You must log in or register to comment.
This year’s general election, after all the votes counted, has a
- Sainte-Laguë index of 48.36, and a
- Gallagher index of 23.75.
This makes the (dis)proportionality worse than HUNGARY’s (my home) FPTP component (SLI = 36.96) – a component of the mixed system which allows our ruling party to get 2/3 supermajorities each time, every time, with sometimes less than 50% of the votes, and which ultimately transformed our country to an “electoral autocracy”
You guys need electoral reform desperately. And do it before someone cheats with the current rules deliberately.
(PS: I calculated the electoral indices using the python package
voting)First Past the Post, everybody:
That’s:
- Conservatives: 19.5% of seats from 22.9% of the vote
- Labour: 63.7% of seats from 35.2% of the vote
- LibDems: 10.5% of seats from 11.3% of the vote
- Reform: 0.6% of seats from 14.5% of the vote
- SNP: 1.2% of seats from 2.5% of the vote
- Others: 4% of seats from 13.6% of the vote
The two largest parties got less than 60% of the national vote but over 80% of seats. FPTP is preventing us from being what we are: a multi party democracy.
I think it’s a bad day to be criticising first past the post. Labour stole a bunch of seats from Farage with his kill-the-NHS policies, a turd who oughtn’t to be allowed to attend D-day celebrations, given that he stands against almost everything that we fought the war for. Not sorry one bit for that disproportionality.
Every day is a good day to criticise FPTP.
A proportional system would have been to Reform’s benefit, but it would also have been to the Green’s and SNP’s.
IRV would have actually been to Labour’s benefit in the two seats I randomly happened to notice. Though I’m sure there would also be some seats where it would’ve benefited the Tories.
But I think the most important thing is that belief in a better electoral system should not depend on which party world benefit. It should be about creating a more democratic outcome. And what we saw yesterday really highlighted how deeply undemocratic the UK is.
Could have had a Labour, LibDem, Green coalition with a helping of SNP with broader positive policies (actual policies, which are currently lacking from Labour) a strong mandate. Instead we have a Labour landslide on a thin voting base. Better than the last lot for sure, but this system is so in need of a reform.
“The conservatives and lib dems look pretty proportional to me. 10/10 voting system” /s
And the depressing thing is that it will never change because the only parties with the power to change it benefit from the current system.
You came so close in 2011. I wonder what could have happened if Clegg had stuck to his guns and insisted on a referendum on a proportional system, to remove the “progressive no” (to borrow a term from a recent Australian constitutional referendum) argument against the reform.
The Lib Dems got so excited about being granted a referendum that they forgot to take it seriously.
AV was a terrible system and arguably worse than FPTP. It’s a more complicated system for people to vote in, and would potentially lead to even more disproportionate results.
and arguably worse than FPTP
Sorry but no. Absolutely no. The only downside is the ability to use it as an excuse not to upgrade to a proportional system in the future.
More complicated? Yeah, I guess. But not enough to actually matter. Not unless you think British people are just exceptionally stupid compared to Australians.
More disproportionate results? Impossible. They’re both single-winner systems. The key difference is that FPTP allows a plurality to win while IRV requires a majority. It might create a situation where it seems less proportionate, but that’s only because you reduce strategic voting so people are voting their true beliefs, so candidates that weren’t going to win under either system end up getting more votes under IRV. But the ultimate result is that the candidate who wins in each electorate is the one who had the most support.
deleted by creator
The British were given the choice and voted against proportional representation. They deserve the duopoly and everything that flows from it e.g. terrible healthcare, the illegal war in Iraq, royals, pointless and expensive aircraft carriers. They chose to leave the only institution that is defending their basic freedoms. These bigoted Dunning Kruger morons cannot be told.
What an utterly moronic stance that stems totally from your complete lack of understanding of what was actually offered.
Proportional representation was never on the table, what was offered was single transferable vote, which would keep the first past the post system but add the option to transfer your vote to another candidate if your preferred candidate lost. There was never proportional representation stop with the false narrative.
