WTF won't Labour, Lib Dems (& potentially the Greens) endorse tactical voting?

They don’t. It’s the Labour lot that use that line.

Plus Labour will need funding to resolve issues, where is that coming from?

I'd rather get rid of FPTP than faff about with tactical voting.

Tactical voting has no impact in some constituencies - my constituency MP (happens to be from the party I'm a member of) had three times the vote of her nearest rival.
Even if that's the party I want to be represented by, it hacks me off that my vote is meaningless & I effectively have no say.
I spoil the ballot paper & write across it that I want a democratic voting system.

Literally any time there is a discussion on Labour/ conservatives on here someone chimes in with ‘least the Conservatives know what a woman is’ 🥱
Everything else is falling apart around us, but yes, let’s make the vote about gender ideology.

I'm not going into detail here, as it's all complex, and there are no easy solutions. Removing rights completely from one part of society isn't known for working out very well, and, frankly, people on here just shout what they want without thinking. So I'll simply leave it here.

Can you explain how the gender critical position is flawed? The way I see it is up until 5 minutes ago everyone knew that there were two sexes and that if you had a penis you were male - then along came gender ideology and now people pretend that males with penises are actually women and that babies can be 'trans'. I am critical of that and many other delights that this movement promotes.
I am also critical of political figures who pretend that the above is true to appease a small section of the electorate (or their party in Starmer's case) and the way that principled, intelligent female politicians like Rosie Duffield have been treated by men like Starmer. It is NOT acceptable and many women (and men) care about this shit and will vote accordingly.

Because for the vast majority of the electorate it’s not an issue. People can’t afford their mortgages, can’t get a GP appointment or a dentist, the number of kids living in poverty and visits to food banks go up every day. Those are things that people are worried about and that will decide how they vote.

This doesn't answer the question that @yogasaurus and I asked: Why, if the vast majority of the electorate doesn't care about this issue, are Labour clinging to the commitment to reform of the GRA like limpets to a rock? If nobody cares abandoning it would not cost them any votes but would gain them a large proportion of the GC votes, then they could tackle all those problems everyone cares about. It seems it is actually more important to them then securing as many votes as possible. Why?

Pretty much spot on for gender ideology

Actually, I'd agree that the Gender Ideology that some are claiming is very flawed, but so is the GC movement. The polarisation is a) what the Tories want, as it's great for their Culture Wars, and b) making it far worse for both sides and, indeed, everybody else...

people have a single ill-thought-out idea and decide to ignore all the damage that could result. Sheer idiocy.

Rather like gender ideology wouldn't you say...?

Ah yes, left wing gender critical women concerned about child safeguarding and the rights of women and girls are now suddenly raving fascists and bigots who are responsible for Brexit happening...heard it all before. From Owen Fucking Jones et al.

And here, again, we see that people do literally no research before deciding their vote. If you had, you'd know that the Tory government have ordered Sadiq Khan to extend the ULEZ.

And all this "knows what a woman is" stuff is exactly the sort of thinking that brought us Brexshit - people have a single ill-thought-out idea and decide to ignore all the damage that could result. Sheer idiocy.

Because for the vast majority of the electorate it’s not an issue. People can’t afford their mortgages, can’t get a GP appointment or a dentist, the number of kids living in poverty and visits to food banks go up every day. Those are things that people are worried about and that will decide how they vote.

What was wrong with saying that their principal of protecting lives and environment is more important and that they would look to ensure that the poorest in society are protected from the additional costs resulting from climate change

Because their principles were what they thought would win them votes. When they realise it isn’t, their ‘principles’ are fast ditched. Same as all the others.

They'll do it for exactly the same reasons as they did last time with the Tories (and won't hesitate to get back into bed with them if they look as though they might be the better option). Fuck the policies, they'll abandon any they have the moment they scuttle into Downing Street.

Labour have just said that they think ULEZ should be reconsidered given it's what caused them to lose

What was wrong with saying that their principal of protecting lives and environment is more important and that they would look to ensure that the poorest in society are protected from the additional costs resulting from climate change

So if they fail women and fail the environment I don't want them in

Never in all my years did I think I could say that

The question that is never answered.

Our problem in the UK is that we have a United ‘right’ (Conservative Party) and a split ‘left’ (everyone else, pretty much). It seems to me that an informal agreement for parties on the centre-left to step forward/back in every seat would be the most effective way to deal with the electoral behemoth of the Tories.

@Igneococcus cross-post

To everyone who is bringing up gender ideology, I get that this is your hill to die on but the Tories are loving all the 'noise' - it creates a diversion from all the other shit they are creating.

Why don’t labour just seize their chance and say what a women is, and that they will protect women’s spaces etc, then? No brainer, surely…. Unless they truly don’t think this?…

This issue just isn't that important compared to others. No reason to keep Tories in

If that is the case, why are Labour and LDs and Greens clinging onto reforming the GRA as if their lives depend on it? Why don't they give up on this so women can actually vote for them in order to get the Tories out if this is the most important thing? It seems to be quite important to some people other than GC women too, no?

Same here

FPTP is a very undemocratic system. 6 out of 10 people vote against you and you win a landslide victory.

I remember telling my TD ( MP) how I enjoyed listing candidates in order of preference and my vote actually counting for something. He replied that it's a stressful system for politicians because ' you might only be elected on the fourth or fifth count - there are no safe seats. '

Cry me a river! PR is no magic bullet but I'll take it over being at the mercy of 'swing voters' in a minority of seats. When I lived in London I was a union rep and once suggested supporting the Electoral Reform Society to my fellow members. You'd think I called for death of the first born children. It was 18 years of Tory government that time....

And the new MP Keir Mather labelled the marvellous Germaine Greer an 'abhorrent transphobe' for knowing that biological sex is real. I do not want these people in power.

Well being afraid of a Labour victory is not something I ever thought I would think or feel having been a member and having voted Labour almost every time in the past but here I am. Gender ideology and misogyny now permeates the party - Starmer thinks that a percentage of women have penises FGS and I cannot vote for such idiocy.