[joeysteele]

This electoral system is a massive stain on real democracy.

It has little to do with votes in the end, it's all down to the seats targeted and won.

I've now argued years for it to end and to have PR.
The vote in 2011 was NOT about real PR.
AV wouldn't have altered the governing process in more than 3 elections since the war

There's doesn't need to be any referendum on PR.
All for instance Labour would need to do as it will NEVER be supported by the Conservative Party.
Is accept the Labour conferences overwhelmingly supporting PR now, put it in the next manifesto.
IF they win that next election then implement it for the next one

He'd be guaranteed a massive win again, because all Parties including Reform would be supporting them on it.

I will along with I'd estimate, 90% of other Labour members, trade unionists and even Labour MPs continually keep making the case for PR.
It's used in Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland for their assembly elections.

I can't stand Reform and Farage particularly.
However to get 14% of the votes and only 5 seats.
As opposed to the Greens lower votes yet getting 4 seats.
Plus the LibDems getting 12% but winning 72 seats.

Just shows how this first past the post system discredits the voting process now rather than is a sign of real democratic elections of governments.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

This electoral system is a massive stain on real democracy.

It has little to do with votes in the end, it's all down to the seats targeted and won.

I've now argued years for it to end and to have PR.
The vote in 2011 was NOT about real PR.
AV wouldn't have altered the governing process in more than 3 elections since the war

There's doesn't need to be any referendum on PR.
All for instance Labour would need to do as it will NEVER be supported by the Conservative Party.
Is accept the Labour conferences overwhelmingly supporting PR now, put it in the next manifesto.
IF they win that next election then implement it for the next one

He'd be guaranteed a massive win again, because all Parties including Reform would be supporting them on it.

I will along with I'd estimate, 90% of other Labour members, trade unionists and even Labour MPs continually keep making the case for PR.
It's used in Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland for their assembly elections.

I can't stand Reform and Farage particularly.
However to get 14% of the votes and only 5 seats.
As opposed to the Greens lower votes yet getting 4 seats.
Plus the LibDems getting 12% but winning 72 seats.

Just shows how this first past the post system discredits the voting process now rather than is a sign of real democratic elections of governments.

How would PR work with our parliamentary system? We vote for who we'd like to represent our area in parliament.

If the seats were allocated based on country-wide votes, how could we chose our representatives?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

How would PR work with our parliamentary system? We vote for who we'd like to represent our area in parliament.

If the seats were allocated based on country-wide votes, how could we chose our representatives?

It's Party government not singular Presidency.

We vote for Parties.
There are many forms of PR.
I don't know which one would be the best, I believe it would need consensus between as many Parties as possible to decide on the right one.

However my own personal view is, if people think it right that voters can go out and vote for Parties who get 14% of the votes but only 5 seats.
Whereas those getting less and far less in some cases but get the same number virtually of seats or 72 for 2% less votes.
Fine, first past the post is good for those people.

However if voters would more like to believe their votes really counted and could make a difference.
Then first past the post is wrong for them.
Where an overall mandate of any size only comes from the number of seats won rather than the actual number of votes cast is near more irrelevant.

There hasn't been one Party government in the 20th century or so far 21st century.
Which got over 50% of the votes cast.
However then did end up winnning anything up to over 60% of the seats at times

I think it wrong and even moreso now where from to a third of voters up to 40% in this election just done don't even bother to vote at all.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

How would PR work with our parliamentary system? We vote for who we'd like to represent our area in parliament.

If the seats were allocated based on country-wide votes, how could we chose our representatives?

there are variations of pr, where people still get to pick the one with the most votes

However, i am a strong advocate for FPP, it provides stability most of the time via strong majority governments, and I would have that any day of the week over pandering to small extremist groups

[MTVN]

I like our system. It means there's a strong link between a local area and their MP and it provides clarity from government. A lot of European countries end up without functioning governments for long periods of time because of PR and it ends up with coalition governments where the parties all give up on the policies that people actually voted for

And yes the seat share and vote share can be very different here but that's also because parties are more deliberate about where they dedicate their resources. The Lib Dems were very tactical about which seats to target this time around

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

However if voters would more like to believe their votes really counted and could make a difference.

They do that by choosing who they want to represent them.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

They do that by choosing who they want to represent them.

Why do the third of voters who haven't voted in elections since 1997 don't believe that then?
There hasn't been an election with a 70% turnout since 1997.
27 years ago.

It's fine that you prefer first past the post.
Perfectly fine I respect that.

I think it wrong that voters have to see the Conservatives get 24% of the vote and 121 seats
The Lib Dems get 12% and 72 seats.
Labour get only 34% but 412 seats.

While other Parties don't get anything like that for their voters efforts to support them

Look, It's time in my view, I appreciate it's not others.
To make government only possible not from the seats targeted and won, however made possible from a system that is more representative of ACTUAL votes cast.
I think that much fairer.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The new independent MP for Blackburn after taking the seat from Labour.
They celebrate his victory by chanting for the genocide of the Jews and to ‘free Palestine’.
They’re in Blackburn.
These voters aren’t voting with Britain in mind.
And Labour are the ones that did this to us!

chilling video here: https://x.com/darrengrimes_/status/1809371027136188705



and note all men

the women get to take pics segregated off in the crowd...

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

The new independent MP for Blackburn after taking the seat from Labour.
They celebrate his victory by chanting for the genocide of the Jews and to ‘free Palestine’.
They’re in Blackburn.
These voters aren’t voting with Britain in mind.
And Labour are the ones that did this to us!

chilling video here: https://x.com/darrengrimes_/status/1809371027136188705

I know this is just another template number 3 post, but no one was shouting for the genocide of the Jews, and using Jews as political footballs is real anti Semitism.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I know this is just another template number 3 post, but no one was shouting for the genocide of the Jews, and using Jews as political footballs is real anti Semitism.

