| Did you know on 10:42 - Jul 1 with 2922 views | GeoffSentence |
Hold on..... I am sure I recall at least one poster telling us that it took more votes to elect a Conservative MP than a Labour MP and that's why gerrymandering the constituencies for the next election was democratic. |  |
|  |
| Did you know on 11:12 - Jul 1 with 2856 views | Crawfordsboot |
| Did you know on 10:42 - Jul 1 by GeoffSentence |
Hold on..... I am sure I recall at least one poster telling us that it took more votes to elect a Conservative MP than a Labour MP and that's why gerrymandering the constituencies for the next election was democratic. |
I guess we get the odd Tory posting on here! [Post edited 1 Jul 2023 11:13]
|  | | |
| Did you know on 21:00 - Jul 1 with 2739 views | HARRY10 |
Whereas with PR you vote blind, not knowing who your MP might be.
After the election the govrnment is not decided by voters but by a half dozr=en secretely in some backroom, and the pllicies you voted for are often dumped so as to form a coalition.
the coalition is not of equal partners so the largets party will always have the final say, in the cabinet and in the house.
Decisions are binary.
You might just as well claim that if Town beat a team 1-0, three times but lose the fourth game 4-0 the other team should be higher in the table because of the higher number of goals they have scored overall.
We had this nonsense with brexit where folk ignored the reality and voted for 'something' that would solve all their problems. Far better to deal with the way parliament is run rather than to remove whole layers of accountability, and take what little control locally there is, and centralise things.
Dorries has made two appearances n Parliament since before Xmas. Her constituency office has been closed for over a year - yet she is free to earn money appearing on kGB Views. Johnson is similarly absent. Tory MPs and the PM routinely lie in Parliament with no rebuttal or even any sanction.
We need greater transparency, not less accountability as you are suggesting. |  | | |
| Did you know on 21:04 - Jul 1 with 2741 views | Kropotkin123 |
Yes, I publish the stats on he each election.
1 vote does not equal 1 vote. I do not recognize the government's purported majority. I do not recognize any referendum where the majority decide to steal the voting power of other voters. [Post edited 1 Jul 2023 21:05]
|  |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| Did you know on 21:18 - Jul 1 with 2707 views | HARRY10 |
| Did you know on 21:04 - Jul 1 by Kropotkin123 |
Yes, I publish the stats on he each election.
1 vote does not equal 1 vote. I do not recognize the government's purported majority. I do not recognize any referendum where the majority decide to steal the voting power of other voters. [Post edited 1 Jul 2023 21:05]
|
Utter nonosens
The league tables are not decided by the overall goals scored, but by the games won.
However, lets have a look at this stepbackwards
For ease of discussion, lets assume the Tories polled 42% against 58% non Tories. Again for ease all the 58% of non Tories opposed the Tories, how would that make any difference ? | | | |
| Did you know on 21:29 - Jul 1 with 2695 views | Oldsmoker |
| Did you know on 11:12 - Jul 1 by Crawfordsboot |
I guess we get the odd Tory posting on here! [Post edited 1 Jul 2023 11:13]
|
I concur.
All Tory voters I know are odd. |  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:32 - Jul 1 with 2693 views | Keno |
| Did you know on 21:00 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
Whereas with PR you vote blind, not knowing who your MP might be.
After the election the govrnment is not decided by voters but by a half dozr=en secretely in some backroom, and the pllicies you voted for are often dumped so as to form a coalition.
the coalition is not of equal partners so the largets party will always have the final say, in the cabinet and in the house.
Decisions are binary.
You might just as well claim that if Town beat a team 1-0, three times but lose the fourth game 4-0 the other team should be higher in the table because of the higher number of goals they have scored overall.
We had this nonsense with brexit where folk ignored the reality and voted for 'something' that would solve all their problems. Far better to deal with the way parliament is run rather than to remove whole layers of accountability, and take what little control locally there is, and centralise things.
Dorries has made two appearances n Parliament since before Xmas. Her constituency office has been closed for over a year - yet she is free to earn money appearing on kGB Views. Johnson is similarly absent. Tory MPs and the PM routinely lie in Parliament with no rebuttal or even any sanction.
