You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Need for electoral "reform"
I'm no fan of the Reform Party. Or, for that matter, the people who tend to vote for them. But I am a big believer in Democracy. And our political system is not providing that. The irony is that it is the Party that advocates change, the Liberals, that benefit the most under the current system. Look at the votes and seats contained below:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/nigel-farage-could-double-tory-vote-and-save-them-from-crushing-defeat-new-poll-proves/ar-AA1nhvH3?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=0425776e511d4241a2c042e6ad011ee0&ei=183
At the last election, the Liberals got 11.8% of the vote. And got 8 seats. At the next election they are predicted to get just 9% of the vote. Yet get 44 seats.
Meanwhile, the Reform Party share of the vote is predicted to go up from 2.7% to 13%. Total number of predicted seats? 0. More votes than the Liberals and SNP combined-72 seats.
Lots of predictions vary wildly for other Parties. The Liberals, the Greens, the SNP, Plaid Cymru-all vary. But every single poll pits the number of Reform seats at 0. Most predict they will only come a (distant) 2nd in 4 or 5 seats.
That cannot be right. I'm not saying every vote should be equal-for example, there has to be weighting for SNP/Plaid. But it appears that there will be approximately 12-14 Political Parties with MPs after the next election.
And the 3rd largest will not be 1 of them. Which is undemocratic.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/nigel-farage-could-double-tory-vote-and-save-them-from-crushing-defeat-new-poll-proves/ar-AA1nhvH3?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=0425776e511d4241a2c042e6ad011ee0&ei=183
At the last election, the Liberals got 11.8% of the vote. And got 8 seats. At the next election they are predicted to get just 9% of the vote. Yet get 44 seats.
Meanwhile, the Reform Party share of the vote is predicted to go up from 2.7% to 13%. Total number of predicted seats? 0. More votes than the Liberals and SNP combined-72 seats.
Lots of predictions vary wildly for other Parties. The Liberals, the Greens, the SNP, Plaid Cymru-all vary. But every single poll pits the number of Reform seats at 0. Most predict they will only come a (distant) 2nd in 4 or 5 seats.
That cannot be right. I'm not saying every vote should be equal-for example, there has to be weighting for SNP/Plaid. But it appears that there will be approximately 12-14 Political Parties with MPs after the next election.
And the 3rd largest will not be 1 of them. Which is undemocratic.
Comments
Best argument I have seen for NOT changing the system to proportional representation.
Most PR countries have a minimum amount of votes (eg 5%) before awarded seats.
1 of the main reasons we voted for Brexit was due to a proportion of voters who felt ignored. Will we never learn?
The examples that you forecast for the future have actually happened a number of times in the past.
You can compare the ratio of votes to seats for UKIP, SNP, Lib Dems, and DUP in recent elections.
It all seems unfair.
The problem is that first past the post suits the main 2 parties, and while this continues it is unlikely to change.
Some proportional representation systems seem complex, but generally it is surely a better system.
How can you fault a system where every vote counts?
You can't claim to live in a democracy where others are actively prevented from having representation however, insidious you find it.
Whilst we're on the subject make voting compulsory. Millions of people have died fighting for the right to vote and yet people in this country seem to think of it as a chore.
Finally, until that happens, (never), if you don't vote then don't complain. Yes Remainers that includes you. I get sick of listening to people who moan about the state of the Nation but are almost proud of the fact that they haven't voted because "None of them are any good".
Sorry, rant over.
Brexit Party 642,323 votes. Seats 0.
Suppose for a second that current voting intentions translate to the next election.
We will have something like:-
Lib Dems 3 million votes 44 seats
Reform 4 million votes 0 seats.
Bonkers.
PS-the odious Richard Tice didn't manage to be the worst person on Question Time last night. The Tory was absolutely terrible. A particularly terrible programme where the distinctly average Labour politician was made to look far better than she was
I was never racist and never supported the BNP so I dont want to give too much of the wrong impression on that.
just to say that your not a fan of the reform party is one thing neither am I. To then say or the people that vote for them I suppose I could say the same thing there too but would be hesitant to it rings of contempt for these people.
People often have different ideas but to class them as deplorables or etc seems counter productive.
I think this country does have a significant problem with immigration numbers, I am not opposed to immigration or immigrants. What I am opposed to is mass uncontrolled immigration. I could go off on many reasons as to why that does not work and is a bad thing long term. The main two parties Tories and Labour consistently do not listen to the issue and if were honest the Brexit referendum was mostly a referendum on immigration.
So people turn to Reform as they appear the only party speaking out on the issue. I am well aware that Reform does not like people like me and is not a party that I could support. However I can understand why many people are turning to this party which I do find scary. Calling them deplorables or making out they are bad people does not seem productive though.
Turning to "mass uncontrolled immigration". It is a smokescreen. All that fuss about 50,000 or so desperate asylum seekers. While letting in close to a million a year in mass controlled immigration...
But the point I am trying to make is that their vote, in a Democratic system, should count. Just as much as mine or yours.