From the river to the sea they chanted

“From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free” is a rallying cry for terrorist groups and their sympathizers, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) to Hamas, which called for Israel’s
destruction in its original governing charter in 1988 and was responsible for the October 7, 2023 terror attack on Israeli civilians, murdering over 1,200 people in the single deadliest day for Jews since the
Holocaust. It is also a common call-to-arms for pro-Palestinian activists, especially student activists on college campuses. It calls for the establishment of a State of Palestine from the Jordan River to the
Mediterranean Sea, erasing the State of Israel and its people. Another phrase “Globalize the Intifada,” which uses the Arabic word for “uprising” or “shaking off,” also calls for widespread violence against both
Israelis and Jews across the globe

[Liam-]

Fptp is fine, it’s created all sorts of governments, hung, coalition and majorities, it’s concise and offers the best possibility for stability based on what the country votes for, a chaotic parliament which would be created by pr would never be able to get anything done

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

From the river to the sea they chanted

Which says nothing about "killing all the Jews" and is about freedom for Palestine and getting their stolen lands back.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Which says nothing about "killing all the Jews" and is about freedom for Palestine and getting their stolen lands back.

“From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free” is a rallying cry for terrorist groups and their sympathizers, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) to Hamas, which called for Israel’s destruction in its original governing charter in 1988 and was responsible for the October 7, 2023 terror attack on Israeli civilians, murdering over 1,200 people in the single deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. It is also a common call-to-arms for pro-Palestinian activists, especially student activists on college campuses. It calls for the establishment of a State of Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, erasing the State of Israel and its people. Another phrase “Globalize the Intifada,” which uses the Arabic word for “uprising” or “shaking off,” also calls for widespread violence against both Israelis and Jews across the globe

https://www.ajc.org/translatehate/Fr...ver-to-the-Sea

get real

[Liam-]

Is it antisemitic when the zionists chant it?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Even Labour agree

Last month, Vienna police banned a pro-Palestinian demonstration, citing the fact that the phrase “from the river to the sea” was mentioned in invitations and characterizing it as a call to violence.

And in Britain, the Labour party issued a temporary punishment to a member of Parliament, Andy McDonald, for using the phrase during a rally at which he called for a stop to bombardment.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

“From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free” is a rallying cry for terrorist groups and their sympathizers, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) to Hamas, which called for Israel’s destruction in its original governing charter in 1988 and was responsible for the October 7, 2023 terror attack on Israeli civilians, murdering over 1,200 people in the single deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. It is also a common call-to-arms for pro-Palestinian activists, especially student activists on college campuses. It calls for the establishment of a State of Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, erasing the State of Israel and its people. Another phrase “Globalize the Intifada,” which uses the Arabic word for “uprising” or “shaking off,” also calls for widespread violence against both Israelis and Jews across the globe

https://www.ajc.org/translatehate/Fr...ver-to-the-Sea

get real

AJC = American Jewish Committee

American Jews have more rights to live in Palestine than palestinians.

An American Jew living in Brooklyn, for example, who has never even been to Palestine has the right to go and kick a Palestinian family out of their home at gun point, and under the threat of violence, to then take their home off them for themselves.

I doubt the AJC is an impartial observer, as they are currently involved in that which they are accusing Palestinians of: Genocide (the removal of people from a land).

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Why do the third of voters who haven't voted in elections since 1997 don't believe that then?

Because they don't understand how the system works, and probably think we're directly electing the Prime Minister.

[The Slim Reaper]

Feeling slightly more optimistic about this gov than I was 2 days ago.

[Liam-]

Rwanda scheme dropped, striking doctors and nurses brought back to the table, experts in their fields given jobs, all within 24 hours, the guys off to a cracking start I’ll give him that

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Feeling slightly more optimistic about this gov than I was 2 days ago.

An inspired appointment

[Crimson Dynamo]

J.K. Rowling TWEETS
@jk_rowling


Now try declaring yourself a winner, John.

#GeneralElection2024



BULLSEYE!

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

J.K. Rowling TWEETS
@jk_rowling


Now try declaring yourself a winner, John.

#GeneralElection2024



BULLSEYE!

Is Joanne now saying that lesbians can't self identify?

Genuine question, as I'm not aware of anything else surrounding that candidate.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Because they don't understand how the system works, and probably think we're directly electing the Prime Minister.

Nah, maybe a fair number that could apply to but not the Millions of the third of voters who don't vote.

I don't believe all those millions are that thick, that they don't understand, going to a polling station, get a slip of paper, put a cross beside the Party you like/ want.
Then put it straight into a big black box there waiting.

I've talked to, (I've lost count of how many), who don't vote.
The vast majority don't vote because they think their votes are wasted and make no difference.

I obviously get you prefer first past the post.
However I don't, I feel sad so many people eligible to vote don't because the system has them feeling the votes are wasted so they're wasting their time doing so.

[Crimson Dynamo]

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Is Joanne now saying that lesbians can't self identify?

Genuine question, as I'm not aware of anything else surrounding that candidate.

"However, it was a statement during cross-examination, about same-sex-attracted women that enranged campaigners. He said, “You are a lesbian, if you declare yourself one”. A comment deemed homophobic by lesbians who believe you must be a biological woman to be a lesbian and who say they face abuse for asserting a transwoman is not a lesbian.

He also stated "aggressively" that those concerned about the "transing" of girls are "obsessed with genitals" and refused to admit that a 16-year-old is a "child". What's more, is that he and Mermaid's representatives admitted that they have not read the full interim Cass review that undermined many of the arguments used to support controversial trans healthcare offered to children and young people."

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co....bigot-27988007