[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Herr Tubthumper]

FPTP needs to go, we share this with only Vatican and Belarus

Our democracy is not fit for purpose, millions of voters have no say.

We need complete reform of our political system its broken

This. It's such a ****ed up way to vote. We have reforms and overhauls for education and health and justice every 5 years (which we really do not need) so why not voting? If there is one reason for a Lab Lib pact it will be that there will almost certainly bring change with it.

 

[knocky1]

and if they lose those 1% they lose dozens of seats. the system is not weighted in Tories favour, it is weighted in favour of parties with a large popular base. it would weight in favour of another party if it got its act together and proposed a manifesto that attracted 30% minimum nationally.

47.5 million registered voters in 2019.
Jeremy Corbyn in 2019 got 32% of the vote of 67% electoral turnout with about 10 million.
Tories got 42% of the 67% with 13 million.

Neither party got 30% of the electorate.

EDIT They did my maths was just wrong. Not much in it considering the thrashing Jeremy got.

 

[darkwolf666]

and if they lose those 1% they lose dozens of seats. the system is not weighted in Tories favour, it is weighted in favour of parties with a large popular base. it would weight in favour of another party if it got its act together and proposed a manifesto that attracted 30% minimum nationally.

The problem is, what the current data doesn't tell you is how many of the 33% of eligible voters who didn't bother to vote, failed to cast their vote because they lived in a safe seat?

For instance in my seat of Sittingbourne and Sheppey Tory MP Gordon Henderson was returned with a majority of over 24,000, out of an electorate of 83,000, so could be considered a safe seat for the Tories. Only 61% of the electorate bothered to turn out, 6% less that the National average.

It is more than possible it was the case that this 6% didn't bother, because they knew their vote wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. (Or they're just lazy buggers in Swale).

We should have a system where EVERY vote counts, and should be rewarded accordingly.

I know detractors of PR say it brings instability - but equally others say that it means that no government can ride rough shod over the populus, claiming they have a mandate to do so, when by any normal stance, they don't. (57% of the public that voted DIDN'T vote Tory).

 

[nicko31]

This. It's such a ****ed up way to vote. We have reforms and overhauls for education and health and justice every 5 years (which we really do not need) so why not voting? If there is one reason for a Lab Lib pact it will be that there will almost certainly bring change with it.

Change is getting harder though, these crypto fascists in charge are up to all kinds of sh1t, the electoral commission, boundary changes, voter suppression via voter ID, you name it

Before we can rebuild the skip fire has to be put out and the Tories and are throwing on more and more petrol to kind their fire going

 

[beorhthelm]

The problem is, what the current data doesn't tell you is how many of the 33% of eligible voters who didn't bother to vote, failed to cast their vote because they lived in a safe seat?

data doesnt tell us much, so lets not make such a bold inferance. voter turnout across europe in the mid 70's so maybe 10% difference. if those people not voting turned out for an alternative party/candidate, it'll turn over any safe seat, but instead of moblising voters some will complain about the process. anyway, point was about swings going both ways, example Tories in 2017 had 100k more votes than Labour in 1997, for 100 less seats.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

FPTP needs to go, we share this with only Vatican and Belarus

Our democracy is not fit for purpose, millions of voters have no say.

We need complete reform of our political system its broken

Yep.

Blair, when he had his HUGE majority should had reformed the FPTP system.

Why didn't he.....let me think.....

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

The problem is, what the current data doesn't tell you is how many of the 33% of eligible voters who didn't bother to vote, failed to cast their vote because they lived in a safe seat?

For instance in my seat of Sittingbourne and Sheppey Tory MP Gordon Henderson was returned with a majority of over 24,000, out of an electorate of 83,000, so could be considered a safe seat for the Tories. Only 61% of the electorate bothered to turn out, 6% less that the National average.

It is more than possible it was the case that this 6% didn't bother, because they knew their vote wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. (Or they're just lazy buggers in Swale).

We should have a system where EVERY vote counts, and should be rewarded accordingly.

I know detractors of PR say it brings instability - but equally others say that it means that no government can ride rough shod over the populus, claiming they have a mandate to do so, when by any normal stance, they don't. (57% of the public that voted DIDN'T vote Tory).

So that’s why Germany has been so unstable for the last 70 plus years…….

……. Or is it because the parties actually have to talk to each other and agree things before they form a government. Now there’s a good idea.

 

[nicko31]

Yep.

Blair, when he had his HUGE majority should had reformed the FPTP system.

Why didn't he.....let me think.....

Yeap the 2 big parties love FPTP when it suits them. Its not just the Tories...

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yep.

Blair, when he had his HUGE majority should had reformed the FPTP system.

Why didn't he.....let me think.....

Unfortunately if you are elected through a system and win because of it, you tend to keep it, especially if you have not expressly told the electorate you intend to change it. The only way of changing it would be to campaign on it and put it in your manifesto - however that comes with great risk of not being elected because of it. The Lib Dems in a collation can have it as part of their agreement as they did in 2010 because they campaign on it, but that referendum vote for a change to FPTP fell on it's arse.

So it is a difficult problem to solve in terms of reform.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The proposed reshuffle (which back benchers are screaming out for) is going to be interesting.

How pissed off would you be if you made yourself look silly supporting all the nonsense and you get kicked out ?

