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.

It really does.

Quite, it is simply to do with the fact that we have a representative democracy and it is where votes are cast that matters. National voting numbers are actually fairly meaningless because that is not how our election works. Why have the LDs done better than Reform - because they have targeted key seats and developed voter base in those seats. Reform have largely been a protest vote for disgruntled Tories who never had a hope of winning beyond a handful of target seats. In my constituency, reform just split the Tory vote but even if you combine Tory + reform they weren't enough to overcome Labour's vote.

I'm pointing out something a lot of people have got fuddled on; percent of the vote nationally is a meaningless statistic whether you have FPTP or PR. A candidate wins a seat by getting the largest share of the vote, or they don't. That is the same under both systems. The differences come in the formation of a government once the vote is in; one party (to rule them all) versus a coalition.

Yes, people might vote differently if we had PR. Or they might not. Either way, Reform could run a close second in every single seat and still not win a single seat in government.

Though a slightly bigger vote share.

You don’t understand how it works though, if you did you wouldn’t be asking the question.

Surely it is a result of the fact that we elect a local representative and that is how our election works? Other voting systems like STV would not change that. It would have to move to a totally different system like electing off lists (by PR or similar) but that moves away from having a local MP directly elected to a constituency by the voters in that constituency.

Such as Reform having about 90 MPs under PR, instead of 4 that they have now.

It’s a bit more nuanced than that. Many Labour voters gave their vote to other parties as tactical votes (and they got votes from others in the same way). It’s very hard to say how many people wanted to vote Labour and would have in a PR election. You can’t extrapolate PR results from FPTP ones.
Edit: I don’t think you were trying to d9 that extrapolation. Just a point in addition.

Reform would have four MPs and be a completely marginal party either way. Whatever political system you have, number of elected representatives is not determined by the national fraction of the vote you get.

Funny how people on the right never complained when the Greens just got 1 MP although they used to get a good vote share

Number of elected representatives based on fraction of vote is exactly what a proportional representation voting system can deliver.

It is ironic that the Liberal Democrat's have benefited so much from FPTP when they are predominantly in favour of PR, but they have done enormously well out of their approach this time. They have benefited from tactical voting and targeted campaigning, and have managed to get a lot of media coverage. They seem to be recovering from the Nick Clegg coalition era and I'm glad for that, giving proper choices on the centre-left. They have really focused on specific issues as well which are of concern to many people, I practiced tactical voting and they had no chance in my area, but I do feel more aligned with their policies than labour policy around areas such as the two child limit.

Just demonstrates the need for a change in the way votes and seats in parliament work.
Also shows the Labour victory is far from a landslide!
Downside of PR is general lack of a majority, so end up with coalitions, which also aren't ideal.

People vote differently in FPTP. If it was PR I’d have voted Labour but as it was FPTP I voted tactically - LibDem as I wanted the nasty party out.

LDs absolutely deserve what they got, as do Reform.

and the fact that Greens got same as Reform is wonderful and Farage needs to be reminded of that.

happy fucking days! What a fucking amazing result!!

Neither is perfect but FPTP is less imperfect.

They were always the ones that were pushing for an eu referendum as well.

Everyone was desperate for a change of government. Yet turnout was quite low for a GE: 60% - that's 7.6 points lower than 2019.

I’m Northern Irish and prefer STV but the Westminster elections are set up for the most popular candidate to win. While Reform were clearly popular this time, there was (nearly) always someone more popular, so that’s who won. It’s the majority in individual contests that matters, not popular nationwide.

The downside of PR is it enables extremist minority parties to hold governments to ransom. E.g the Scottish Greens in Holyrood. Almost nobody voted for them yet they had ministerial posts

The winner can win only by vote of difference. There is 650 seats. With only two parties on the elections there is a possibility that the winner win all the seats only with 650 votes more than the looser.
If a party consistently is the third, they may have millions of votes and cero seats.

Of course

But this is the FPTP for you. Ridiculous, if you ask me.

How can parties with such different share of the public vote be given equal powers in parliament? Or even more perversely, a party with 12% gets 71 seats but a party with 14% - only 4.

This isn’t a representative democracy, if you ask me. And I’m not saying it because I like Reform, I’m saying it because people are being conned - their votes literally don’t matter.

www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/5/uk-general-election-2024-why-do-some-popular-parties-win-so-few-seats

Labour Party: 35 percent vote share, 412 seats
Conservative Party: 24 percent vote share, 121 seats
Liberal Democrats: 12 percent vote share, 71 seats
Reform UK: 14 percent vote share, 4 seats
Green Party: 7 percent vote share, 4 seats
Scottish National Party (SNP): 2 percent vote share, 9 seats
Sinn Fein: 0.7 percent vote share, 7 seats
Plaid Cymru: 0.7 percent vote share, 4 seats

Welsh synod are trying a different approach which sounds sensible
senedd.wales/senedd-now/senedd-blog/how-your-vote-is-used-to-elect-members-of-the-senedd/

People vote differently in FPTP. If it was PR I’d have voted Labour but as it was FPTP I voted tactically - LibDem as I wanted the nasty party out

I think you're overestimating the sophistication and critical thinking skills of the average Reform voter.

The reason why Reform got so many votes was that there were a lot of people who think they have their best interests at heart and if they actually got into power then suddenly everyone who was not white and/or doesn't have English as their first language would magically disappear and their lives and economic prospects would improve drastically without them having to do any of the unpleasant and badly paid jobs that were generally done by all the 'immigrants' that the country is apparently over-run with.

DreadPirateRobots either doesn't understand how the British voting system works, or they are indulging in Trumpian tactics. Or maybe both.

I have a different perspective. FPTP can help against populist parties however what is often overlooked is that FPTP allows & enables larger parties to ignore & disenfranchise a sizeable part of the electorate which frustrates people. Over time, this can increase flow to more extreme groups. But this flow doesn’t get attention as they aren’t winning seats.

Reform haven’t just appeared in this election. This group has been around since Brexit, feeling disenfranchised. In 2019 the Brexit party did not stand against the conservatives. How many of them were part of the Conservative majority?

In PR, the movement to fringes is more immediate & more obvious.

In PR, the larger parties will often steal some of the smaller parties’ policies which brings some people back to centrist parties.

So in PR, the feedback to the larger parties is more immediate.

But yes, then governments may have coalitions to deal with. The upside is that they can’t just point at each other arguing the opposite opinion like children. They need to influence, negotiate & have reasoned arguments & compromises.