Instant Runoff was on the table in the 2011 referendum. Very similar to STV, but generally STV is what’s referred to in a multi-winner situation. Australia uses STV in the Senate, as does the Irish Dáil. IRV is what Australia uses in the House of Representatives, and a few areas of the US, like Maine. STV actually is a proportional (or at least quasi-proportional) system, unlike IRV.
But you’re right that unfortunately proportional representation has never been on the table in the UK. I don’t agree with the guy’s more recent takes on comedy and “free speech”, but I have great respect for the fact that this is something John Cleese has been on about since 1987. And again in 1998. And most recently in 2018.
The reason a lot of people voted against it was that there was a concern that if it was implemented the government would consider themselves to have taken action and would just shut down any talk about proportional representation by arguing that we already had it. Even though we wouldn’t have.
The theory was that by not voting for the weak source option the idea of proportional representation could be floated at a later date, and to be honest I actually agree with the analysis.
Not an unreasonable concern, to be honest. In politics there is often a balance to be struck between “letting the perfect be the enemy of the good”, and “not allowing a weak compromise option that’s just not good enough to pass because it’s ever so slightly better than the status quo”.
We use IRV for our House of Representatives, which is by far the more politically significant chamber, and it sucks. Our most recent federal election saw just 4 Greens MPs elected after an absolute record performance for them (their previous best was 1). That’s 2.7% of seats from their over 12% of first-preference votes (not to mention votes for closely-aligned minor parties like Animal Justice Party). Labor (yes…we spell it the American way in this one specific context, for some reason) got 51.3% of seats from 32.6% of the first preference votes.
But on the other hand, it is better than FPTP. Enormously better. Those 4 Greens seats would probably be 0 with FPTP, because who would vote for them? They first got into Parliament thanks to receiving preferences, and many of the new seats they won in 2022 were dangerously tight. I know even as an ardent Greens supporter, I would never have voted for the Greens under FPTP, because I’d be terrified of increasing the chance that the conservative LNP won instead of Labor.
If I were voting in the UK in a referendum like the 2011 one, I don’t know how I would vote. Probably yes, but the threat of stalling any progress to an even better system is strong enough it’s hard to blame people who vote no on that grounds.
The British were given the choice and voted against proportional representation. They deserve the duopoly and everything that flows from that e.g. terrible healthcare, the illegal war in Iraq,
And time travelling powers apparently 🤣🤣😂.
🤡
What’s wrong with Pointless? It beats the shit out of most game shows.
Pointless is a fucking great premise for a game.
But whoever they poll to determine the points makes me sometimes feel utterly insane watching the show. When they don’t know obscure Australian towns as well as me, that’s one thing, and not very surprising. But when major Disney Renaissance films, or some other thing that to me is part of the most fundamental 21st century culture, scores in the low 20s, it makes it very hard to relate to the show.
If the polling was done by an audience more representative of the general population in terms of age, instead of clearly skewing very old, it would be greatly to the show’s benefit.
Let’s hope polling standards maintain their upwards trajectory.
And yet many countries with PR still have crap governments and bad policies. You’ll never have a perfect system since you’re still expected to choose one party, but there’s a large number of policies and issues to address, and the odds are that no party gets the mix correct for most voters. It’s a one-dimensional system to implement multidimensional politics. So quibbling over the particular metric to use to allocate seats along that single dimension is missing the larger problem. Something closer to direct democracy might be better, but that requires an engaged, disciplined and educated electorate.
It’s a Tory wipeout in Wales!
CON: 0 (-12)
Love to see it.
I’m watching the BBC program, currently just discussing the exit poll before any official results.
Exit poll shows conservatives losing 241 seats, Labour landslide predicted with 410 seats. Not a huge surprise, but a welcome start.
I did find it entertaining that the labour guest in the show is congratulating Kier Starmer and Co. On a job well done, when really this is almost entirely caused by Tory self destruction.
here is the entire exit poll for everyone interested btw:
Peter Mandelson? I think he had a point in that Starmer has changed the party from unelectable with Corbyn (which sadly, they were) to a more than realistic prospect for a sensible alternative to the Tories.
