|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 9, 2024 8:07:59 GMT
Having read all of the above I think we should stick with what we have! I totally agree. As usual when PR comes up there are loads of ideas/opinions on what is should be but no one addresses the question posed in the OP: "How would PR work....?" Clearly in the case of Italy it doesn't. I know there is an issue with one party getting into power and having "total control" (They don't actually, public opinion is very powerful, and judges can intervene, as they are in deporting illegal immigrants.) Personally I don't agree totally with any party, each has policies I cannot support; I think the present Labour position is as good if not better than any other, but I worry what the Labour policies will be after the next Labour conference. As with Johnson, Trump, Truss, Biden, etc. I can always comfort myself in the knowledge that they will not be there that long and will eventually be removed by the electorate. Unlike PR in Germany for example where the same politicians are in endless power, just repositioning their coalitions and policies and who gets what job are done secretly behind closed doors. PR gives a voice and platform to extremists, look how PR would have let in a host of Reform MPs this last week. Who wants that? I don't; I say stick with FPTP.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 9, 2024 8:47:19 GMT
Having read all of the above I think we should stick with what we have! I totally agree. As usual when PR comes up there are loads of ideas/opinions on what is should be but no one addresses the question posed in the OP: "How would PR work....?" Clearly in the case of Italy it doesn't. I know there is an issue with one party getting into power and having "total control" (They don't actually, public opinion is very powerful, and judges can intervene, as they are in deporting illegal immigrants.) Personally I don't agree totally with any party, each has policies I cannot support; I think the present Labour position is as good if not better than any other, but I worry what the Labour policies will be after the next Labour conference. As with Johnson, Trump, Truss, Biden, etc. I can always comfort myself in the knowledge that they will not be there that long and will eventually be removed by the electorate. Unlike PR in Germany for example where the same politicians are in endless power, just repositioning their coalitions and policies and who gets what job are done secretly behind closed doors.PR gives a voice and platform to extremists, look how PR would have let in a host of Reform MPs this last week. Who wants that? I don't; I say stick with FPTP. And yet the 2024 V-Dem Democracy Report places UK not in the top 10% in the world at 20th position but Germany is at 11th position. Strange that. Page 58 of 64 of Report for Rankings www.v-dem.net/
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jul 9, 2024 8:55:42 GMT
That elect a 'local MP' thing really is important to me. I try to vote more on the individual than party lines. I voted for the Green bloke this time, I happen to think some of their policies are a bit crackers but he was the only person who could be arsed to come out to take a look at a local traffic/parking issue we have. I thought about the new Labour chap but the only reason he seemed to be able to come up with to vote for him was that 'a vote for him was the only way to beat the Tories around here'. I just thought ne needed to come up with something a bit better than that. And then when I saw on the ballot paper that he was the only candidate who did not live in the Borough I thought to myself basically Labour Head Office have just parachuted him in from nowhere wnd he won't have to live with any of his decisions! Thats why open list pr or stv is much better as you usually vote for the local MP in both of them. It's the closed list PR introduced in Welsh run labour which you need to be concerned about as that's the paratrooper model.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 9, 2024 9:19:58 GMT
I totally agree. As usual when PR comes up there are loads of ideas/opinions on what is should be but no one addresses the question posed in the OP: "How would PR work....?" Clearly in the case of Italy it doesn't. I know there is an issue with one party getting into power and having "total control" (They don't actually, public opinion is very powerful, and judges can intervene, as they are in deporting illegal immigrants.) Personally I don't agree totally with any party, each has policies I cannot support; I think the present Labour position is as good if not better than any other, but I worry what the Labour policies will be after the next Labour conference. As with Johnson, Trump, Truss, Biden, etc. I can always comfort myself in the knowledge that they will not be there that long and will eventually be removed by the electorate. Unlike PR in Germany for example where the same politicians are in endless power, just repositioning their coalitions and policies and who gets what job are done secretly behind closed doors.PR gives a voice and platform to extremists, look how PR would have let in a host of Reform MPs this last week. Who wants that? I don't; I say stick with FPTP. And yet the 2024 V-Dem Democracy Report places UK not in the top 10% in the world at 20th position but Germany is at 11th position. Strange that. Page 58 of 64 of Report for Rankings www.v-dem.net/Not at all strange. You should read your own links, that ranking is base on numerous factors that contribute to democracy. It is not solely a measure of how democratic the electoral system is, or how easy or difficult it is to remove those who hold the power. The V-Dem organization has no credibilit and simply chooses their own criteria to pass judgement, which is hard on many other EU countries who I notice are well down the rankings and use PR..
