Swimming with the tide....

[Deleted member 28]

You have to ask yourselves where are all these people when it comes to voting time?

Perhaps they'll all be at the poles voting for a more Liberal, 'woke' government next time round to back up these findings?

 

[oldwheels]

True, if they (the surveys) are in fact accurate. How would we know?

Surveys can be slanted by the wording of questions so I always take them with pinch of salt. It is a very long time since I had anything to do with such things so the details escape me. The sample surveyed can also can also be chosen to give the required result.

 

[winjim]

You have to ask yourselves where are all these people when it comes to voting time?

Perhaps they'll all be at the poles voting for a more Liberal, 'woke' government next time round to back up these findings?

They were at the Poles last time, that's part of the problem.

Anyway... under PR the 2019 election results get you Tories on 288, combined Lab/Lib on 286, Brexit party on 10, Greens on 12, SNP on 28, Plaid Cymru on 4 plus a few assorted others and the NI parties. I'd call that a progressive majority.

Our current electoral system doesn't properly represent the will of the people. And with proposed boundary reforms and ID requirements for voting, the Tories intend to queer the pitch even more.

Our democracy isn't good enough.

 

[Deleted member 28]

They were at the Poles last time, that's part of the problem.

Anyway... under PR the 2019 election results get you Tories on 288, combined Lab/Lib on 286, Brexit party on 10, Greens on 12, SNP on 28, Plaid Cymru on 4 plus a few assorted others and the NI parties. I'd call that a progressive majority.

Our current electoral system doesn't properly represent the will of the people. And with proposed boundary reforms and ID requirements for voting, the Tories intend to queer the pitch even more.

Our democracy isn't good enough.

Why didn't Labour change the format last time they were in power if it's unfair?

 

[winjim]

Why didn't Labour change the format last time they were in power if it's unfair?

You mean why didn't the ruling party change the system which kept them in government for over a decade? Beats me. But the Tories are changing it. In their favour.

 

[Deleted member 28]

You mean why didn't the ruling party change the system which kept them in government for over a decade? Beats me. But the Tories are changing it. In their favour.

So it's fair if it's working for you and only unfair when it's not?

It's going to PR next time, or you talking about ID cards?

 

[Deleted member 28]

Our democracy isn't good enough.

But it was when Labour were "in for over a decade ".

 

[Deleted member 28]

Tories on 288, combined Lab/Lib on 286,

So it's a bit like Liverpool saying "we're never gonna beat City but if we get Utd to give us a hand we'll have 'em" and play 22 vs 11.

 

[winjim]

But it was when Labour were "in for over a decade ".

What? For the whole time Labour were in government I voted for parties which supported electoral reform / PR.

 

[winjim]

So it's a bit like Liverpool saying "we're never gonna beat City but if we get Utd to give us a hand we'll have 'em" and play 22 vs 11.

What? Parliament would more accurately represent the opinions of the people as described in the results of the survey which is the subject of the thread.

 

[Deleted member 28]

What? For the whole time Labour were in government I voted for parties which supported electoral reform / PR.

What do you mean "what"?

If 'our democracy ' isn't good why didn't Labour change it?

Because it was good enough when they were winning, but not now.

 

[cookiemonster]

What do you mean "what"?

If 'our democracy ' isn't good why didn't Labour change it?

Because it was good enough when they were winning, but not now.

I agree with this.

Ok, the big parties will lose some seats but, more importantly, democracy is served. Everyone's vote counts and we don't have the stupid situation where a party can win an 80 seat majority with just 43% of the vote.

The big parties won't change the FPTP for obvious reasons.

 

[winjim]

What do you mean "what"?

If 'our democracy ' isn't good why didn't Labour change it?

Because it was good enough when they were winning, but not now.

What are you on about? I didn't think our democratic system was good enough then and I don't think it's good enough now.

In case you hadn't noticed I'm not a Labour supporter and have only voted for them once or twice when the party I do usually vote for did something which I considered profoundly undemocratic, thereby losing my vote until they changed leaders.

 

[winjim]

I agree with this.

Ok, the big parties will lose some seats but, more importantly, democracy is served. Everyone's vote counts and we don't have the stupid situation where a party can win an 80 seat majority with just 43% of the vote.

The big parties won't change the FPTP for obvious reasons.

That's fair enough but @shep appears to be under the impression that I'm somehow writing on behalf of the Labour party which I most certainly am not.

I even got a hard time for trying to tell my friends that even though I didn't like the result I considered the 2015 Tory election victory to be legitimate since FPTP had been effectively endorsed in a recent referendum. So I'm not really approaching this from the POV of wanting to benefit any particular political party, I'd simply like our democracy to be a bit better and more representative of the population.

 

[Hitchington]

'Swimming with the tide' would not be advised in the raw shitt and piss filled seas and beaches of Tory Britain.