up by 2.5%

Spoiling a vote is like voting for the majority party. The sooner people realise this the better. Votes are tallied and counted on the voted numbers not those registered to vote vs those that voted. That is the reality. Vote for another party then instead of abstaining/spoiling a vote. All good an well if you were intending on voting for the majority anyway then sure, abstain or spoil your vote.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Spoiling a vote is like voting for the majority party. The sooner people realise this the better. Votes are tallied and counted on the voted numbers not those registered to vote vs those that voted. That is the reality. Vote for another party then instead of abstaining/spoiling a vote. All good an well if you were intending on voting for the majority anyway then sure, abstain or spoil your vote.

Spoiling a vote is not the same thing as not voting...

 

[Pitbull]

Spoiling a vote is not the same thing as not voting...

You're right. Apologies. I got carried away for a bit. It does however get taken out of the votes all together so it still applies the same as not voting at all.

 

[C4Cat]

This is not quite how it works though. Mathematically....

Let's say you have 10 voters.

All 10 people vote for different parties:

2/10 vote for the one party (20%)
2/10 vote for the other party (20%)
6/10 vote for the another party (60%)

10/10 votes right?

Now let's assume the following:

Only 8 people out of 10 vote:

2/8 = 25%
1/8 = 12.5%
5/8 = 62.5%

Even with losing 1 vote the majority party's percentage went up by 2.5%

Spoiling a vote is like voting for the majority party. The sooner people realise this the better. Votes are tallied and counted on the voted numbers not those registered to vote vs those that voted. That is the reality. Vote for another party then instead of abstaining/spoiling a vote. All good an well if you were intending on voting for the majority anyway then sure, abstain or spoil your vote.

Isn't the second scenario more like this?
2/10 vote for the one party (20%)
1/10 vote for the other party (10%)
5/10 vote for the another party (50%)
2/10 spoiled vote (20%)

 

[Hamish McPanji]

You're right. Apologies. I got carried away for a bit. It does however get taken out of the votes all together so it still applies the same as not voting at all.

What really put me off the DA was them (Zille in particular) basically trying to put people off voting for smaller parties "A vote for the partyX is a vote for the ANC" .

In a system of proportional representation that is in essence dishonest. By having less parties, you have less chance of voting that has your particular interest in mind and you end up voting for the lesser of the 2 evils. That is not what democracy is meant to be

 

[Pitbull]

Isn't the second scenario more like this?
2/10 vote for the one party (20%)
1/10 vote for the other party (10%)
5/10 vote for the another party (50%)
2/10 spoiled vote (20%)

Nope, as spoilt votes are removed. You can't tally a vote that wasn't cast for a party. So it's still 8 valid votes, which is 6/8 and 2/2 is spoilt votes (which means 100% of the spoilt votes were well... spoilt )

 

[Ry4n]

So you are telling me, just because someone doesn't vote for the DA, they are by automation against a united South Africa?

In a nut shell yes, as indirectly they will be supporting the ANC as they DA are the ANC direct opposition. The same applies to the ANC voters who dont vote ANC they are helping the DA. By not voting you helping the ANC and by helping the ANC you are destroying this country - if you cannot see this, then there is no point explaining further. Excuse the gramma about to run.

 

[RogueTr00per]

Isn't the second scenario more like this?
2/10 vote for the one party (20%)
1/10 vote for the other party (10%)
5/10 vote for the another party (50%)
2/10 spoiled vote (20%)

So then 20% of the seats in parliament would be empty?

 

[Insint]

I will wait till after the election to see if the DA is losing or winning support. This feels like speculation.

 

[Pitbull]

What really put me off the DA was them (Zille in particular) basically trying to put people off voting for smaller parties "A vote for the partyX is a vote for the ANC" .

In a system of proportional representation that is in essence dishonest. By having less parties, you have less chance of voting that has your particular interest in mind and you end up voting for the lesser of the 2 evils. That is not what democracy is meant to be

And I 100% agree with you. Rather vote for a smaller part you agree with more than not vote at all. Her approach was 100% wrong. This would have led to people not voting at all to begin with. No one is saying vote for the DA because you have to. Vote for whoever you agree with like Cray said. But just know that voting for a smaller party makes you voice less louder. But please vote even if you vote for the Christian whatever party

 

[Scary_Turtle]

Neither of those is entirely true.

more true then false

 

[C4Cat]

Nope, as spoilt votes are removed. You can't tally a vote that wasn't cast for a party. So it's still 8 valid votes, which is 6/8 and 2/2 is spoilt votes (which means 100% of the spoilt votes were well... spoilt )

Can't we start a Spoiled Vote Party

 

[Pitbull]

Can't we start a Spoiled Vote Party

Give the seats for the spoilt votes to ordinary random citizens so they can speak for the people.

Hey that's actually not a bad idea

 

[Hamish McPanji]

Our democracy is flawed, yes you are correct.

All democracies are flawed. But they tend to be better than the alternatives.

e.g. In the US or the UK, most people don't agree with 40-60% of what the party they vote for says. But it's a binary choice, and they disagree with the other party more.

In the UK, slightly different as the Libdems were often seen as the protest vote, and with UKIP on the rise there is another party of protest available.