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 9, 2024 9:42:06 GMT
And yet the 2024 V-Dem Democracy Report places UK not in the top 10% in the world at 20th position but Germany is at 11th position. Strange that. Page 58 of 64 of Report for Rankings www.v-dem.net/Not at all strange. You should read your own links, that ranking is base on numerous factors that contribute to democracy. It is not solely a measure of how democratic the electoral system is, or how easy or difficult it is to remove those who hold the power. The V-Dem organization has no credibilit and simply chooses their own criteria to pass judgement, which is hard on many other EU countries who I notice are well down the rankings and use PR.. Purely measuring Electoral Democracy UK moves up to 18th with Germany 15th if you had read through the link you would have found that but I'll make it easier for you en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-Dem_Democracy_IndicesPersonally I prefer the holistic approach which looks at all factors that contribute to a Democracy, but to each their own. Simple question do you believe anything that doesn't match your personal opinion?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 9, 2024 12:05:09 GMT
Not at all strange. You should read your own links, that ranking is base on numerous factors that contribute to democracy. It is not solely a measure of how democratic the electoral system is, or how easy or difficult it is to remove those who hold the power. The V-Dem organization has no credibilit and simply chooses their own criteria to pass judgement, which is hard on many other EU countries who I notice are well down the rankings and use PR.. Purely measuring Electoral Democracy UK moves up to 18th with Germany 15th if you had read through the link you would have found that but I'll make it easier for you en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-Dem_Democracy_IndicesPersonally I prefer the holistic approach which looks at all factors that contribute to a Democracy, but to each their own. Simple question do you believe anything that doesn't match your personal opinion? Thank you for amending your previous post on Germany and UK's relative ranking. So there is a 2 thousandths difference. Big deal! I've no problem with incremental change to our system, just as Germany has chosen to change their system. Unfortunately it is in the direction of reducing people's representation, which doesn't surprise me at all. Anything to preserve the same politicians keeping their jobs even if not retaining power goes under PR. www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2023-03-22/game-has-new-rules-amendment-to-electoral-law-bundestagI much prefer the UK system of booting useless politicians out of parliament. I note how many left wing supporters on this MB are delighted how the mighty are fallen. They can now go and write a book or appear on TV shows for a living. Regarding your simple question, which on reflection is quite deep, I do believe in transparent facts, I am strongly suspicious of convoluted facts such as cherry picked statistics and graphs which, whilst factually correct, are designed to mislead and construe the a false message. It seems in the world today that every messenger has a vested interest in pushing their message. There are loads of organisations these days that are "wolves in sheeps clothing". I am sure V Dem methodoly is skewed to their own political views on the world. As you yourself have pointed out, when you read the detail of an article, it bears no resemblance to the headline which invariably is purely biased opinion and not supported with any facts. As is evidenced by my Brexit reviews, I support my views with facts. Consequently I do question everything, especially views I don't agree with. I am not a bigot and quite prepared to change my mind, most notably on membership of the EU, which I was a strong advocate of in the 1970s but by the 00s was opposed to membership. And, since the referendum result a passionate supporter of not being in the EU. As for other regular political topics on this MB: Whilst I am in favour of incremental improvements of the present status, I am against PR, in favour of keeping HoL, am a monarchist, and against EU membership, so all in all I am happy with things. I am happy for any British government to make the changes they want to implement, even if I don't agree with them and subject to them not being diametrically opposed to the manifesto they were elected on, because I know the next government can reverse them. That's real democracy not being constrained by a constitution or treaties.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 9, 2024 12:39:16 GMT
Having read all of the above I think we should stick with what we have! I totally agree. As usual when PR comes up there are loads of ideas/opinions on what is should be but no one addresses the question posed in the OP: "How would PR work....?" Clearly in the case of Italy it doesn't. I know there is an issue with one party getting into power and having "total control" (They don't actually, public opinion is very powerful, and judges can intervene, as they are in deporting illegal immigrants.) Personally I don't agree totally with any party, each has policies I cannot support; I think the present Labour position is as good if not better than any other, but I worry what the Labour policies will be after the next Labour conference. As with Johnson, Trump, Truss, Biden, etc. I can always comfort myself in the knowledge that they will not be there that long and will eventually be removed by the electorate. Unlike PR in Germany for example where the same politicians are in endless power, just repositioning their coalitions and policies and who gets what job are done secretly behind closed doors. PR gives a voice and platform to extremists, look how PR would have let in a host of Reform MPs this last week. Who wants that? I don't; I say stick with FPTP. Don't you get how arrogant and elitist that sounds? You want FPTP because it returns then governments you want. You have no more right to have you voice heard in Parliament than a Reform UK voter. That attitude also ferments justifiable anger and resentment - why should nearly a fifth of the population put up with being massively under represented? Who gave you the right to tell them to suck it up? I don't agree with the politics of Reform UK but those that voted for them deserve to have their voice as much as anyone. FPTP distorts politics and no longer has any credibility.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jul 9, 2024 13:01:14 GMT
