Needs to be absolutely balanced decision making, process , boundaries, campaigning rules, spending limits, the lot. It’s absolute nonsense that the beneficiary makes he rules and/or owns the sign off.
Absolutely. You're correct. Tactical voting and a spread was always going to happen. Doesn't change the fact, out of all those options, less people choose not to desert the labour party.
He's a bit like Di Canio. He's great at the tough talk that so many seem to like, but talking **** about people often doesn't inspire them to want to work with you productively so you get nowhere. But he has it "sussed".
Aye and a protest vote may change if there’s a chance the hare brained simplistic ideas may become a genuine reality and getting challenged effectively by other parties and the media. As the top two went for each other they got a free pass with some awful policies.
I wouldn't call them that mate tbf. This country is riddled with child poverty, food banks and ghost towns. People see immigrants, from countries they don't like coming here and helping themselves to housing, benefits and the NHS. I totally understand why people are cheesed off and our government need to find solutions to these problems. Not just ONE solution that Sunak was pursuing by threatening migrants with being sent to free accomodation, with benefits, in a safe country. Boris Johnson wanted us to go back to the days of Empire as Little Islanders with pints and yards and pounds&ounces. That's all very well if you're sitting in the Carlton Club and worlds away from worrying about your next leccy bill. Fascists follow a well trodden path of highlighting excess, pretending they're not part of it and highlighting some minority to take all the blame. Farage has an easy target who he vilifies and blames for all of our problems. One of the main promises, in his manifesto, is that no one will be investigated for hate crimes please log in to view this image
Smaller % of the vote than under Corbyn? Sure I read that somewhere. Hard to claim a Labour win for me, it is much more about and absolute fall off from conservative and snp. That is the system though. The question is whether we are going to keep accepting it.
Means absolutely feck all. It's about seats and winning them. There are more parties in a better place now than 2019 hence the vote spread. Fact is more people stuck with labour relative than going elsewhere. Tories had their lot move to the right. Labour didn't.
Ha'way man, you accepted it when the Tories won. We were all told we had to accept the Brexit vote, because it was democracy, despite there being 2% in it ... ... now you want us to believe Labour didn't win with an absolute landslide. Those straws you're grasping are looking a bit thin tbh.
More than a bit thin. I seen lots of broadcasting experts saying tactical voting was essential before the election. Hence some tactical voting. Now the same broadcasters are saying labour had less vote and therefore it's less or a win. Some people are literally falling hook line and sinker for it too.
That’s the point though. It’s complete nonsense. If people just thought it through it’s idiotic manipulative and irrational. Being downtrodden by financial inequality and voting for a beneficiary of privilege who says ‘blame others’ doesn’t take much working out
Looks like the ridiculous Rwanda scheme has essentially been scrapped and Starmer is appointing ministers based on their expertise...what a difference a day makes.
It's quite ironic that Hitler was a hero of Germany's impoverished despite being of Austrian heritage ... ... and Farage in a hero of some English despite having German heritage.
You are right of course. Seats are everything. My underlying point, and I have been making it on here for a while, is I am not convinced the current model of vote % to seat % is the right one. Other models are available and I wonder if we see any moderate level of discussion on alternatives. I would like to have the debate again, not because labour have a big majority, but because the bare numbers evidently do not equate to the new balance of power. Irrespective of where the power lies.
How on earth do you know what I accepted or didnt when the tories won? And why would I grasp at straws? I have been clear on my stance of not wanting another tory term. And comparing the brexit vote to an election isnt a comparison at all. That was a yes/no vote, and a referendum. Entirely different. I am interested in considering whether some form of electoral change is worth considering, that is all. I will leave it at that.
I have to say, I consider one of the major benefits of FPTP to be that it acts as a safety net against anything too outrageous. Not sure if that's by accident or design. To be elected, you really have to be quite centrist, which is what I consider to be what's required. In 2019, Labour strayed too far to the left, and got hammered. Since then, the Tories have strayed to far to the right and got hammered. Under FPTP, populist upstarts like Reform are kept at bay. We'd be in a much worse position if seats had been directly linked to percentage of the national vote. Reform as the third largest party? Doesn't sound great.
You were saying Labour won seats because people weren't voting for the Tory candidate, fair enough. Perhaps the same applies in all of the seats where people decided not to vote Reform. Just having a bit of fun mate, of course you can't directly compare a referendum to a General Election ... ... except that it's a reflection of how people are feeling . I don't think there'll ever be a change in how MPs are elected, it only seems to be discussed around election time.
I think that is a fair point. I voted Lib Dem and our seat numbers far exceeded vote share. But, it really isnt about me and my vote tbh. How do all those who genuinely want the green party get their voice heard in the current FPTP system? I couldnt be further from the Reform party views, but 14% of folk voted for their message. On a personal level I do not want them in parliament. An alternative view though would be to keep your enemies close. Perhaps if they had more of a voice, folk would see how unreasonable they are and they will die a quicker death as a party than than they may now do banging this drum of representation. One of my big gripes about our current political system is the lack of balance in the debate. It is setup to be a 2 party debate. Leader v opposition leader etc etc. We see it all the time, in every element of the political discourse. This time it will be parties with 40% of the vote not having much of a voice. Turnout this election is the lowest in over 29 years. After the last years of Tory rule you would think it would be one of the highest. I think there may well be a correlation between turnout and feeling your vote wont count. This election is by far the worst for the gap between vote share and seats. It is more than double what it was in 2019. It appears to be the worst in history. Worth a consideration in my opinion as to whether there is a better way.
Other countries have changed. Maybe there system is no better though. I am 100% not bitter about the election result at all. I just dont see the system as having a lot of balance. My lad went on and on about voting being a pointless excercise. Then at the last minute he had a change of heart and went and voted for the party policies he was in tune with. Last night he described it as a wasted 20 minutes and he wont bother again. Something is wrong mate, in my opinion anyway.
Cooper as home secretary is a good one im my opinion. I like her style. Benn in at Northern Ireland too, I do like Benn. I think Reeves is a very smart lady indeed but I hope she doesnt fall too far into the trap of private investment that she is talking about. We are still battling the PIF deals. If she does it then it needs to be better than that old model.