We need greater transparency, not less accountability as you are suggesting. |
Sorry but I fundamentally disagree
In a large number of seats a large number of peoples votes simply don’t and possibly never will matter. At least if there was an element of PR the votes of the majority would still be recognised and there would be a way of allowing the views of unrepresented majority to be heard [Post edited 1 Jul 2023 21:36]
|  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:43 - Jul 1 with 2635 views | HARRY10 |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:32 - Jul 1 by Keno |
Sorry but I fundamentally disagree
In a large number of seats a large number of peoples votes simply don’t and possibly never will matter. At least if there was an element of PR the votes of the majority would still be recognised and there would be a way of allowing the views of unrepresented majority to be heard [Post edited 1 Jul 2023 21:36]
|
Again, explain how PR would make things better. Rather than as it would be - an unknown MP foistered onto the electorate AFTER the vote and a coalition which is decided in secret, by a few politicians in a back room
Take the example of the last election.
Allocate the seats on a PR basis and tell me how it would be different. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:54 - Jul 1 with 2626 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:43 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
Again, explain how PR would make things better. Rather than as it would be - an unknown MP foistered onto the electorate AFTER the vote and a coalition which is decided in secret, by a few politicians in a back room
Take the example of the last election.
Allocate the seats on a PR basis and tell me how it would be different. |
Transferable vote is by far the fairest most democratic and best system. It means every constituency gets an MP that represents the voting intentions of the constituents. |  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 22:29 - Jul 1 with 2572 views | eireblue |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:43 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
Again, explain how PR would make things better. Rather than as it would be - an unknown MP foistered onto the electorate AFTER the vote and a coalition which is decided in secret, by a few politicians in a back room
Take the example of the last election.
Allocate the seats on a PR basis and tell me how it would be different. |
In terms of an MP and the duties to constituents, then they serve everyone, not just the people that voted for them and their party.
So in terms of the majority of constituents, they always get an MP foisted on them that they didn’t vote for. |  | | |
| Did you know on 22:57 - Jul 1 with 2538 views | Trequartista |
2015 - UKIP 3,881,099 for their one seat. |  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 23:06 - Jul 1 with 2524 views | HARRY10 |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 22:29 - Jul 1 by eireblue |
In terms of an MP and the duties to constituents, then they serve everyone, not just the people that voted for them and their party.
So in terms of the majority of constituents, they always get an MP foisted on them that they didn’t vote for. |
Not correct in this sense. . When you vote at the moment you know who you are voting for, for better or worse - with PR you don't. If your choice of candidate is not elected then that is how it is. This nothing much that can be done about that unless you take PR to it's ultimate conclusion and start send bits of people to Parliament, proportionate to their share of the vote.
The problem comes down to most people not having a clue how Parliament works, or why it is run as it is.
As said, almost all decisions are binary, so it is a case of yes or no. If the government cannot pass legislation then it falls - which would be the inevitable consequence of what is being proposed.
Or the government is backed, against the wishes of the smaller parties voters. | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 23:41 - Jul 1 with 2496 views | HARRY10 |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:54 - Jul 1 by LegendofthePhoenix |
Transferable vote is by far the fairest most democratic and best system. It means every constituency gets an MP that represents the voting intentions of the constituents. |
eh ?
In FTTP "every constituency gets an MP that represents the voting intentions of the constituents. "
Having this absurd an over complicated method does not do what is claimed but merely means there is an awful lot of 'donkey' voting ie just ticking the first names on the enormous list.
The fault lies with an ill informed (ignorant) populace. You get the politicians you eserve.. With PR/STV there is greater incentive for corruption and horse trading. Unless of course the SNP is completely free of such accusations.
This was seen in 2010. How many Libdem voters supported the austerity policies their leaders were then supporting. yet far from having any say, or tosh about representing their constituencies, the Libems were outvoted every time in cabinet and backed the Tories in the house. That is what happens with PR.
The naive delusion is that if there are only 42% of MPs Tory, then the opposition can vote them down. Which triggers a vote of no confidence, a subsequent GE, and it all starts again.
In 1998 STV was introduced in NI. It was supposed to be more representative, democratc blah blah..............., but very quickly slid into two sides opposing each other. As before. To the extent it has not sat for a over a year. So much for STV making it better.
FTTP will always throw up the anomalies as stated, and seen. But it does allow for government to function
The problem is how that government functions. As long as folk are happy to swallow lies, they will be told. Parliament needs an independent minister, and sanctions to follow on blatant lies. Suspension for 7 days. That will ensure MPs check their facts first, and only state what is correct.
End ALL second jobs. | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 07:20 - Jul 2 with 2415 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 23:41 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
eh ?
In FTTP "every constituency gets an MP that represents the voting intentions of the constituents. "
Having this absurd an over complicated method does not do what is claimed but merely means there is an awful lot of 'donkey' voting ie just ticking the first names on the enormous list.
The fault lies with an ill informed (ignorant) populace. You get the politicians you eserve.. With PR/STV there is greater incentive for corruption and horse trading. Unless of course the SNP is completely free of such accusations.