How many people have also been promised the same job lol

 

[knocky1]

The problem is, what the current data doesn't tell you is how many of the 33% of eligible voters who didn't bother to vote, failed to cast their vote because they lived in a safe seat?

For instance in my seat of Sittingbourne and Sheppey Tory MP Gordon Henderson was returned with a majority of over 24,000, out of an electorate of 83,000, so could be considered a safe seat for the Tories. Only 61% of the electorate bothered to turn out, 6% less that the National average.

It is more than possible it was the case that this 6% didn't bother, because they knew their vote wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. (Or they're just lazy buggers in Swale).

We should have a system where EVERY vote counts, and should be rewarded accordingly.

I know detractors of PR say it brings instability - but equally others say that it means that no government can ride rough shod over the populus, claiming they have a mandate to do so, when by any normal stance, they don't. (57% of the public that voted DIDN'T vote Tory).

Somewhere around 67% of those who got of their arses didn't vote Tory.

 

[darkwolf666]

So that’s why Germany has been so unstable for the last 70 plus years…….

……. Or is it because the parties actually have to talk to each other and agree things before they form a government. Now there’s a good idea.

Obviously we can't be so grown up in this country. Or it's just those with a vested interest don't want change - as the old saying goes about Turkeys and Christmas!

 

[Audax]

Unfortunately if you are elected through a system and win because of it, you tend to keep it, especially if you have not expressly told the electorate you intend to change it. The only way of changing it would be to campaign on it and put it in your manifesto - however that comes with great risk of not being elected because of it. The Lib Dems in a collation can have it as part of their agreement as they did in 2010 because they campaign on it, but that referendum vote for a change to FPTP fell on it's arse.

So it is a difficult problem to solve in terms of reform.

Part of the problem there, I think, is they asked for the wrong change (and too big a change). There are several possible systems that would be better than FPTP. Reforming the UK system may need someone (like the Lib Dems) to realise that the reform needs to take place in steps over several election cycles. Each step small enough to be palatable to those who don't like change, but also in the direction that a large enough number in the electorate want. A fairly simple change to make is asking people to number candidates in order of preference instead of putting a tick or cross in just one box. That, at least, starts to deal with the problem of MPs being elected on the back of 3x% vote in favour and 6x% against.

 

[Gwylan]

I know detractors of PR say it brings instability - but equally others say that it means that no government can ride rough shod over the populus, claiming they have a mandate to do so, when by any normal stance, they don't. (57% of the public that voted DIDN'T vote Tory).

I used to be against PR because I too thought it brought instability but I'm a convert to the system now. In my view, PR brings the opposite of instability, politicians have to be more pragmatic and accept compromise. Imagine if we'd had a coalition government negotiating Brexit, we'd almost certainly be in the single market or customs union and the negotiations with Europe would have been run more smoothly. European governments are nearly always coalitions and that has definitely given them an advantage in negotiations.

I'm sure PR will come eventually

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I used to be against PR because I too thought it brought instability but I'm a convert to the system now. In my view, PR brings the opposite of instability, politicians have to be more pragmatic and accept compromise. Imagine if we'd had a coalition government negotiating Brexit, we'd almost certainly be in the single market or customs union and the negotiations with Europe would have been run more smoothly. European governments are nearly always coalitions and that has definitely given them an advantage in negotiations.

I'm sure PR will come eventually

Very much this.

 

[Gwylan]

The one ray of light is that Johnson is predicted to lose his seat at next election now that would be justice to be the first PM ever to lose his seat at the election

He wouldn't be. Arthur Balfour lost his Manchester East seat at the 1906 election.
That election also saw the fewest Conservative seats ever - just 156 out of 670

 

[Is it PotG?]

I used to be against PR because I too thought it brought instability but I'm a convert to the system now. In my view, PR brings the opposite of instability, politicians have to be more pragmatic and accept compromise. Imagine if we'd had a coalition government negotiating Brexit, we'd almost certainly be in the single market or customs union and the negotiations with Europe would have been run more smoothly. European governments are nearly always coalitions and that has definitely given them an advantage in negotiations.

I'm sure PR will come eventually

As a concept, it sounds fine and sensible.

In reality, I don't think anything would ever get done.

Egos, personal motives, a minor tweak here and a word change there would mean more faffing than my mother-in-law. Sometimes decisions, whatever their merits in the eyes of some, need to be taken decisively and promptly.

A mish mash of views ain't gonna help none in this respect.

 

[Gwylan]

As a concept, it sounds fine and sensible.

In reality, I don't think anything would ever get done.

As opposed to Brexit, voted on six years ago and still being argued about

 

[Is it PotG?]

As opposed to Brexit, voted on six years ago and still being argued about

I didn't expect you to agree.

My instance would be the pandemic.

With no history or cases as examples, strategies were varied from nation to nation. Someone needs to act. 5 groups around a table might cause delays, and some aspects might never get resolved.

 

[darkwolf666]

As a concept, it sounds fine and sensible.

In reality, I don't think anything would ever get done.

Egos, personal motives, a minor tweak here and a word change there would mean more faffing than my mother-in-law. Sometimes decisions, whatever their merits in the eyes of some, need to be taken decisively and promptly.

A mish mash of views ain't gonna help none in this respect.

Yet, as pointed out, it works well in many countries!