UKIP should have more MPs

Assuming you are using the Party List Voting method in your link, your five MPs (I'm going to make it six for fairness, as Sheffield has 6 constituencies) and using these figures based on the Brightside 2016 election and the previous GE for the other seats:

 

Total Labour: 119,656 votes (47.8%)

Total Conservative: 40,730 votes (16.2%)

Total UKIP: 38,549 votes (15.4%)

Total Lib Dem: 37,807 votes (15.1%)

Total Green: 13,392 votes (5.3%)

 

Total votes cast: 250,134

 

* ignored the sub 500 vote candidates

 

If I understand PR right, Sheffield would then have 3 Labour, a Conservative, a UKIP and a Lib Dem MP and the Greens wouldn't make the cut?

 

Can you imagine the uproar if Sheffield had a Conservative MP..

That is the point of PR, everyones vote counts for something, if Sheffield got a tory mp its because sufficient voters wanted one

In general PR systems are based on the national vote, so 35 million vote Labour, 42 million Tory, 16 million UKIP, 7 million LibDem you would in a parliament of 100 would result in 35 Lab, 42 tory, 16 UKIP and 7 LibDem.

Based on the vote in 2015: (from BBC)

Conservative

11,334,576

 

Labour

9,347,304

 

 

UKIP

3,881,099

 

Liberal Democrat

2,415,862

 

Scottish National Party

1,454,436

 

Green Party

1,157,613

You would need a coalition to get a majority, at which point you could have had a UKIP/TORY Brexit majority or a Labour/LibDem/SNP/Green anti-Brexit majority.

Basically every vote counts at this point, this would result in the removal of 'tactical voting' and increase the swing in voteshares of parties. It would damage Labour and Conservative and benefit other parties.

Well, leaving aside the shock to the system and the need for St Johns Ambulance assistance required yes, that would be about the size of it. and thinking about it that would be just about right wouldn't it?

 

Whilst it may seem strange, there are actually some Conservative supporters in Sheffield and fairness would dictate that they were represented.

 

The percentage of views would be represented correctly which in a supposed democracy is exactly how it should be.

 

Thanks for working that out by the way, and informing us. Unfortunately my patience isn't up to that type of investigation and it's appreciated that you took the time.

Short memories- Sheffield had Tory MPs from 1885 until 1997 apart from a 1916 a liberal by-election win.

In those days a Smurf in his blue outfit could have won the seat.

Apologies to any Smurfs reading this.

Surely the title is a mistake? Shouldn't it read "UKIP should have some MPs"?

Personally, I think they have enough.

In general PR systems are based on the national vote, so 35 million vote Labour, 42 million Tory, 16 million UKIP, 7 million LibDem you would in a parliament of 100 would result in 35 Lab, 42 tory, 16 UKIP and 7 LibDem.

 

Based on the vote in 2015: (from BBC)

 

 

You would need a coalition to get a majority, at which point you could have had a UKIP/TORY Brexit majority or a Labour/LibDem/SNP/Green anti-Brexit majority.

 

Basically every vote counts at this point, this would result in the removal of 'tactical voting' and increase the swing in voteshares of parties. It would damage Labour and Conservative and benefit other parties.

That last line perfectly highlights why we will never get PR, proper PR in this country. It's not in the interest of the only two winners there has been in nearly a century to change the system to one when they've little chance of winning without the need of a coalition.

That last line perfectly highlights why we will never get PR, proper PR in this country. It's not in the interest of the only two winners there has been in nearly a century to change the system to one when they've little chance of winning without the need of a coalition.

I agree, but just one question about a previous post reply of mine, do you consider STVS to be proper PR?