5 ms·

Until a major party comes out with a manifesto pledge to offer a public vote on moving to Proportional Representation I'm not sure why anyone would bother votin

Until a major party comes out with a manifesto pledge to offer a public vote on moving to Proportional Representation I'm not sure why anyone would bother voting Conservative or Labour anymore.

ben_w 4y ago
Why would the new PR referendum give a different result to the previous PR referendum?
- blibble 4y ago
  because, uh, the previous referendum was on AV, which isn't PR?
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  There has never been a referendum on PR.
  - ChrisKnott 4y ago
    Why would you expect a PR referendum to get a different result to the AV referendum? Every PR supporter I know voted Yes for AV
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      > Why would you expect Where did you read that I'd expect anything? > Every PR supporter I know voted Yes for AV Lol well we don't need referenda then - we'll just ask what your mates want in the future /s
      - ChrisKnott 4y ago
        I was just restating the question in a way that acknowledged your nitpicking response. It's a pretty natural inference from what you said. If you weren't suggesting that the referendums would have different results then I don't see the point of your original response.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        AV and PR are different things. People may have different opinions, even if your particular circle wouldn’t.
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        In any case, there's no referendum needed. If it ends up with a Lab Lib government next time, I expect it to just be legislated for.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        > If it ends up with a Lab Lib government next time, I expect it to just be legislated for. Are Labour in favour of changing the voting system? I don't think they are. Why would they be? It doesn't make any sense for them. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote-down-local-labour-parties-call-to-axe-first-past-the-post https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/27/proportional-representation-labour-party-lib-dems https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/27/propor... And even if members were, the PLP certainly aren't - as they'd lose their jobs.
        blibble 4y ago
        the 1997 labour manifesto had a committment to changing the voting system there was a consultation and its results were quietly buried no reason to expect it would be different next time
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        Because of the SNP. Without Scotland, it would be very difficult for them to get a majority with FPTP.
    - teamonkey 4y ago
      AV was confusing. To those who knew what it meant, there were no obvious benefits, so why bother. To those who didn't know, the difference could only be explained by mathematics and unintuitive use cases, and no-one could make a compelling argument about why it was better, so why bother. The argument for PR is far clearer. In the last general election (FPTP), Conservatives got 42% of the vote but won 50% seats; Labour 40% of the vote but 41% of seats; Lib Dem 7% of the vote but 2% of seats; SNP 3% of vote but 5% of seats; etc. THAT intuitively doesn't seem fair or democratic. PR seeks to reflect % of votes with % of elected seats, which does seem intuitively fair and democratic.
pydry 4y ago
Im not sure why PR is being treated as a panacea. It has its benefits but I cant be wild about a system where, for example, far right parties pushing racial supremacy can get to play kingmaker like in Israel. I wouldnt necessarily be against it but if I had limited political capital I could think of better things to spend it on than trying to make lib dem tory coalitions more common. The last one did sod all good.

Until a major party comes out with a manifesto pledge to offer a public vote on moving to Proportional Representation I'm not sure why anyone would bother voting Conservative or Labour anymore.

ben_w 4y ago

Why would the new PR referendum give a different result to the previous PR referendum?

blibble 4y ago
because, uh, the previous referendum was on AV, which isn't PR?
chrisseaton 4y ago
There has never been a referendum on PR.
- ChrisKnott 4y ago
  Why would you expect a PR referendum to get a different result to the AV referendum? Every PR supporter I know voted Yes for AV
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    > Why would you expect Where did you read that I'd expect anything? > Every PR supporter I know voted Yes for AV Lol well we don't need referenda then - we'll just ask what your mates want in the future /s
    - ChrisKnott 4y ago
      I was just restating the question in a way that acknowledged your nitpicking response. It's a pretty natural inference from what you said. If you weren't suggesting that the referendums would have different results then I don't see the point of your original response.
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        AV and PR are different things. People may have different opinions, even if your particular circle wouldn’t.
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        In any case, there's no referendum needed. If it ends up with a Lab Lib government next time, I expect it to just be legislated for.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        > If it ends up with a Lab Lib government next time, I expect it to just be legislated for. Are Labour in favour of changing the voting system? I don't think they are. Why would they be? It doesn't make any sense for them. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote-down-local-labour-parties-call-to-axe-first-past-the-post https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/27/proportional-representation-labour-party-lib-dems https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/27/propor... And even if members were, the PLP certainly aren't - as they'd lose their jobs.
        blibble 4y ago
        the 1997 labour manifesto had a committment to changing the voting system there was a consultation and its results were quietly buried no reason to expect it would be different next time
        disgruntledphd2 4y ago
        Because of the SNP. Without Scotland, it would be very difficult for them to get a majority with FPTP.
  - teamonkey 4y ago
    AV was confusing. To those who knew what it meant, there were no obvious benefits, so why bother. To those who didn't know, the difference could only be explained by mathematics and unintuitive use cases, and no-one could make a compelling argument about why it was better, so why bother. The argument for PR is far clearer. In the last general election (FPTP), Conservatives got 42% of the vote but won 50% seats; Labour 40% of the vote but 41% of seats; Lib Dem 7% of the vote but 2% of seats; SNP 3% of vote but 5% of seats; etc. THAT intuitively doesn't seem fair or democratic. PR seeks to reflect % of votes with % of elected seats, which does seem intuitively fair and democratic.

pydry 4y ago

Im not sure why PR is being treated as a panacea. It has its benefits but I cant be wild about a system where, for example, far right parties pushing racial supremacy can get to play kingmaker like in Israel. I wouldnt necessarily be against it but if I had limited political capital I could think of better things to spend it on than trying to make lib dem tory coalitions more common. The last one did sod all good.