Lib Dems doing well - but do we really want a change in electoral system?

kennyboy66_2

LizEstelle wrote: »

Ok, fine.

I take it you don't mind voting for anonymous party lists, then, and giving up the link with a constituency MP whom you can vote out if you want.

Just as long as you do realise the implications of what is proposed.

None of which of course would occur is Single Transferable Vote was the method for voting (which is what Lib Dems propose).


You would still vote for a candidate (then name your 2nd, 3rd preference).
They would still represent your constituency (or multi constituency district)
You could vote them out next time.

Maybe not perfect but better than what we have now.

Alan_Cross

kennyboy66 wrote: »

None of which of course would occur is Single Transferable Vote was the method for voting (which is what Lib Dems propose).


You would still vote for a candidate (then name your 2nd, 3rd preference).
They would still represent your constituency (or multi constituency district)
You could vote them out next time.

Maybe not perfect but better than what we have now.

Get real and get informed.

The Lib Dems want STV, yes, but for 'multi-member constituencies'. Bang goes the constituency link' with a single MP... and bang goes accountability.

PR will be the first thing Clegg would ditch if he saw a remote chance of the Lib Dems gaining an outright majority under the present system. Just like the others, he is a self-interested politician and this has become glaringly obvious in the last few days with his arrogant dictats.

Sir_Humphrey

Alan_Cross wrote: »

The Lib Dems want STV, yes, but for 'multi-member constituencies'. Bang goes the constituency link' with a single MP... and bang goes accountability.

That actually strikes me as a strength; if one MP is lazy/useless, you just go to another one. Impossible under the current system.

PR will be the first thing Clegg would ditch if he saw a remote chance of the Lib Dems gaining an outright majority under the present system.

Probably true, but that is not going to happen if the current polls are correct.

carolt

I don't think there is anything inherently 'liberal' about PR.

It is just, as others have said, that it suits their interests as currently decades of gerrymandering the boundaries mean that the Lib Dems are unlikely to win under FPTP.

If they thought they might win, under the current system, I'm sure all their 'principles' about electoral reform would just melt away...

twadge_face

We desperately need a change in electoral system. The low turnouts (and getting worse) of the last few years/decades indicate the increasing disenfranchisement on the electorate. This is wholly unhealthy.

Why vote if you know you won't or can't be represented?

Viva la revolution!

nickmason

http://www.epolitix.com/latestnews/article-detail/newsarticle/prime-minister-clegg-faces-wipeout-at-2019-election/?no_cache=1

an interesting prediction of life after FPTP...

dealsearcher

Jonbvn wrote: »

I agree. On Sky this morning, the latest polls show labour well down in % of votes (3rd place), but still managing to win the most seats.

For me this is the biggest problem with the present system. To come third in the popular vote and yet win the largest number of seats is clearly a considerable distortion of democracy.