You’re right of course that the Conservatives have utterly fucked the pooch (not to mention the country) but Starmer has nonetheless made a massive change in making the party palatable to many, many more people (not that I personally agree with quite a lot of his policies and policy reversals)
That’s a fair take, and yes it was Mandelson.
Interestingly, Labour have less of the vote (proportionaly) than when Corbyn was at the helm.
I agree, and I do infinitely prefer Corbyn. I didn’t vote Labour this time. I think the nuance here is that Corbyn motivated Tory voters to vote against him, whereas Starmer was less threatening to them, so they didn’t worry so much about vote splitting or staying home
Ree Smog is out! I repeat, Ree Smog is out!
Yes, despite many leftists decrying Labour’s centreward shift, I think this is a good result. This result was helped by that shift in no small part.
Starmer is very well spoken and his morning after speech does well to inspire confidence.
Top hat wanker! Truss lost too, this is amazing.
Oh good, so now Truss can now piss off too the US and moan about the apparent conspiracy that was against her all she likes, and it won’t inconvenience her constituents anymore.
And of course no one in the US will really care, because will have no idea who the hell she is.
Is she that head of lettuce who killed the queen?
Yeah. She has convinced herself that her complete failure is a result of a grand conspiracy. This conspiracy requires some of the most uncharitable and profit driven people in the world, to be bleeding heart liberals, which is why no one believes it.
Apparently a bunch of venture capitalists, economists and fellow politicians decided that, rather than making vast sums of money under her “brilliant” scheme, it was instead better to crash the economy just despite her.
This is clearly a great result, but I think that given the popular vote, that it’s important to accept that this election was anti-tory, not pro-labour.
Labour have five years to make a substantial tangible change in people’s lives or we may very well find ourselves back where we left off or even worse.
Countdown to Smog reappearing as a Reform candidate?
I don’t want to see Reform get any seats really when it’s filled with people like this.
They’re just a live action version of the Daily Mail. They only believe immigrants and trans people are a problem because Farage and his crew tell them so. Otherwise I bet those groups of people have barely any impact on their daily lives whatsoever.
Just seen Count Binface arrive for the count, shit just got real.
Looks like Reform got a lot of votes despite not getting many seats. Those nasty cunts aren’t going to shut up about this for the next 4 years.
Not really a bad thing. Reform plus the Lib Dems attacking fptp. Means both right and right of centre. (Pretty much the only views available under fptp ). Will have strong options for voters to switch vote and split the fptp possibility of a win for them. This may end up the final option that forces PR of some form.
Honestly, as close as both sides are. It’s the first time both the government and the opposition has had parties truly risking a future split in the vote.
Jacob Rees Mogg suggesting Conservatives were demolished because they weren’t far right enough. Interviewer says “don’t you think maybe it’s because you let down the centre?” And Mogg is like “no way. Maggy Thatcher is based.”
😬
I mean, I hate him, but he’s right. Reform are basically the newest farage far right party, so the rabid nazis of britain aren’t satisfied with the bullshit the tories are serving up.
EDIT : they got fed up of still seeing ethnic minorities after brexit, and don’t want to vote for an ethnic minority for prime minister. It’s disgusting.
Except apart from the proud ex BNP the motives for voting Reform seem to come from a scared impotent scarcity helplessness. It’s a “all these immigrants taking my stuff and my opportunities and there isn’t enough to go round” - if they’re paid properly and the NHS works the far right is less appealing. 🤞
I hope you’re right
Historically, people turn to the far right when things are going terribly wrong. The conservatives ran the country into the ground and legitimised everything the far right stood for, then were upset that people started voting far right. I say it was unsurprising. Why not vote Reform if you’re a rabid racist and your usual party are about the same policywise but have a boring British Asian leader instead of a white laddish thug of a politician?
If things get significantly better for folks, there’s less motivation to vote in desperation.
But would he win more electorates by pandering to the further right, or by giving the middle a reason to be enthusiastic about them?
https://www.bbc.com/news/election/2024/uk/results
Conservative
total votes 6,814,650
Reform UK
total votes 4,102,109
share change +12.3
Liberal Democrat
total votes 3,499,969
share change +0.6
Cons lost their votes to the nazis more often than the Lib Dems.
