Author Topic: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)  (Read 1952 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9875
  • Gender: Male
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #35 on: June 03, 2017, 10:13:25 PM »
To get a temperature of the room here, I wonder how Americans (or at least those in this thread) would feel about a system similar to what France has.

Nationwide popular vote.
First round, candidate from all parties run. People vote.
The top two candidates move on.
Second round, just those two candidates, no one else, winner of the nationwide vote wins.

Like any system, there would be pros and cons. I'm interested to hear what folks here think of that kind of system.

Strongly disagree with any system that distills down to "majority rule".   There's got to be SOME failsafe, especially in a country like ours that is 325 million people over six time zones, and 4 million square miles.

Offline ariich

  • sexin' you later
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
  • Gender: Male
  • Fun! Fun! Fun! Fun!
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #36 on: June 04, 2017, 02:37:00 AM »
To get a temperature of the room here, I wonder how Americans (or at least those in this thread) would feel about a system similar to what France has.

Nationwide popular vote.
First round, candidate from all parties run. People vote.
The top two candidates move on.
Second round, just those two candidates, no one else, winner of the nationwide vote wins.

Like any system, there would be pros and cons. I'm interested to hear what folks here think of that kind of system.

Strongly disagree with any system that distills down to "majority rule".   There's got to be SOME failsafe, especially in a country like ours that is 325 million people over six time zones, and 4 million square miles.
That's just the French presidential vote, they also elect representatives separately.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3273
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #37 on: June 04, 2017, 03:49:06 PM »
The electoral college would be better if the states and the voters were represented more fairly/accurately.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Nekov

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8257
  • Gender: Male
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #38 on: June 05, 2017, 07:03:08 AM »

I partially agree with your view here. People shouldn't presuppose what the result will be because as you said there are some states that have been both red and blue in the past but the reality is that if 49% of the people vote republican and the other 51% vote democrat, that 49% counts for exactly 0 when it comes to that particular election because all the electoral college votes will go to the Dems. Now, that 49% means that there's a lot of people within that state that prefer red and the republicans know that for the next election they can work a little harder to reach the 50% mark so yes, those votes are a good indicator but they still don't affect the overall result of that specific election which is why people think, me included, that the system is faulty.

But don't confuse the elections:  that's ONLY for President, and there is only one President, so how do you parse "49% of the vote" to one office?    Senators and Representatives are elected in a straight "majority wins" ballot in their district.   I see what you're saying in one sense; if there are ten districts, and one party wins all ten by a 51%/49% margin, then even with 49% of the vote that party will have no say, but that's not the case on a national level, and the answer there is "up your game for next time".

But that's exactly how it works on a national level. If a state gets 50.1% of the votes for one party, all the electoral college votes go for that party and that's the part that people don't like. I get that within the state's vote you get your Senator or Representative to win with that but electoral college votes should be distributed based on the % of voters for the nationwide election.
When Ginobili gets hot, I get hot in my pants. 

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16173
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #39 on: June 05, 2017, 10:22:18 AM »
The electoral college would be better if the states and the voters were represented more fairly/accurately.

How often does this get updated to reflect current state populations?  I'm not sure how to make it more fair, but I would think there have to be ways to make it more accurate.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4424
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #40 on: June 05, 2017, 11:41:41 AM »
A degressively proportional system such as the electoral college makes absolutely no sense when there is a single winner, as all you do in that case is enable tyranny of the minority rather than tyranny of the majority. Degressive proportionality should be saved for an elected body with multiple members such that it acts as a moderating influence rather than an effective veto of majority opinion (which is why the european parliament operates the way it does).

In addition, the electoral college is terrible as it:

a) theoretically allows a president to win with only 22% of the popular vote, and therefore does not guarantee that a president is elected by the popular vote, or anywhere near a popular majority.
b) allows a president to be elected using electoral votes from only 12 of the most populous states, therefore does not guarentee that the president is elected with majority STATE support either, and certainly does not guarantee that the less populated rural states have a say. This point will only get worse as the population becomes more concentrated in cities.
c) legally allows 538 un-elected representatives to veto the result and choose someone else entirely.

