[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not fairer really though...to the person who is kicked out instead of actual least popular one

Say cher and mary were the bottom two. Cher actually got the least votes.

But the judges would save Cher, regardless of how bad her singoff was(and it would be bad no doubt, mary would wipe the floor with her).

if they based the decision SOLELY on the performance, then yeah, everyone deserves a second chance, but they don't. they use a variety of **** reasons.

Fair point - though I personally believe that generally, though there are exceptions to the rule [people who don't bother voting etc], the two acts who end up in the Bottom Two aren't really favourites of the viewers anyway [hence why they're there], and so it's not really going to be a big deal as to who stays and who goes. You also have to factor in that, really, they should also keep an act that definitely has a chance of going on to win [or more of a chance of going on to win than the other act] - in this case I believe it would be Cher. Similarly, they should [and I believe do] also factor in who out of the two is the most commerically viable - again, out of the two I believe this is Cher. There's no point in saving an act that will definitely not win or an act that is not commerically viable. When neither are, then either it should be judged on the vocal or the entertainment - personally speaking I'd prefer the latter. That's how I saw it in the Bottom Two between Diva Fever and Belle Amie - neither are going to win, so you may as well save the act that's more entertaining - Diva Fever.