Just remember this when Biden wins the popular vote but loses the election ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/0m0lbCuTEBzaRn6f8QaM.gif)
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Jul 9, 2024 13:58:45 GMT
I totally agree. As usual when PR comes up there are loads of ideas/opinions on what is should be but no one addresses the question posed in the OP: "How would PR work....?" Clearly in the case of Italy it doesn't. I know there is an issue with one party getting into power and having "total control" (They don't actually, public opinion is very powerful, and judges can intervene, as they are in deporting illegal immigrants.) Personally I don't agree totally with any party, each has policies I cannot support; I think the present Labour position is as good if not better than any other, but I worry what the Labour policies will be after the next Labour conference. As with Johnson, Trump, Truss, Biden, etc. I can always comfort myself in the knowledge that they will not be there that long and will eventually be removed by the electorate. Unlike PR in Germany for example where the same politicians are in endless power, just repositioning their coalitions and policies and who gets what job are done secretly behind closed doors. PR gives a voice and platform to extremists, look how PR would have let in a host of Reform MPs this last week. Who wants that? I don't; I say stick with FPTP. Don't you get how arrogant and elitist that sounds? You want FPTP because it returns then governments you want. You have no more right to have you voice heard in Parliament than a Reform UK voter. That attitude also ferments justifiable anger and resentment - why should nearly a fifth of the population put up with being massively under represented? Who gave you the right to tell them to suck it up? I don't agree with the politics of Reform UK but those that voted for them deserve to have their voice as much as anyone. FPTP distorts politics and no longer has any credibility. FPTP never had any credibility. I have been a long term advocate, along with abolition of the House of Lords, as fundamental to a real democratic system in the UK. I do however find it amusing to hear the voices from the right bemoaning a system which has long benefited the Tories as a result of a progressive parties splitting the vote on the left.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 9, 2024 15:11:58 GMT
Don't you get how arrogant and elitist that sounds? You want FPTP because it returns then governments you want. You have no more right to have you voice heard in Parliament than a Reform UK voter. That attitude also ferments justifiable anger and resentment - why should nearly a fifth of the population put up with being massively under represented? Who gave you the right to tell them to suck it up? I don't agree with the politics of Reform UK but those that voted for them deserve to have their voice as much as anyone. FPTP distorts politics and no longer has any credibility. FPTP never had any credibility. I have been a long term advocate, along with abolition of the House of Lords, as fundamental to a real democratic system in the UK. I do however find it amusing to hear the voices from the right bemoaning a system which has long benefited the Tories as a result of a progressive parties splitting the vote on the left. Unfortunately Starmer is taking the same stance. FPTP advantages Labour and Starmer has already said he has no intention of reforming the voting system because it results in "strong government" (i.e absolute control of Parliament by us and the Tories). The fact is the voting system is setup by and for the two main parties tpo serve their imterests - it is not setup to represent the people. We really have to take Parliament out of the hands of the Labour and Tory Party machinery and make it work for us.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jul 9, 2024 15:49:46 GMT
Just remember this when Biden wins the popular vote but loses the election ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/0m0lbCuTEBzaRn6f8QaM.gif) I think Joe is going to lose both!
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Jul 9, 2024 16:04:42 GMT
FPTP never had any credibility. I have been a long term advocate, along with abolition of the House of Lords, as fundamental to a real democratic system in the UK. I do however find it amusing to hear the voices from the right bemoaning a system which has long benefited the Tories as a result of a progressive parties splitting the vote on the left. Unfortunately Starmer is taking the same stance. FPTP advantages Labour and Starmer has already said he has no intention of reforming the voting system because it results in "strong government" (i.e absolute control of Parliament by us and the Tories). The fact is the voting system is setup by and for the two main parties tpo serve their imterests - it is not setup to represent the people. We really have to take Parliament out of the hands of the Labour and Tory Party machinery and make it work for us. Except of course the FPTP system was firmly in place well before The Labour Party existed.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 9, 2024 16:32:15 GMT
Starmer is right about keeping FPTP, but hardly for stable government judging by the Truss fiasco.
If Reform got a third of the vote and a majority of MPs at the next election, FPTP would suddenly become a "low priority". When Cameron needed a coalition partner, did the LibDems insist on a PR bill when they had sight of power?
I am in favour of FPTP to keep control of politicians, they cannot be trusted. Do we know what Starmer really believes in, he does seem to change his mind on issues. Every politician should be accountable to their constituents who can toss them out like Truss if they mess up. No politician should be installed as a law makers without been accountable to the people. No politician should be elected just because they are in a particular party that wins a % of the vote. If the MPs cease to become accountable to their constituents and become accountable to "the party" it is road to ruin.
|
|