This is not a good system in a modern society.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2017, 11:50:36 AM by XJDenton »

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3273
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #41 on: June 05, 2017, 02:24:45 PM »
The electoral college would be better if the states and the voters were represented more fairly/accurately.

How often does this get updated to reflect current state populations?  I'm not sure how to make it more fair, but I would think there have to be ways to make it more accurate.

It isn't done by population. It never has been, nor ever will be, proportional by population. That's the problem
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16173
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #42 on: June 05, 2017, 02:42:52 PM »
The electoral college would be better if the states and the voters were represented more fairly/accurately.

How often does this get updated to reflect current state populations?  I'm not sure how to make it more fair, but I would think there have to be ways to make it more accurate.

It isn't done by population. It never has been, nor ever will be, proportional by population. That's the problem

I may need a history lesson, but I thought that was how each state got it's # of electoral votes, the # of senators/representatives for that state where as your # of representatives is proportional by population.  So not directly tied, but it is tied to it.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3273
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #43 on: June 05, 2017, 02:47:30 PM »
The electoral college would be better if the states and the voters were represented more fairly/accurately.

How often does this get updated to reflect current state populations?  I'm not sure how to make it more fair, but I would think there have to be ways to make it more accurate.

It isn't done by population. It never has been, nor ever will be, proportional by population. That's the problem

I may need a history lesson, but I thought that was how each state got it's # of electoral votes, the # of senators/representatives for that state where as your # of representatives is proportional by population.  So not directly tied, but it is tied to it.

And therein lies the problem.  Each state getting the same for senators throws the whole thing out of whack
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9875
  • Gender: Male
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #44 on: June 05, 2017, 07:05:53 PM »
The electoral college would be better if the states and the voters were represented more fairly/accurately.

How often does this get updated to reflect current state populations?  I'm not sure how to make it more fair, but I would think there have to be ways to make it more accurate.

It's updated with the census.  Each state gets the same number of electoral votes as they have Congressional delegates (i.e. Representatives - the number of which are proportional to population - and Senators - two for every state).

Every one is entitled to their opinion, but the reality is, the potential downsides of the electoral college are the equivalent of a hole in one - all the stars have to align for that outcome to occur, and as such they rarely happen.  ("My guy" not getting elected is not a "downside").   The potential downsides of a popular, majority-rules vote are the equivalent of a shot into the rough.  Doesn't happen every hole, perhaps not even every other hole, but will invariably happen at least once per round. 

This was anathema to the Founding Fathers, and is one of the things that is actually more relevant today than then.     

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3273
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #45 on: June 05, 2017, 08:00:49 PM »
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the reality is, even if one thinks the EC is necessary, it is currently broken in some fundamental ways.  One major way being the weight of a vote.  Also, it might be a tad bit better for the conversation if one discusses the actual upsides or downsides, instead of golf shots.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2017, 04:20:02 AM by eric42434224 »
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #46 on: June 06, 2017, 10:39:14 AM »
A couple of interesting takeaways from playing games with the electoral system. If the states allocated their EVs proportionally, as I've always advocated, Hillary still loses, and it doesn't matter what system is used to allocate them. She comes closest (losing by 2 votes) if they're allocated by state. She loses a lot in Cali and NY, for example, but gains plenty in Texas and the mid-West. However, in 2012 there are a couple of proportional systems where Romney beats out Obama. If they're allocated by congressional district he actually eeks out a narrow victory. This second system doesn't actually work, as it effectively uses a party's skill at gerrymandering work its way to the white house.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16173
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #47 on: June 06, 2017, 11:12:20 AM »
Why is it that some states are proportional while almost all are not?  As in, why isn't the system consistent?  Honest question.  I think making all states EV proportional seems like a good idea, maybe someone can say why it is not in practice?