This was seen in 2010. How many Libdem voters supported the austerity policies their leaders were then supporting. yet far from having any say, or tosh about representing their constituencies, the Libems were outvoted every time in cabinet and backed the Tories in the house. That is what happens with PR.
The naive delusion is that if there are only 42% of MPs Tory, then the opposition can vote them down. Which triggers a vote of no confidence, a subsequent GE, and it all starts again.
In 1998 STV was introduced in NI. It was supposed to be more representative, democratc blah blah..............., but very quickly slid into two sides opposing each other. As before. To the extent it has not sat for a over a year. So much for STV making it better.
FTTP will always throw up the anomalies as stated, and seen. But it does allow for government to function
The problem is how that government functions. As long as folk are happy to swallow lies, they will be told. Parliament needs an independent minister, and sanctions to follow on blatant lies. Suspension for 7 days. That will ensure MPs check their facts first, and only state what is correct.
End ALL second jobs. |
There isn't a perfect voting system. And yes, the single transferable vote is complex (although you'd think that with modern technology it could be automated to get results fairly quickly. But it combines the benefit of PR (every vote counts, at least until someone has a majority) with local accountability (which is totally lacking in PR). Don't disagree at all that greater transparency is needed in politics, but that is a separate issue. STV has to be the least bad mechanism. | |
| |
| Did you know on 08:31 - Jul 2 with 2373 views | Crawfordsboot |
| Did you know on 21:00 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
Whereas with PR you vote blind, not knowing who your MP might be.
After the election the govrnment is not decided by voters but by a half dozr=en secretely in some backroom, and the pllicies you voted for are often dumped so as to form a coalition.
the coalition is not of equal partners so the largets party will always have the final say, in the cabinet and in the house.
Decisions are binary.
You might just as well claim that if Town beat a team 1-0, three times but lose the fourth game 4-0 the other team should be higher in the table because of the higher number of goals they have scored overall.
We had this nonsense with brexit where folk ignored the reality and voted for 'something' that would solve all their problems. Far better to deal with the way parliament is run rather than to remove whole layers of accountability, and take what little control locally there is, and centralise things.
Dorries has made two appearances n Parliament since before Xmas. Her constituency office has been closed for over a year - yet she is free to earn money appearing on kGB Views. Johnson is similarly absent. Tory MPs and the PM routinely lie in Parliament with no rebuttal or even any sanction.
We need greater transparency, not less accountability as you are suggesting. |
That’s quite a rant! - This is a discussion forum.
I simply pointed out the facts re voting numbers because I was surprised the differences were so great. Did you follow the link and read the article? A reasoned response to the article would be interesting.
Edit
And by the way - I don’t claim anything - I’m not sure whether I would prefer some form of proportional to fptp. I just found the article interesting and persuasive. The author is a labour peer who certainly knows how parliament works. [Post edited 2 Jul 2023 9:38]
| | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 09:40 - Jul 2 with 2313 views | eireblue |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 23:06 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
Not correct in this sense. . When you vote at the moment you know who you are voting for, for better or worse - with PR you don't. If your choice of candidate is not elected then that is how it is. This nothing much that can be done about that unless you take PR to it's ultimate conclusion and start send bits of people to Parliament, proportionate to their share of the vote.
The problem comes down to most people not having a clue how Parliament works, or why it is run as it is.
As said, almost all decisions are binary, so it is a case of yes or no. If the government cannot pass legislation then it falls - which would be the inevitable consequence of what is being proposed.
Or the government is backed, against the wishes of the smaller parties voters. |
Hmmm, I think I would happily trade a majority of people not getting an MP they wanted, which is true now anyway, for a set of MPs that more accurately reflect the population.
Making binary decisions and pushing them through Parliament, I think we deserve something more sophisticated than that.
Getting in power and being seen to do things doesn’t seem to be leading to good government. | | | |
| Did you know on 09:44 - Jul 2 with 2309 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Did you know on 22:57 - Jul 1 by Trequartista |
2015 - UKIP 3,881,099 for their one seat. |
Also 2015, SNP 25,962 to elect an MP. |  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 09:50 - Jul 2 with 2299 views | Keno |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 21:43 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
Again, explain how PR would make things better. Rather than as it would be - an unknown MP foistered onto the electorate AFTER the vote and a coalition which is decided in secret, by a few politicians in a back room
Take the example of the last election.
Allocate the seats on a PR basis and tell me how it would be different. |
So you rather keep a flawed imperfect system that means you will always have a government voted for by a minority of people which leave millions feeling disenfranchised, disconnected and represented by someone they dont want
There are various forms of PR
Personally I would look at a Single Transferable vote system. For instance you have a first and single choice. In the first round if you first choice gets less that a certain percentage in the second round you 2nd choice is counted.
