Must it be time for PR now?

[marty21]

So far SNP has 56 seats with 1.4 million votes, UKIP has one seat with 3.6 million votes.

As much as I can't imagine anyone here shedding tears for the kippers, first past the post looks more than a bit squiffy this morning.

SNP didn't stand nationwide , arguably they might have polled more than UKIP if they had.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

SNP didn't stand nationwide , arguably they might have polled more than UKIP if they had.

Arguably the moon is made from your fetid nob-cheese, doesn't necessarily make it so.

 

[redsquirrel]

Because people voted against a very watered-down version of it less than five years ago.

No they didn't they voted against AV which isn't any kind of PR.

 

[marty21]

Arguably the moon is made from your fetid nob-cheese, doesn't necessarily make it so.

My fetid nob cheese would have beaten Farage in Thanet

 

[Dogsauce]

No they didn't they voted against AV which isn't any kind of PR.

Most people voting against it wouldn't have made that distinction. They were voting for the status quo (admittedly in part to cunt off the LDs).

 

[coley]

In the UK when you vote for your MEPs it's proper PR.




With nine seats to go UKIP are on 3,830,029 votes and 1 MP.

Between them the SNP, DUP, Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymr, SDLP and UUP have 76 MPs for a combined 2,211,366 votes.

I'd like to hear the case for not extending PR to Westminster elections .

That is a friggin disgrace!

 

[Artaxerxes]

Most people voting against it wouldn't have made that distinction. They were voting for the status quo (admittedly in part to cunt off the LDs).

Most people were indifferent because of a godawful YES campaign which neither of the 2 main parties had an interest in pushing and the papers were also fairly uncaring about.

 

[butchersapron]

Most people were indifferent because of a godawful YES campaign which neither of the 2 main parties had an interest in pushing and the papers were also fairly uncaring about.

Indifferent people indifferent were not indifferent because they didn't like the YES campaign. They were indifferent because they well...were indifferent. (Don;t know why indifference has been brought into it). A good old chunk of the NO vote was an anti-lib-dem vote. The way in which the YES campaign effected the vote was to make YES voters stay away, turn into NO voters or harden NO voters in their choice.

 

[tim]

SNP didn't stand nationwide , arguably they might have polled more than UKIP if they had.

They clearly did stand "Nationwide"! and got a huge proportion of the vote in all the seats in th nation they stood in. Equally clearly a Scottish nationalist party would not have gathered that many votes in England and Wales.

 

[Poi E]

They clearly did stand "Nationwide"! and got a huge proportion of the vote in all the seats in th nation they stood in. Equally clearly a Scottish nationalist party would not have gathered that many votes in England and Wales.

Interesting to speculate in an idle moment how under an MMP system a party vote for SNP would have been available to all voters in the UK. I suspect a good few party votes would have come from outside Scotland.

 

[ska invita]

From teh Daily Express twitter feed so may be wrong

though a good point made on twitter is that people wouldnt have voted that way as the tactical vote goes out the window under PR

 

[marty21]

They clearly did stand "Nationwide"! and got a huge proportion of the vote in all the seats in th nation they stood in. Equally clearly a Scottish nationalist party would not have gathered that many votes in England and Wales.

Plenty of Scots in the rest of the UK would have voted for them

 

[Artaxerxes]

though a good point made on twitter is that people wouldnt have voted that way as the tactical vote goes out the window under PR

Its almost as if, gosh, it actually gives everyone a chance to be represented

 

[Quartz]

Proportional Representation removes the direct link between the elected and the electorate. Those forms with a party list system encourage politicians to put their party over the people. Those forms which require electors to order the candidates are too complex for many. It's generally a bad idea.

I prefer Approval Voting. It's simple and scales to multi-member constituencies. It's not perfect, but it's better than the rest.

 

[weltweit]

My fetid nob cheese would have beaten Farage in Thanet

Farage did a lot better in Thanet than Galloway did in Bradford.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Toying with joining these guys

 

[tim]

We could just follow the Swiss and move towards a system of direct democracy. Lots of referendums. Decisions taken at the lowest possible level. The political class smaller and much weaker. This could be combined with the demand that the Chartists made in 1848 for annual parliaments.