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #48 on: June 06, 2017, 12:03:04 PM »
Why is it that some states are proportional while almost all are not?  As in, why isn't the system consistent?  Honest question.  I think making all states EV proportional seems like a good idea, maybe someone can say why it is not in practice?
The same reason we can't do away with gerrymandering. If I were to craft a computer algorithm that perfectly divided a state into districts based on population and natural borders everybody would say "wow, that's awesome. Let's do it." Shortly thereafter somebody would plug in the numbers and show that one party would lose some seats and then half the population would pronounce it the death of democracy. Grabby's not the only one that cares more about results than process. Divvying up the EVs would do the same thing. You think California or Texas could vote to move to a proportional system? I guarantee you there are plenty of republicans in Cali and democrats in Texas that think it'd be a super idea. They, of course, have counterparts who'll play the role of constitutional scholar to explain why we mustn't ever do such a foolish thing.

Don't go looking for fairness among people who view the outcomes as life and death.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline yeshaberto

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8961
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody Get Me A Doctor! - VH
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #49 on: June 07, 2017, 08:02:47 AM »
Earlier in this thread I had issued a final warning to Eric and after consideration I have rescinded due to a misunderstanding of the intent/meaning.

The DTF mods have a desire for P/R to be a unique place that discussion from multiple angles can take place while maintaining civility.  You all do a great job of helping to make that happen (as monumental as it is).

Please continue to keep it up!

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3273
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #50 on: June 07, 2017, 01:01:18 PM »
 :tup
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #51 on: June 08, 2017, 11:41:18 AM »
A quick question for the local Brits. Are the people voting for MP's today? Parties? It comes across as an election between Corbyn and May, but of course it's not.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline ariich

  • sexin' you later
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
  • Gender: Male
  • Fun! Fun! Fun! Fun!
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #52 on: June 08, 2017, 01:35:06 PM »
A quick question for the local Brits. Are the people voting for MP's today? Parties? It comes across as an election between Corbyn and May, but of course it's not.
It's not, technically, but that's how the majority of people approach it. Some old-fashioned types vote genuinely for their preferred local candidate, but the vast majority now (especially in this age of social media) vote based on the national party and/or party leader.

Interestingly, twice as many people are saying they intend to vote tactically this time compared with 2015. Certainly a lot of UKIP supporters are voting Conservative because of brexit, and UKIP has even gone as far as to not field candidates in a whole load of seats to help the Tories win. Then to some extent there's a big movement of anti-Tory/UKIP tactical voting as well, with people voting for the party with the best chance of beating the Tories in their constituency even if they would prefer a different one. Impossible to say what effect it will have, to be honest.

All of this makes it so clear that we need a new electoral system. 20% of voters are planning to vote for a party they don't actually want. It's ludicrous and makes a mockery of democracy.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #53 on: June 08, 2017, 01:44:47 PM »
How does Corbyn get to be the presumptive candidate for MP should his party win? Do you always know in advance who you're voting for? I was of the impression that the MP isn't necessarily the ranking member of the party that gains the majority.

Honestly, it sounds me me a great deal like our system if you just replace the EC with our representatives. We'd vote for our congressman based on who he supports as the president. For us that system wouldn't work, but I don't know if gerrymandering is a problem over there.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 537
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #54 on: June 08, 2017, 01:45:21 PM »
A quick question for the local Brits. Are the people voting for MP's today? Parties? It comes across as an election between Corbyn and May, but of course it's not.

There are 650 so-called 'constituencies' (basically the political unit of division for geographical regions; my former constituency before I left the country is called 'Heywood and Middleton' - my home town is Middleton, a small town in Manchester - and has an electorate of about 80,000. It was, is and always will be a very safe Labour seat) and each constituency has an MP.

Today Brits vote for their MP. MPs almost always belong to a party (on very rare occasions they are independent), the main ones being Labour and Conservative, but we also have the almost obsolete Liberal Democrats, the emerging UKIP, the Green party, and so on. Whichever candidate has the largest number of votes is elected as their constituency's MP. At the end of the night when all 650 results are gathered, whichever party has an overall majority of elected MPs (i.e more than 325 of 650 seats) can form a majority government. If no party has an overall majority, a coalition gets formed, as happened with Cameron's first election victory, when he formed a bizarre coalition with the Lib Dems and promptly set about banishing them to the wilderness.

