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.

Interested in views in a wider context.

IMO FPTP is outdated. It is only representative for mono-cultures or where 2 dominant cultures.

PR gives a variety of views which is far more reflective of the UK’s multicultural & complex society.

FPTP tends to send the 2 parties to extremes (see America) despite the majority of people being centrist.

then the 2 parties come back towards centre, but the more extreme members have nowhere to go & “upset” the vote.

i accept it is tricky to manage in government but PR gives a plurality of views far more reflective of our actual society. Surely this is a good thing for a government rather than them enacting a minority’s vision? Thoughts?

If it was under PR I'd have voted Green but I just wanted the tories out so voted Labour. I've heard a lot of people say they preferred the Greens but didn't vote for them as they eirther didn't have one standing in their constituency or they hadn't a hope in hell of winning.
I think the people voting Reform partly did so as a protest vote so that might be why they got such a high percentage.

A bit like not getting 52% of Brexit 😀

It's pretty horrible that Labour won a landslide number of seats on such a low vote, compared to the Tories. It's ironic that the Liberals won almost exactly the number of seats their vote suggested.

Not really. That's the French system and people vote accordingly knowing there is a second round. Its a bit like saying Greens got 2 million votes and its not fair because we have FPTP, The Greens were simply smarter than Farage and focused on seats they could win on the ground, the result is Greens -2 million votes- 4 seats. Reform 4 million votes, - 4 seats.

Also what you're saying doesn't make any sense as French anti Le Pen parties would adapt tactics and not run in the first round if there was only 1 round first past the post.

I think this is utter bollocks. The system is not 'designed' to prevent fringe parties getting elected - if they are fringe parties they won't get into power? If a 'far-right' party got 40% of the vote they are not 'fringe' they are 'mainstream' by definition. It's presumably (like a lot of things in England) a leftover system that evolved from centuries old ways of doing things and no one wants to change it.

Same! I'm really torn. Its obvious that FPTP isn't objectively fair, which is why multiple countries who initially used it have moved to something else....but at the same time the alternative would have been a nightmare in this particular election.

But if I believe in democracy shouldn't I accept that if thats what the people want that should happen? Its giving me food for thought!

IMO quite a few LD seats won’t have been won because of any great love for, or great faith in the LDs - more often a tactical vote in areas like mine, where it’s LD or Tory - and Labour tag along far behind.

Reform actually boosted the Lib Dems by taking votes away from the Tories in seats where the Lib Dems had a chance of winning.

Oh God that doesn't bear thinking about. Farage will be insufferable as it is.

@DreadPirateRobots

PR constituencies have multiple candidates for that exact reason - to return a proportional result. No need to split anyone King Solomon style 😅

That's the UK electoral system. A lot of people don't end up voting for their true preference. Unless they are truly clueless, Reform voters will also have known that their vote was more likely to end up with a Labour candidate winning than a Reform one. The Daily Mail pointed it out to them enough times. I think a lot of Reform voters were disgruntled Tories who wanted to get the Conservatives out but couldn't bring themselves to vote Labour.

It seems to me the problem with PR is how to implement it while maintaining the system we already have - ie 650 MPs. As someone commented above, if you are then going to assign MPs to areas which didn't vote for your party then that's a bit hopeless.
I appreciate that bringing up this today was always going to make it look like I'm annoyed because 'MY' party was done down by the system, but I am not invested in any one party enough to be that annoyed. Honestly.

And to be honest, given that my area has been a safe seat since 1868 I don't see any great need to bother my arse next time.

I think that's true, Reform is the obvious choice for disgruntled Conservative voters. As everyone except Keir Starmer seems to realise, this was not a Labour victory, it was people turning their backs on the Conservatives.

This is where I feel like PR would potentially be fairer, but I also like the system we have now with constituent MPs. Going to go read up on ways of doing it. Not that I can change it but I’m interested now.

A good point. My area swings back and forth between Labour and Conservative and Lib Dems don’t seem to make a dent so I just assumed they had better presence elsewhere, but this makes sense!

But it does encourage local , boots on the ground work from the parties, picking up thousands of votes coming 2nd or 3rd across the UK might give you millions of votes, but unless you win over the local ward, it means nothing.

That's why the Greens got half the number of votes but the same number of seats as Reform, they laser targeted their seats, Reform went for number of votes to get headlines, rather than seats.

I think Starmer knew perfectly well that to win a good majority in Parliament you don't need a huge share of the vote, you need a large number of seats. I think they campaigned on that basis.

Yes, but there was a referendum already on it, and people said no. And I believe NF is against second referendums so what can he do 🤔

Why maintain 650 MPs? Germany has fewer representatives in the Bundestag, despite a much bigger population, as does France which has about the same population. There is nothing sacrosanct about the total number so that could be reformed. And a modernised House of Commons with enough seating space would be useful too!

Jesus christ, what does it matter if Labour are sitting in number 10 with a stonking majority ? Get over it.

I don't think that's true, they came second in many constituencies and had over 4 million votes. They had no voter information, no voter base to draw from. What I did see at two polling stations the Lib Dems had people sat by the door asking for your polling card number. They got more votes than the Lib Dems. Anyone that voted for them, has baffled me, As give it a couple of weeks and they will roll out the CAZ charge to all non electric vehicles. It has been running in Bath for a couple of years and no evidence that it's lowered pollution in Bath. I think this is proof that FPTP is undemocratic. I'm wishing Labour well but I do think this way of calculating votes and seats is unfair on Reform and the Green Party! We all need to push for PR. That way it is fair for everyone, everyone's vote should be of equal importance!

It is all such a bunch of phoney baloney from bottom to top anyway.
Most of these MPs are career politicians with no real life experience. The ones that advocate for the redistribution of wealth blah blah blah are multi millionaires or will be when they quit office and write a book.
They are all, without fail, essentially conservative and they do not practise what they preach.
We’re heading really quickly towards a communist state; you won’t own anything in 20 years time because it will all be far too bloody expensive. Good luck if you continue to live in Britain!!!

Fuck all, as the Remainers ( myself included ) would smell blood for a second Brexit vote.