|
Post by vinny on Jul 10, 2024 8:48:24 GMT
Single transferable vote (sometimes called AV) would be my choice I voted for AV as well, but I lost, accept that I lost and the next referendum on the voting system needs to be something else. D'Hondt PR would be my choice. After all, most of us have some experience of that system already. Yeah yeah, before anyone says it, I know it was used in EU elections.......
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Jul 10, 2024 8:51:49 GMT
An MP doesnt run a constituency. He represents it. The council runs it. There is no reason on earth why a constituency cannot be represented by more than one person. It even has its advantages. If the Tories gain the most votes and get one of the MPs, if you don't think a Tory will be interested in your problem you will have another alternative to approach. Competition as to who can best serve local constituents might also be a good thing. You could have a situation where the Tory MP looks out for the interests of landlords and home owners, whilst the other one - a Green for example - champions tenants. There is far more positive than negative in this, though such a change would be scary for those afraid of change I admit. And of course no system is ever going to be perfect, but the lack of perfection in any alternatives should not be used as an excuse for sticking to the indefensible system we have now. I understand what your saying Could you imagine the Anger of Farage if the muslim voters got more pm in the HOC. Don't think the Clown realise what hes wishing for If the majority of the public were Muslim, and via PR got a Muslim PM into Downing Street, that's democracy, whether I like it or not.
I don't like Sadiq Khan, but he is elected and the ballot box must be respected.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on Jul 10, 2024 9:35:39 GMT
Single transferable vote (sometimes called AV) would be my choice I voted for AV as well, but I lost, accept that I lost and the next referendum on the voting system needs to be something else. D'Hondt PR would be my choice. After all, most of us have some experience of that system already. Yeah yeah, before anyone says it, I know it was used in EU elections....... One of the defining features of democracies is they can change their minds. You of all people should know that (think 1975 referendum)
|
|
borgr0
Observer
+++
Posts: 1,188
|
Post by borgr0 on Jul 10, 2024 13:11:16 GMT
But there was a 41 year gap between the two referenda. It's debatable whether a referendum in 10 years is acceptable, I think 10 years is probably long enough to let people have another go at it, but Jo Swinson et al's idea that you could overturn democracy - in 2019 - was absolutely abominable.
By the way, even the EU didn't agree with what Jo Swinson wanted to do, many Europhiles from France and elsewhere told me they 100% disagreed with what she wanted.
There's giving people some time to mull it over and see how things turn out and changing your mind after generations, then there's trying to overturn democracy. They are two different things.
|
|
borgr0
Observer
+++
Posts: 1,188
|
Post by borgr0 on Jul 10, 2024 13:17:09 GMT
IMHO, PR isn't going to fix anything. We're going to see Reform UK and parties like the SNP get a lot of seats and other parties are going to suffer if we adopt it, Labour aren't going to adopt it anyway; not sure that makes anything better.
IMHO, there's got to be a better way than any form of PR or FPTP
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Jul 10, 2024 14:01:08 GMT
I voted for AV as well, but I lost, accept that I lost and the next referendum on the voting system needs to be something else. D'Hondt PR would be my choice. After all, most of us have some experience of that system already. Yeah yeah, before anyone says it, I know it was used in EU elections....... One of the defining features of democracies is they can change their minds. You of all people should know that (think 1975 referendum) And there should be more votes. Once the EU has changed treaties, and hopefully reformed, we can hold another and decide whether to rejoin or stay out.
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 10, 2024 14:57:34 GMT
But there was a 41 year gap between the two referenda. It's debatable whether a referendum in 10 years is acceptable, I think 10 years is probably long enough to let people have another go at it, but Jo Swinson et al's idea that you could overturn democracy - in 2019 - was absolutely abominable. By the way, even the EU didn't agree with what Jo Swinson wanted to do, many Europhiles from France and elsewhere told me they 100% disagreed with what she wanted. There's giving people some time to mull it over and see how things turn out and changing your mind after generations, then there's trying to overturn democracy. They are two different things. Leaving aside the rather tedious rehashing of historical Brexit discussions, worth just establishing the principle of how democracy works. A democratic vote held today reflects the expressed will of the public today. If that is a different outcome to a similar vote held last year, that’s fine. It’s the very essence of democracy. We have established a process of how often elections should be held. We haven’t established a similar process for referendums.
|
|
borgr0
Observer
+++
Posts: 1,188
|
Post by borgr0 on Jul 10, 2024 17:22:16 GMT
Yeah, no, with referenda there has to be sufficient will for a 2nd referendum and the people spoke in regards to Jo Swinson. They said she was a delusional old bat
Sorry if that disappoints
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on Jul 10, 2024 22:14:30 GMT
In that election more people voted for parties supporting a second referendum than parties advocating 'Get Brexit Done'
|
|
borgr0
Observer
+++
Posts: 1,188
|
Post by borgr0 on Jul 12, 2024 6:27:23 GMT
And only 34% of people voted for Starmer this time round, should he be denied election?
|
|