• Why the UK Election Results are the Worst in History [CGP Grey]
    10 replies, posted
[video=youtube;r9rGX91rq5I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I&ab_channel=CGPGrey[/video]
for fucks sake not this again [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] you're voting for an MP in your constituency to have their say in parliament, you are not voting for a certain party or certain leader of a party to become prime minister. there is no reason to change the voting system as it does what it's supposed to perfectly. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] also, if we were to just go off all of the votes nationally: the conservatives would still have majority votes, so nothing changes labour would have slightly less seats, and ukip would have more. why would you even want that? people that argue against the current system we have are people that are bitter that the tories control parliament. but changing it would do literally nothing so fuck off
[QUOTE=zerosix;47983345]for fucks sake not this again [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] you're voting for an MP in your constituency to have their say in parliament, you are not voting for a certain party or certain leader of a party to become prime minister. there is no reason to change the voting system as it does what it's supposed to perfectly. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] also, if we were to just go off all of the votes nationally: the conservatives would still have majority votes, so nothing changes labour would have slightly less seats, and ukip would have more. why would you even want that? people that argue against the current system we have are people that are bitter that the tories control parliament. but changing it would do literally nothing so fuck off[/QUOTE] This would be great if the UK was a federal nation, with each constituency allowed to make their own laws on the same level as American states. It's not. Whoever gets the most MPs (especially in a majority government such as this) is going to be able to make the most decisions, regardless of whether or not you voted for them. Caroline Lucas, Green MP for Brighton and Hove, might be able to influence the local city council, but on a national level she can do nothing other than pressure other MPs or suggest bills. UKIP received nearly 4 million votes and won a single seat in the election. Regardless of your views on the party, it is clear that the UK political climate has changed significantly in the last five years. We can retain our current system and the stability associated with it, or we can try something new. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] Also, there are more potential voting systems than just Proportional Representation. Single Transferable Vote has been suggested by some, as well as the system used by the European Parliament.
[QUOTE=zerosix;47983345]for fucks sake not this again [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] you're voting for an MP in your constituency to have their say in parliament, you are not voting for a certain party or certain leader of a party to become prime minister. there is no reason to change the voting system as it does what it's supposed to perfectly. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] also, if we were to just go off all of the votes nationally: the conservatives would still have majority votes, so nothing changes labour would have slightly less seats, and ukip would have more. why would you even want that? people that argue against the current system we have are people that are bitter that the tories control parliament. but changing it would do literally nothing so fuck off[/QUOTE] found the tory
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;47983441]This would be great if the UK was a federal nation, with each constituency allowed to make their own laws on the same level as American states. It's not. Whoever gets the most MPs (especially in a majority government such as this) is going to be able to make the most decisions, regardless of whether or not you voted for them. Caroline Lucas, Green MP for Brighton and Hove, might be able to influence the local city council, but on a national level she can do nothing other than pressure other MPs or suggest bills. [B]UKIP received nearly 4 million votes and won a single seat in the election.[/B] Regardless of your views on the party, it is clear that the UK political climate has changed significantly in the last five years. We can retain our current system and the stability associated with it, or we can try something new. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] Also, there are more potential voting systems than just Proportional Representation. Single Transferable Vote has been suggested by some, as well as the system used by the European Parliament.[/QUOTE] still doesn't mean that 12% of votes should mean 12% of seats. have you seen some of the UKIP candidates? my local UKIP candidate had no political background and seemed like he'd have absolutely nothing to offer when it came to national politics. because of that, people didn't vote for him and they instead voted for the better candidate. that's the way it should stay.
[QUOTE=zerosix;47983585]still doesn't mean that 12% of votes should mean 12% of seats. have you seen some of the UKIP candidates? my local UKIP candidate had no political background and seemed like he'd have absolutely nothing to offer when it came to national politics. because of that, people didn't vote for him and they instead voted for the better candidate. that's the way it should stay.[/QUOTE] It seems likely that if we had a more proportional voting system, 'protest votes' and 'tactical voting' would be less common. However, people would have to be well-informed on the issue if any change was to be made (presumably with a referendum held as there was a few years back about Australia-style AV), because it would make a low voting turnout arguably even more unrepresentative of the actual voting population [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] As a note, I'm not a UKIP supporter. But if people are voting for them, there's no reason they shouldn't get into power. I don't like the Tories either but I accept that, under basically any system, they would have got [I]some[/I] kind of majority in this election.
[QUOTE=zerosix;47983585]still doesn't mean that 12% of votes should mean 12% of seats. have you seen some of the UKIP candidates? my local UKIP candidate had no political background and seemed like he'd have absolutely nothing to offer when it came to national politics. because of that, people didn't vote for him and they instead voted for the better candidate. that's the way it should stay.[/QUOTE] 37% of the vote definitely shouldn't mean 50% of the seats though
The Lib Dems tried to fix this shit with their electoral reform referendum in 2011. A campaign of misinformation and deliberate complication by the media ensured that never got off the ground. Our electoral system is definitely a few pennies short of a pound. Still, could be worse. We could have only two political parties who flip in and out of office every four years.
[QUOTE=zerosix;47983345]for fucks sake not this again [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] you're voting for an MP in your constituency to have their say in parliament, you are not voting for a certain party or certain leader of a party to become prime minister. there is no reason to change the voting system as it does what it's supposed to perfectly. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] also, if we were to just go off all of the votes nationally: the conservatives would still have majority votes, so nothing changes labour would have slightly less seats, and ukip would have more. why would you even want that? people that argue against the current system we have are people that are bitter that the tories control parliament. but changing it would do literally nothing so fuck off[/QUOTE] Literally every point here is discussed in this video, did you even watch the bloody thing?
[QUOTE=Jackald;47989403]I think saying "Nobody knows who their local MP is and just votes for national" is a bit disingenuous for Mr American man to say here, I know plenty of people, myself included, who voted based on local elections, and many constituencies had 2 ballot papers, one for local election and one for national election, so that point is a bit shit.[/QUOTE] I think a better point is that the party whip system means your local candidate can't do their own thing anyway
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.