I left britain years ago when brexit happened, that country is stupid, and I wish the people that still live there the best of luck.
I also would like to remind them that I wasted much air trying to convince them that voting LD wasn’t a waste of time, but for some reason, 4 million of them can be convinced to vote for a third party, but only if it’s racist enough, and not civil liberties oriented enough.
Starmer didn’t win this election, the tories lost it due to a split vote.
Labour
total votes 9,686,329
share 33.7%
share change +1.6
This doesn’t look like the extremely winning party that run an extremely successful campaign. It looks like a bunch of chancers that got lucky flipping seats due to split voter base of nazis.
I’m not even optimistic that center left starmer is going to do anything all that impressive to be honest. I hope I’m wrong, I think Biden is doing great and getting no credit. Best of luck to him and to Britain, I hope things get better in that country.
My favourite quote: ‘Rees-Mogg congratulated the Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer, on “what seems to be a historic victory”, adding, as his final thought, “from the ashes of disaster grow the roses of success. So thank you very much everybody, and good night.”’
I can only read this as him admitting publicly that he and the Tories are a complete disaster.
all the socdem use of rose as a symbol makes it only better
Reform didn’t gain many seats but came 3rd in total votes
Did the areas with a high Reform vote, have a higher vote turnout?
about 1/7th of the total, or about 1/5th of Labour, Tory, and LDs combined.
The entire C4 panel laughed at Nadine when she just couldn’t stop talking about Boris Johnson
This is as late as I can stand. I’ll check back in the morning for the final scores. If it was anything resembling a closer election I might have stayed up. I’m hoping the exit poll has over estimated the tories and reform, with a few extra opposition parties.
That’s how I’m feeling. I need my kip and some of the major heads I’d want to see fall won’t be toppling until much later.
Rise and shine.
Reform only on 4 instead of ~17 from the exit poll and the greens got 4 seats instead of 2! Happy days.
I would be a bit worried about proportional representation for parties like reform as they seem to have come second in a larger number of constituencies.
It blows my mind that Tory candidates get even a single vote. Who’s voting for them?!
And reform, its bloody terrifing seeing them get so much support
Yup. They’ve been coming second in most results so far. Not sure how much of it is a protest vote against the big two or people like their policies.
Only one opposed to the trend. So long while before we can be sure.
But if it continures. Lab holds having huge reform vote. But Tory loss them being 3rd. It would support most Tories, only voting reform when they know Tories won’t win. But hesitating when a reform win is possible. (edit: possible to prevent what they see as a more sane party)
Be interesting to see if that continues.
Starting the day and seeing Rees snob, grant schnapps and penny mordor are out.
Feels like a good start to the day
Oh and Liz snubbed
Happy to see the Tories get obliterated, but not feeling confident about the incoming Labour government. The fact that a bunch of Tories defected to them and they were endorsed by the Sun is a bad sign IMO.
After seeing the first few results come in, my main worry is how Starmer’s Labour will react to the rise of Reform. If Labour cannot visibly begin to turn things around, and they also fail to effectively counter the building populist undercurrent, we could be heading for some dark times.
We will have to see what exactly Starmer’s Labour will actually do once it has power.
Two Tories defected to them, and neither of them were standing for election this time, it was just a gesture against Sunak (although I do wish Labour had told them to fuck off).
And as for the S*n, they just put their weight behind whoever is going to win.
Labour and Starmer are far from perfect, but I think they will be far better, even if just from a competence and basic human decency standpoint.
And as for the S*n, they just put their weight behind whoever is going to win.
I was a bit surprised the S*n did switch to Labour. From what I’ve heard there still a grudge amongst Murdoch and his minions towards Starmer, due the prosecutions he pursued as DPP during the phone hacking scandal.
I wouldn’t read too much into the Sun endorsement. Murdoch hates to be wrong, and they would have come out in favour much earlier in the campaign if they were actually ideologically aligned.
