Swimming with the tide....

[Deleted member 28]

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.

So 'your ' party is highly unlikely to get into power then?

 

[winjim]

So 'your ' party is highly unlikely to get into power then?

The fact that they have been in government more recently than the Labour party notwithstanding, that is one of the reasons I vote for them.

 

[Deleted member 49]

The fact that they have been in government more recently than the Labour party notwithstanding, that is one of the reasons I vote for them.

That should be enough to put you off them for good.

 

[winjim]

That should be enough to put you off them for good.

Well I had a little go at voting Labour after that but it didn't exactly work out, did it?

 

[Rusty Nails]

So 'your ' party is highly unlikely to get into power then?

You really do not understand the principles behind PR do you.

It is more than being about wanting "your party" (as if it was "your football team") to get into power, it is about wanting to get a government that more closely reflects the political wishes of the electorate. This may lead to coalitions where no one party gets into power, rather than one which got less than 50% of the electorate's vote, but that works fine for many other countries.

I support Labour more often than not, but they have been as bad as the Tories in ensuring that power keeps on alternating between the existing duopoly.

 

[icowden]

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

Yep. The difference is that the Conservatives have now made it even more unfair in their favour, and Labour are belatedly realising that they are up the creek without a paddle. They have lost support in Scotland and Wales and aren't going to get it back again quickly.

 

[BoldonLad]

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.

Doesn't that rather depend on the form of PR in operation?

 

[jowwy]

Yep. The difference is that the Conservatives have now made it even more unfair in their favour, and Labour are belatedly realising that they are up the creek without a paddle. They have lost support in Scotland and Wales and aren't going to get it back again quickly.

Labour lost support in wales…..you serious???

 

[Deleted member 28]

Labour lost support in wales…..you serious???

Well, I'm sure flabbie will have a Gaurdian link.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Labour lost support in wales…..you serious???

This is partly true, as far as the UK government is concerned where, at the 2019 GE, Labour lost six seats as part of the Red Wall swing.

However Labour increased its share of the vote and seats in the Senedd in 2021, whereas the Tories increased their support in the Senedd, but at the expense of Plaid and LD.

 

[winjim]

Doesn't that rather depend on the form of PR in operation?

Yes but TBH despite my stated opinions on methodological transparency I CBA with a huge set of unwieldy caveats. Whatever, the wider point stands.

 

[Salty seadog]

With reputable surveys all the technical information about the sample including confidence levels in their accuracy should be available. Nothing in life, other than death, is guaranteed, but the information provided can be valuable.

I did a lot of work with the ONS about 12 years ago and was impressed by the effort and seriousness they put into the accuracy of their surveys but cannot vouch for the work of other polling organisations.

ONS, NHS, we are the envy of the world at some things.

 

[winjim]

Data here.

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk...have-looked-with-proportional-representation/

 

[BoldonLad]

Yes but TBH despite my stated opinions on methodological transparency I CBA with a huge set of unwieldy caveats. Whatever, the wider point stands.

OK OK, personally, I am not against PR, but, I don't understand how you can give "predictions" of what the last election would have produced, if PR had been in place, without, also specifying the form of PR you are "assuming" was in place.

 

[Salty seadog]

It depends what you mean by accurate!
Thing is, any given survey is only a snapshot. Some major event could happen the day after the survey was taken (like the Queen dying) and the results could change overnight.
Polls, like other research, are a starting point, a marker an indicator. More often that not other surveys are carried-out that might start to show similar trends. Get enough surveys and you can start to do meta-analyses which improves confidence in the data and sometimes discover new connections.

I don't profess to be a stats master, but know several who are, and it's a bloody complex business!

However, the Govt. has just been pulled-up over Moggs Imperial measures yougov. poll, which even a rank amateur like me can spot is heavily biased, so scepticism is well placed....

Why, why, why. It's gone, its messy and complicated and most who understand its nonsense will be gone soon.

Metric is unbelievably simple.
Tory dogma.

And such a skewed survey.

In other news ballot boxes on the referendum for areas of the Ukraine to rejoin Russia are going house to house accompanied by Russian guns to skew that vote too.