So the quick answer to your question is that Brits are technically voting for MPs, but effectively for parties. Every voter today will know which party he or she intends to vote for, but I doubt many of them, before they see the ballot paper, will know who is actually standing for the party, despite all the bumf that gets pushed through their doors in the run up to the election.

Having said all this, today is basically a coronation march for Theresa May. I can't see any other outcome but a huge win for her. UKIP for risky strategic reasons have decided not to put forward candidates in most right-leaning seats.

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 537
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #55 on: June 08, 2017, 01:52:01 PM »
How does Corbyn get to be the presumptive candidate for MP should his party win?

Did you mean to say PM (Prime Minister) here? If so, he (Corbyn) was nominated and elected by the party membership to lead the party. If you did mean to ask how someone becomes an MP, he or she is nominated by 10 parliamentary electors of their constituency. There are all kinds of rules and regulations surrounding how that happens, but that's the gist of it.

Offline ariich

  • sexin' you later
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
  • Gender: Male
  • Fun! Fun! Fun! Fun!
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #56 on: June 08, 2017, 01:57:27 PM »
How does Corbyn get to be the presumptive candidate for MP should his party win?

Did you mean to say PM (Prime Minister) here? If so, he (Corbyn) was nominated and elected by the party membership to lead the party. If you did mean to ask how someone becomes an MP, he or she is nominated by 10 parliamentary electors of their constituency. There are all kinds of rules and regulations surrounding how that happens, but that's the gist of it.
This.

Each party elects its own leader, and the leader of the party that is able to form a government is the Prime Minister. Sometimes the incumbent Prime Minister will step down as party leader, but this does not trigger an election because technically we all voted for our local MP, so the governing party gets to elect its own new leader in whatever way it deems fit. That's how May become PM last year when Cameron stepped down, and it's how Gordon Brown did it in 2007 when Blair stepped down.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #57 on: June 08, 2017, 01:58:29 PM »
Having said all this, today is basically a coronation march for Theresa May. I can't see any other outcome but a huge win for her. UKIP for risky strategic reasons have decided not to put forward candidates in most right-leaning seats.
I thought the rationale for the snap election was to shore up here side. Seems to me that it being much closer than expected does just the opposite. Is she expected to gain or lose seats in her party's bloc? Seem the latter would undermine her as opposed to shoring up her support.

And yes, I did mean PM in my next post.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline ariich

  • sexin' you later
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
  • Gender: Male
  • Fun! Fun! Fun! Fun!
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #58 on: June 08, 2017, 02:02:32 PM »
Having said all this, today is basically a coronation march for Theresa May. I can't see any other outcome but a huge win for her. UKIP for risky strategic reasons have decided not to put forward candidates in most right-leaning seats.
I thought the rationale for the snap election was to shore up here side. Seems to me that it being much closer than expected does just the opposite. Is she expected to gain or lose seats in her party's bloc? Seem the latter would undermine her as opposed to shoring up her support.

And yes, I did mean PM in my next post.
That was why she called it, yes. She and the Tories were ridiculously far ahead in opinion polls at the time. She was the only party leader to have a net positive opinion among survey respondents, while Corbyn's was rock bottom. And voting intention polls had the Tories almost double Labour's share.

It's kinda hilarious how much she's ballsed it all up. Because of her popularity, the Tory campaign has basically been just her. Even branded the campaign as "Theresa May's team" at the start, and made a big deal about her being the "strong and stable" leader we need etc. But when it turned out she's actually quite crap, the whole thing broke down. :lol

She's still very likely to win, and there's a decent chance it will be with an increased majority of MPs. But it's not the landslide destruction of the Labour party that she would have hoped for two months ago.

EDIT 1: And to be honest, Corbyn is crap as well, and most of the good Labour MPs are fairly sidelined these days. So it's all pretty damn depressing whatever happens. The best result would actually be for everything to go tits up and nobody to win a majority or be able to form a government. It would be chaos, but it would force everyone to seriously take stock.