600,000 votes and no seats is 1 thing. 4 million is quite another
Here is a conundrum for you then;
If the hard Right is a minority party.
If the Looney Left is a minority party.
Then the rest must be in the majority?
If so where and what is this Party that could govern if the majority wanted to vote for it at the next general election?
Anyone who drives 10 mph slower is a road hog.
Anyone who drives 10 mph faster is a maniac.
Generally, the labels are mostly inaccurate
People talk about voting for Parties with Radical Agendas. While actually voting for whoever is closer to the Centre. And, most of the time, both Labour and Conservatives are quite close to the Centre
The Majority of the time the closest Party is believed to be the Tories. Right now it is Labour. Because the Tories seem to be in the grip of more extreme views (much like, say, Corbyn in the recent past). While the Tory malcontents believe they should be moving further to the Right
If you go back to 2015,
UKIP got 3.8million and 1 seat.
Greens 1.15 million and 1 seat.
SNP got 1.45 million and 56 seats.
Lib Dems 2.4million and 8 seats.
DUP got 184,000 and 8 seats.
There are lots of anomalies in every election.
I tend to look at Opinion Polls a lot-they have always interested me.
So-for example-in the last 6 months, the Lib Dems appear to be polling between 8-12%. Predicted seats vary from 15-70.
Reform appear to be polling between 10-14%. Predicted seats? 0. Every single time.
The 2015 example you give is interesting. But there are important differences. Firstly, 1 seat does at least provide representation, and the Liberals didn't get that many more seats. Secondly, the Winners of the election acceded to their principal demand, namely for the vote that led to Brexit. Which, to UKIP in general and Farage in particular, was far more important than having a few MPs.
Of course it is true that there are anomalies at every election. But never 1 as big as 4 million votes and no MPs.
How the fk can 49% of 75% represent a mandate to govern it doesn't, it's not a majority. However, that's the lie that the MP. want you to keep falling for.
Prop Rep is the only real way to govern. Yes that means that we have to endure politicians who's views are reprehensible but that's a democracy.
Of course you are absolutely correct. In what is basically a 2 party system the result rests on the popular vote at the time.
However, my point was that if by chance the majority despise equally both ends of the political spectrum where is the electable Party which would truly represent them in Parliament.
Obviously it currently does not exist. But Why?
Surely one could have expected a party representing the majority to be in power with the
extremists consistently knocking on its door from either side?
Labour got 32%.
So more people didnt vote, than voted for Labour.
PR sounds good in theory, but its hard to really know, with no experience of it.
One down side is that some of the countries that operate it, rarely elect a government with an outright majority.
This can enable some of the weirder, more extreme parties influencing some of the more popular parties, in order for them to form a government.
The Tories were always the party of wealth and Labour the party of the working man, but with so many workers now representing the "middle class" the lines are blurred.
As an example when I was working in the mines, 75% of miners rented their homes which were usually on council estates. Thatcher pushes through the right to buy and boom, now they're property owners and suddenly the old socialist values are compromised.
So yes it does not exist because there is no reason for it to exist. Bring in proportional representation and there will suddenly be a credible party, maybe more than one.
One seat for 3.8 million is not far off.
The reason I couldnt see the Lib Dems getting 3M votes and no seats, is based on the last 3 election results.
2015 2.4M votes for 8.
2017 2.1M votes for 8
2019 3.6M votes for 11.
So based on their worst performance which was 2.1M for 8, how could they get almost a million additional votes, and lose all their seats?
Is the reason they get a lot of votes and no seats, because they are mostly used as a protest vote.
The majority of constituencies are either Tory or Labour.
So when the voters in Tory constituencies have got the hump with the Tories, they will vote Lib Dem, because they cant bring themselves to vote for Labour.
Vice versa in the Labour constituencies.
This may be the reason they come second a lot, but rarely win.
This could apply to some of the other parties in the past, and into the future, like The Brexit Party, UKIP, and Reform.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/nigel-farage-could-double-tory-vote-and-save-them-from-crushing-defeat-new-poll-proves/ar-AA1nhvH3?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=0425776e511d4241a2c042e6ad011ee0&ei=183
On the basis of I have spent the vast majority of my life in a Labour constituency.
Had I been a Tory voter, my vote would have been worthless for my whole life.
I cannot be alone in this.
I am sure that many people in this position just give up voting.
I also wonder whether the electorate in this country have clear voting intentions.
In the US voters will face a clear choice, presumably between Trump, or Biden.
It is maybe not so clear in this country.
We are meant to be voting for our constituency MP.
Although I am not sure that this is always the case.
Maybe Fred West could have got elected as a Tory MP, when Margaret Thatcher was at her peak.
1. In the UK, UKIP came from nowhere to win a European election
2. In France, Macron successfully exploited dissatisfaction with the traditional parties to create his own and win
Times change. Seats that were traditionally red or blue are much rarer than they once were-partly because the working class and upper class/wealthy recognise that their traditional political home may no longer suit their requirements.