If the Scots get independence the English system will need to be looked at
And while I'm on one it should be a criminal offence that if you are elected and doing take you seat whether thats Westminster to Stormont. You should be immediate debarred from standing and your seat passed to the second placed candidate [Post edited 2 Jul 2023 9:51]
| |
| |
| Did you know on 09:51 - Jul 2 with 2300 views | Herbivore |
Harry's love for FPTP is bizarre. It is patently less representative and less democratic as a system than PR, and as has been explained to him many times most systems of PR operate in such a way that you do know who you are voting for when you place your vote so I'm not sure why he persists with that argument, especially when he votes for the colour of the rosette rather than the individual in any case. |  |
| |
| Did you know on 09:57 - Jul 2 with 2253 views | ElephantintheRoom |
The best illustration is probably the massed ranks of SNP MPs in our parliament- and the fact they need allies to be the majority party in Scottish parliament where the voting is more representative | |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:09 - Jul 2 with 2212 views | DJR |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 09:50 - Jul 2 by Keno |
So you rather keep a flawed imperfect system that means you will always have a government voted for by a minority of people which leave millions feeling disenfranchised, disconnected and represented by someone they dont want
There are various forms of PR
Personally I would look at a Single Transferable vote system. For instance you have a first and single choice. In the first round if you first choice gets less that a certain percentage in the second round you 2nd choice is counted.
If the Scots get independence the English system will need to be looked at
And while I'm on one it should be a criminal offence that if you are elected and doing take you seat whether thats Westminster to Stormont. You should be immediate debarred from standing and your seat passed to the second placed candidate [Post edited 2 Jul 2023 9:51]
|
As regards Northern Ireland, that might end up with Northern Irish MPs all being Democratic Unionists, and Northern Irish Assembly members all being members of Sinn Fein, given the respective boycotts! |  | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:20 - Jul 2 with 2189 views | WeWereZombies |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:09 - Jul 2 by DJR |
As regards Northern Ireland, that might end up with Northern Irish MPs all being Democratic Unionists, and Northern Irish Assembly members all being members of Sinn Fein, given the respective boycotts! |
If you claim your expenses for attending then the least you could do is turn up - even if you just sit there with arms folded glaring at everyone. |  |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:21 - Jul 2 with 2175 views | Keno |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:09 - Jul 2 by DJR |
As regards Northern Ireland, that might end up with Northern Irish MPs all being Democratic Unionists, and Northern Irish Assembly members all being members of Sinn Fein, given the respective boycotts! |
The alliance party might have a say in that | |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:26 - Jul 2 with 2163 views | DJR |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:21 - Jul 2 by Keno |
The alliance party might have a say in that |
Yes, there could be a few get in, which might be no bad thing. | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 11:22 - Jul 2 with 2107 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 23:41 - Jul 1 by HARRY10 |
eh ?
In FTTP "every constituency gets an MP that represents the voting intentions of the constituents. "
Having this absurd an over complicated method does not do what is claimed but merely means there is an awful lot of 'donkey' voting ie just ticking the first names on the enormous list.
The fault lies with an ill informed (ignorant) populace. You get the politicians you eserve.. With PR/STV there is greater incentive for corruption and horse trading. Unless of course the SNP is completely free of such accusations.
This was seen in 2010. How many Libdem voters supported the austerity policies their leaders were then supporting. yet far from having any say, or tosh about representing their constituencies, the Libems were outvoted every time in cabinet and backed the Tories in the house. That is what happens with PR.
The naive delusion is that if there are only 42% of MPs Tory, then the opposition can vote them down. Which triggers a vote of no confidence, a subsequent GE, and it all starts again.
In 1998 STV was introduced in NI. It was supposed to be more representative, democratc blah blah..............., but very quickly slid into two sides opposing each other. As before. To the extent it has not sat for a over a year. So much for STV making it better.
FTTP will always throw up the anomalies as stated, and seen. But it does allow for government to function
The problem is how that government functions. As long as folk are happy to swallow lies, they will be told. Parliament needs an independent minister, and sanctions to follow on blatant lies. Suspension for 7 days. That will ensure MPs check their facts first, and only state what is correct.
End ALL second jobs. |
As far as I am concerned, as I live in a safe Tory seat, my vote has never, ever counted towards the formation of the Govt or any determination of its policies because due to my political beliefs, I have never voted Tory - how is that democratic, Harry? Do I need to move to a constituency where my favoured political candidate is likely to win to have my views taken into account? |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