EDIT 2: Oh and in terms of what's likely to happen, the "likely to win" comment above is only my own thoughts, but opinion polls have been varying hugely this time around. In 2015 all the polls were similar but they were all wrong, so each polling organisation has been trying different ways to change their methodologies, producing very different results. A couple show it quite close suggesting we could end up with a hung parliament (see EDIT 1) and others put the Tories a long way ahead. And of course the most important thing is how votes translate into seats. If Labour further expand their share in safe Labour seats, that's completely useless.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2017, 02:12:42 PM by ariich »

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 537
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #59 on: June 08, 2017, 02:40:01 PM »
Having said all this, today is basically a coronation march for Theresa May. I can't see any other outcome but a huge win for her. UKIP for risky strategic reasons have decided not to put forward candidates in most right-leaning seats.
I thought the rationale for the snap election was to shore up her side. Seems to me that it being much closer than expected does just the opposite. Is she expected to gain or lose seats in her party's bloc? Seem the latter would undermine her as opposed to shoring up her support.


There are 3 connected reasons why she called a snap election, the main (stated) one being to have no distractions while she navigates the very rough course through Brexit which lies ahead. You'll know from my record over at the other place that I'm a fan of benign dictatorships and prefer to live in one, and while I'm not convinced May is the politician to make Brexit somehow work (neither am I unconvinced; I don't know her well enough), it is going to take someone with extraordinary personal power by Britain's standards to have a chance. All petty in-fighting and self-destructive slanging matches are going to have to take a back seat for the next couple of years while everyone focuses on taking on Juncker and his gang. The 2nd reason is that she currently lacks an electoral mandate, having not actually been elected PM by anyone (a fact that Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister of Scotland and apparent Anglophobe, never misses a chance to point out). Thirdly and as you said, she and pretty much everyone thought the time was right to cement control for the Conservatives, Labour being almost completely impotent right now. I don't think the race is as close as some are now suggesting, this always happens in Britain just before an election, the BBC in particular starts pushing the story that it's closer than anyone thought in order to get people glued to their through-the-night coverage. We'll see in a few hours, but I'm fairly sure the Tories will gain even more seats.

Offline ariich

  • sexin' you later
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
  • Gender: Male
  • Fun! Fun! Fun! Fun!
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #60 on: June 08, 2017, 03:10:18 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #61 on: June 08, 2017, 03:24:10 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!
Am I correct that the SNP would be more inclined to side with Labor than the Tories when forming a coalition? Based on the table I'm seeing that would be a pretty big deal.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 537
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #62 on: June 08, 2017, 03:25:48 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!

Heh, shows how on the pulse my finger is when it comes to modern British politics. Big surprise if this ends up being true, I had no idea May was so unpopular over there. I say 'so unpopular' because although she'll still win, her rival has the charisma of a corpse and I really thought he'd be blown away. Strange to think now what might have happened if UKIP had actually fielded candidates, maybe they'd have taken enough votes away from the Tories to give Labour the win.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #63 on: June 08, 2017, 03:34:38 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!

Heh, shows how on the pulse my finger is when it comes to modern British politics. Big surprise if this ends up being true, I had no idea May was so unpopular over there. I say 'so unpopular' because although she'll still win, her rival has the charisma of a corpse and I really thought he'd be blown away. Strange to think now what might have happened if UKIP had actually fielded candidates, maybe they'd have taken enough votes away from the Tories to give Labour the win.
Does Labor need to win?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 537
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #64 on: June 08, 2017, 03:54:27 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!

Heh, shows how on the pulse my finger is when it comes to modern British politics. Big surprise if this ends up being true, I had no idea May was so unpopular over there. I say 'so unpopular' because although she'll still win, her rival has the charisma of a corpse and I really thought he'd be blown away. Strange to think now what might have happened if UKIP had actually fielded candidates, maybe they'd have taken enough votes away from the Tories to give Labour the win.
Does Labor need to win?

Not for me, no, they'd be utterly hopeless. Corbyn is a man of principle and integrity but he's not a leader and in my opinion he doesn't understand the times (this same criticism I level at almost every left-wing politician with whom I'm familiar). He can't see (or at least articulate) a vision of the role left-wing thinking needs to play in the society we now live in. No, despite being a card-carrying communist, I was actually hoping for a huge Conservative win today, because I think that is the only chance of Britain not getting shafted by Juncker (not just him of course, but he's my nemesis on the EU scene).

