butlers   259 #13 Posted May 26, 2021 Europes own North Korea. The dear leader got " 80 " percent of the votes cast. Independent moniters says every election since he first won office in 1994 ,has been corrupt.  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
El Cid   212 #14 Posted May 26, 2021 1 hour ago, apelike said: Sorry but its not as it is used to elect a single winner and at no time is PR involved.  https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/voting-systems/types-of-voting-system/supplementary-vote/  I accept it doesnt work, that I know of. But if Boris Johnson wants to get rid of it, perhaps that is because it could let an outsider win. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
andyofborg   11 #15 Posted May 26, 2021 1 hour ago, El Cid said: I accept it doesnt work, that I know of. But if Boris Johnson wants to get rid of it, perhaps that is because it could let an outsider win. I doubt it would let an outsider win as they would have to be second choice of a substantial number of other voters. I guess they have looked at the voting and think that they stand a better chance of winning on the first round. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jeffrey Shaw   89 #16 Posted May 31, 2021 (edited) You want a good reason why 'First Past The Post' with constituencies beats (hands-down) a truly PR system?  Israel. [NB: this is nothing to do with middle-eastern disputes]  In Israel, the Middle East's only true democracy, there are no constituencies and never have been. Instead, there's 120 electees picked from each national political party's single list. Subject only to a 5% threshold, the result is that a party which scores X% of votes returns X% of 120 electees. Hence the constant creation/fracturing/reforming of political parties. Hence the constant mess. Hence the constant shenanigans. Hence the repeated and inconclusive elections.  Now don't you agree that the UK's system is better? Edited May 31, 2021 by Jeffrey Shaw Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
tinfoilhat   11 #17 Posted May 31, 2021 2 minutes ago, Jeffrey Shaw said: You want a good reason why 'First Past The Post' with constituencies beats (hands-down) a truly PR system?  Israel. [NB: this is nothing to do with middle-eastern disputes]  In Israel, the Middle East's only true democracy, there are no constituencies and never have been. Instead, there's 120 electees picked from each national political party's single list. Subject only to a 5% threshold, the result is that a party which scores X% of votes returns X% of 120 electees. Hence the constant creation/fracturing/reforming of political parties. Hence the constant mess. Hence the constant shenanigans. Hence the repeated and inconclusive elections.  Now don't you agree that the UK's system is better? No. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
butlers   259 #18 Posted May 31, 2021 Yes but we won't to improve our system. so would likely look to our European neighbours Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   534 #19 Posted May 31, 2021 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Jeffrey Shaw said: You want a good reason why 'First Past The Post' with constituencies beats (hands-down) a truly PR system?  Israel. [NB: this is nothing to do with middle-eastern disputes]  In Israel, the Middle East's only true democracy, there are no constituencies and never have been. Instead, there's 120 electees picked from each national political party's single list. Subject only to a 5% threshold, the result is that a party which scores X% of votes returns X% of 120 electees. Hence the constant creation/fracturing/reforming of political parties. Hence the constant mess. Hence the constant shenanigans. Hence the repeated and inconclusive elections.  Now don't you agree that the UK's system is better? Germany, New Zealand and many other countries do fine without a first past the post system and manage to avoid the problems you mentioned that Israel has.  The problems with Israel's elections are down to the Israelis, they are not inherent in the electoral system they use - let alone all other non FPTP systems.   In 2015 UKIP got 12.6% of the votes but only 0.2% of the seats. Now don't you agree that the UK system could be better? Edited May 31, 2021 by altus Added UKIP bit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest makapaka   #20 Posted May 31, 2021 Illusion of democracy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
El Cid   212 #21 Posted May 31, 2021 4 hours ago, Jeffrey Shaw said: You want a good reason why 'First Past The Post' with constituencies beats (hands-down) a truly PR system?  Israel.  Now don't you agree that the UK's system is better? Better than Israel, perhaps. But that does meant that there are more things that the UK could do better. People knowing who there elected representative is, is great, local or national. But they can still be elected proportionally. Do you believe that UK democracy could be improved? The house of Lords is too full, 1/4 of the electorate cannot stand for election, only 20% of the population votes in local elections, all very poor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
andyofborg   11 #22 Posted June 1, 2021 in addition to reform of th 7 hours ago, El Cid said: Better than Israel, perhaps. But that does meant that there are more things that the UK could do better. People knowing who there elected representative is, is great, local or national. But they can still be elected proportionally. scotland retains constituancy mp's and returns additional mps based on the local list votes to ensure proportionality. something along those lines would retain the idea of people voting for a winner.  where you're electing one person rather than a collection then some sort of transferrable vote would always ensure that the winner had the support of the majority of the electorate.   7 hours ago, El Cid said: only 20% of the population votes in local elections, all very poor. isn't the way to improve that a radical return of power to the nations, regions, counties, citites, towns and vilages which meant local politicians could actually do things to improve the lot of their citizens and people would have a real choice of alternatives?  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
GabrielC Â Â 53 #23 Posted June 1, 2021 13 hours ago, Jeffrey Shaw said: You want a good reason why 'First Past The Post' with constituencies beats (hands-down) a truly PR system? Â Israel. [NB: this is nothing to do with middle-eastern disputes] Â In Israel, the Middle East's only true democracy, there are no constituencies and never have been. Instead, there's 120 electees picked from each national political party's single list. Subject only to a 5% threshold, the result is that a party which scores X% of votes returns X% of 120 electees. Hence the constant creation/fracturing/reforming of political parties. Hence the constant mess. Hence the constant shenanigans. Hence the repeated and inconclusive elections. Â Now don't you agree that the UK's system is better? It only takes 40/43 per cent of the vote to get into power not 100% of the vote PR shares power not hogs it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
butlers   259 #24 Posted June 1, 2021 The 2015 election. 66 percent turn out.  Tories got 37 %of the vote  Got 51%of the seats.  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...