To think that the election results don't add up?

[RobynRB]

How did LibDem get 70 odd seats and Reform 4 when Reform got 14% of the vote. I mean, I understand how it works... but it's hardly cause for LibDem's 'greatest result' ever is it? I bet Nigel is fuming. And rightly so.

but if we had introduced PR years ago we wouldn't be in this situation now - because for the past 30 years or so we would probably have had a string of centre/left governments.

Judging the pros and cons of either FPTP or PR on one single election isn't the best way.

It's probably why turnout is quite low, as people feel their vote won't count.

Turnout is slightly higher than 2001, but lower since then.

People do not turnout when there is no one they are happy to vote for.

Or if they think it is a forgone conclusion.

“I know how it works…”

This was a little fib wasn’t it? 😆

Which would have reduced the number of labour voters. Why go out when you know there will be a landslide?

Not being in favour of PR because it would benefit people you disagree with isn't a particularly democratic stance. I am in favour of PR - even though it will give people like Farage more seats - mainly because I believe in democracy and people should have a say in how their country is run. I may not like their opinions and will endeavour to change them, but I believe they have the right to be represented. If not, it's not really democratic.

No.

I am in favour of democracy which is why I favour FPTP. We should be voting for an MP to represent us. I do not want an MP allocated to my area that the people living here have not voted for.

It’s about swing areas, and swing seats. Google it.

I th ink the tactical voting was libdems and labour (like me)

the protest vote was reform

I don’t think every reform voter is racist, but I think that every racist voted reform.

There are different versions of PR - you can have constituency representation AND PR - for example, Ireland's system of STV. No system is perfect, but FPTP is less means large swathes of the population end up unrepresented in parliament, which feels profoundly undemocratic to me.

Similarly I don't think everyone who voted Labour can't tell the difference between a real woman and a man, but everyone who can't probably voted for Labour.

The people who can't are spoilt for choice because they have the Lib Dems and the Greens as well.

The Lib Dems won't be changing their support for proportional representation. According to your chart, they got 12% of the vote but 11% of the seats. So even in this election PR is in their interests. In 2019 they got 11.5% of the vote and 1.7% of the seats. It's not really on to suggest that their seat share this time around is unfair, it's actually pretty proportional. It's unfair in relation to all the other parties. And it is their 'greatest result ever' in terms of their number of seats. I don't think it's possible to resent their achievement here as it's so similar to their vote share.

This isn’t a representative democracy, if you ask me.

It literally is, @rumnraisins. We democratically elect our representatives.

With vote-counting systems, you're saying you vote for a national party and not a local representative. Your MP would be whichever person the national party allocated to your constituency.

You might not think it matters but parties already field unknown, non-local candidates in seats they can't win (small parties don't field any). Then, when you needed your MP's help or support with something - could be SEN provision, planning disputes, anything - you'd find they had no clue about the locality, and even less interest in local people.

All voting systems are imperfect but this way, we at least get someone whose main job is to represent our interests in Parliament.

yawn yawn yawn

any belief that Reform or Con would help women is fucking nuts. Absolutely fucking nuts.

starmer and team are going to be brilliant for the UK. So happy. Get over it.

That is exactly why I agree with FPTP. I know it is imperfect, but my local MP is based on who votes locally. Our local MP lost their seat. He was hopeless and did not care about local issues. He was a backbencher but seemed a careerist. He was voted out I am sure because so many people were fed up how he ignored local people, refused to do anything about their concerns, or take up any individual issues. I think he thought he was safe as where I live have voted conservative for years. But local people voted labour, and I am surely partly because of national politics. But also because the local Labour candidate is a community activist and seems to go to everything and volunteer on lots of local issues. I think I would have voted for him whatever party he represented as he cares about our local area and tries to improve things.

Some countries with proportional representation have stronger local democracy. So the equivalent of their local councillors have much more power and act locally more like local MPs. So they do not have the issues we would have with proportional representation.

It's the French elections round 2 this weekend.

They have an interesting system whereby you can only win on the first round if you fulfill certain criteria - or it's through to the second round if you fulfill a certain number of votes.

Certainly makes things interesting

It is possible to have PR & choose a person, see Ireland PR STV

there are many types of PR

I didn't say they would. Did I? I was just countering a stupid statement with a stupid statement.

I mean clearly this is how it 'should' be, but how many people actually have anything to do with their local MP? I think most people voting in a general election are voting for the main party rather than their local MP. In fact, my wife has done polling duty and she couldn't believe the number of people who couldn't understand why Boris Johnson's name wasn't on the ballot paper.