Offline RuRoRul

  • Posts: 1441
  • Gender: Male
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #65 on: June 08, 2017, 04:09:22 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!
Am I correct that the SNP would be more inclined to side with Labor than the Tories when forming a coalition? Based on the table I'm seeing that would be a pretty big deal.
Yes, SNP's aim would be a coalition with Labour, and I'd go as far as to say they could virtually never form a coalition with the Tories. A couple of years ago to attract voters away from Labour after the independence referendum, SNP would attack Scottish Labour politicians as "Red Tories". Tories are pariahs to most SNP voters.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19073
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #66 on: June 08, 2017, 04:36:18 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!

Heh, shows how on the pulse my finger is when it comes to modern British politics. Big surprise if this ends up being true, I had no idea May was so unpopular over there. I say 'so unpopular' because although she'll still win, her rival has the charisma of a corpse and I really thought he'd be blown away. Strange to think now what might have happened if UKIP had actually fielded candidates, maybe they'd have taken enough votes away from the Tories to give Labour the win.
Does Labor need to win?

Not for me, no, they'd be utterly hopeless. Corbyn is a man of principle and integrity but he's not a leader and in my opinion he doesn't understand the times (this same criticism I level at almost every left-wing politician with whom I'm familiar). He can't see (or at least articulate) a vision of the role left-wing thinking needs to play in the society we now live in. No, despite being a card-carrying communist, I was actually hoping for a huge Conservative win today, because I think that is the only chance of Britain not getting shafted by Juncker (not just him of course, but he's my nemesis on the EU scene).
What I was actually getting at was does Labor need to win to become the ruling party. I was of the impression that they could lose overall but still come out ahead (seemingly easily) once a ruling coalition was formed. If they've got the social democrats and the SNP then it would seem to be their game.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline RuRoRul

  • Posts: 1441
  • Gender: Male
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #67 on: June 08, 2017, 04:47:37 PM »
Exit poll suggests no overall majority and a hung parliament. Astonishing if accurate!

Heh, shows how on the pulse my finger is when it comes to modern British politics. Big surprise if this ends up being true, I had no idea May was so unpopular over there. I say 'so unpopular' because although she'll still win, her rival has the charisma of a corpse and I really thought he'd be blown away. Strange to think now what might have happened if UKIP had actually fielded candidates, maybe they'd have taken enough votes away from the Tories to give Labour the win.
Does Labor need to win?

Not for me, no, they'd be utterly hopeless. Corbyn is a man of principle and integrity but he's not a leader and in my opinion he doesn't understand the times (this same criticism I level at almost every left-wing politician with whom I'm familiar). He can't see (or at least articulate) a vision of the role left-wing thinking needs to play in the society we now live in. No, despite being a card-carrying communist, I was actually hoping for a huge Conservative win today, because I think that is the only chance of Britain not getting shafted by Juncker (not just him of course, but he's my nemesis on the EU scene).
What I was actually getting at was does Labor need to win to become the ruling party. I was of the impression that they could lose overall but still come out ahead (seemingly easily) once a ruling coalition was formed. If they've got the social democrats and the SNP then it would seem to be their game.
Yes, if no party has an overall majority then Labour could end up the ruling party (either as a coalition, or as a "minority government" which basically means they get the extra votes from other party's MPs needed to form the government but without making an official coalition). And that's true even if the Conservatives have more seats than Labour. So yeah if Labour + Liberal Democrats + SNP + Plaid Cymru (of Wales) make up the majority, then Labour could end up in charge even though Tories have more MPs than Labour.

Offline ariich

  • sexin' you later
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 19804
  • Gender: Male
  • Fun! Fun! Fun! Fun!
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #68 on: June 08, 2017, 06:25:02 PM »
A coalition seems pretty impossible if the exit polls are accurate. Neither party would be able to get enough support from the smaller parties.

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 362
  • Gender: Male
Re: Electoral systems (FPTP vs PR vs whatever America has)
« Reply #69 on: June 08, 2017, 08:17:35 PM »
re: British election I found this to be very entertaining and informative

https://youtu.be/dVbC0jASJYA