UKIP have an MP

ICBM

The odd thing is that I could actually see the rise of UKIP benefitting the Lib Dems a bit as well - there are probably fewer Lib Dem voters who will move to UKIP than Labour ones, and reducing the Labour vote could help the Lib Dems hang onto a few more seats in marginals. Genuinely left-of-centre voters have few other places left to go except the Greens either.

For all the apparent failures of the current coalition I'd still rather see another one - of almost any mix of parties - than back to the one-party largest-minority-rule system we usually get.

frankus

18 years of mixed coalitions would be better than 18 years of Tories then 12 years of Labour

But it will be Lib Dems again I bet..

ICBM

frankus said:

18 years of mixed coalitions would be better than 18 years of Tories then 12 years of Labour

Exactly. Coalitions involve compromise and will almost certainly have been voted in by a majority of the electorate.

One-party "majority" government is a form of elected dictatorship voted in by the largest minority, usually around a third of the electorate. It's no wonder people lose interest in voting.

VimFuego

I'm happy to see another coalition government, just not too sure I want any of the 3 main parties being in it.

holnrew

I'd say barring IDS and May, this government has been alright given the circumstances. 

Jalapeno

IDS talks a lot, hasn't delivered very much at all.  Much the same as Vince Cable (in terms of effectiveness)

May and Graying are my hate figures.

Emp_Fab

UnclePsychosis said:

At some point people have to realise that you have to vote for what you want, not what you don't want. British politics would be so much better if people stopped tactical voting and started actually engaging with parties who genuinely represent their hopes and beliefs.

Choosing who to vote for because "I don't want the Tories" is ultimately completely self defeating. You're never going to be happy.

Politics can be different. Just look at Scotland - the big three are running scared and no UKIP in sight.

I've lost count of the number of people who've told me "I would vote Green but it's just a waste". Maybe if you all actually vote for who you really want then they'd actually have a chance?

Not with the stupid 'first past the post' biased system we have.  The only way people's votes, and opinions, will ever actually be truly reflected fairly in government is with proper Proportional Representation.  The UK public had the chance to get a foot in that door back in 2011 when the first ever referendum on changing the electoral system was held - and yes, the 'Alternate Vote' system offered was far from being full Proportional Representation - but - it was a step towards it, and would have resulted in a far greater chance of eventually getting full P.R.   But what happened ? - two thirds of the public voted against it and in favour of keeping the current biased system that unfairly favours the big two parties.  Stupid fuckers.  They believed the hype and propaganda spouted by the main parties and their tabloid cronies that keeping the current system would somehow benefit them and democracy - just as a large percentage vote how their particular tabloid rag instructs them to - because they are too thick and/or lazy to look at the policies and create their own political opinions.

I've long held that if you are unable to name three major policies of each of the parties contesting, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.  The country is run by the same old Oxbridge crowd, year in, year out, who keep getting elected with a flawed system that purports to offer democracy when the votes and choices of huge numbers of people are simply ignored.  The chances of another referendum on changing this corrupt system is now about as likely as me being chosen as the next King of Sweden.

holnrew

Jalapeno said:

IDS talks a lot, hasn't delivered very much at all.  Much the same as Vince Cable (in terms of effectiveness)

May and Graying are my hate figures.

I forgot about Cable, I had a lot of respect for him before. He's lucky to have held on to his position. And Grayling, how did I forget about him? And then there's Jeremy Cu.. I mean Hunt, and Pob himself, Michael Gove.

Evilmags

Gove did an excellent job. Shame Cameron lacked the balls to back him. UK education has fallen several rungs on the international rankings ladders and needed a radical overhaul. Taking schools out of political control makes sense. If teachers had any common sense they would stop behaving like a trade and start acting like a profession, and adress the failings of the system.

guitarfishbay

Emp_Fab said:

UnclePsychosis said:

At some point people have to realise that you have to vote for what you want, not what you don't want. British politics would be so much better if people stopped tactical voting and started actually engaging with parties who genuinely represent their hopes and beliefs.

Choosing who to vote for because "I don't want the Tories" is ultimately completely self defeating. You're never going to be happy.

Politics can be different. Just look at Scotland - the big three are running scared and no UKIP in sight.

I've lost count of the number of people who've told me "I would vote Green but it's just a waste". Maybe if you all actually vote for who you really want then they'd actually have a chance?

Not with the stupid 'first past the post' biased system we have.  The only way people's votes, and opinions, will ever actually be truly reflected fairly in government is with proper Proportional Representation.  The UK public had the chance to get a foot in that door back in 2011 when the first ever referendum on changing the electoral system was held - and yes, the 'Alternate Vote' system offered was far from being full Proportional Representation - but - it was a step towards it, and would have resulted in a far greater chance of eventually getting full P.R.   But what happened ? - two thirds of the public voted against it and in favour of keeping the current biased system that unfairly favours the big two parties.  Stupid fuckers.  They believed the hype and propaganda spouted by the main parties and their tabloid cronies that keeping the current system would somehow benefit them and democracy - just as a large percentage vote how their particular tabloid rag instructs them to - because they are too thick and/or lazy to look at the policies and create their own political opinions.

I've long held that if you are unable to name three major policies of each of the parties contesting, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.  The country is run by the same old Oxbridge crowd, year in, year out, who keep getting elected with a flawed system that purports to offer democracy when the votes and choices of huge numbers of people are simply ignored.  The chances of another referendum on changing this corrupt system is now about as likely as me being chosen as the next King of Sweden.

I agree that AV was a missed opportunity, and I did perceive a lack of understanding being a key part of why it failed.  I knew a number of people unable to fully explain the system to me when I asked why they were against it.  Hardly a representative sample, but I got the feeling that it was fairly common that people didn't understand it fully, so would be more likely to be swayed by propaganda slogans.  I don't actually remember a lot of explanations of the systems being broadcasted.  I just remember the party broadcasts arguing for or against, and the posters with stuff on them like 'this soldier needs a new bullet proof vest, not a new voting system.'  

I actually do like AV and would keep it for MPs.  This in theory means local areas are represented by who the people on balance represents them best.  I would like to see an elected house of Lords, chosen by PR, so that there is a house that represents the wishes of the nation as a whole.  That would be an ideal split of representation and voting systems IMO - but nothing will ever be perfect.

Phil_aka_Pip

The AV system was never a credible alternative to FPTP. It was only offered so as to keep FPTP.

guitarfishbay

Phil_aka_Pip said:

The AV system was never a credible alternative to FPTP. It was only offered so as to keep FPTP.

Can you explain why AV isn't credible?  And why FPTP is in relation?

Fretwired

We're heading for a presidential system .. the press are gearing up for a straight fight between Cameron and Miliband and even in Clacton people were moaning about Cameron and saying how much they liked Farage. The days of vote for your local MP are coming to an end IMHO. The are people where I live who'd love a chance to vote for Ukip - at the moment they can't as Ukip can't afford to put up a candidate.

frankus

The AV mechanism put forward by the tories wasn't a mechanism for proportional representation anyone thought was useful - so it was the option of vote in system noone wants or keep what we've got.

A bit like this:

Okay, any one of you big noses doesn't want to get crucified, put yer 'and up now... no? good...

IanSavage

ICBM said:

The odd thing is that I could actually see the rise of UKIP benefitting the Lib Dems a bit as well - there are probably fewer Lib Dem voters who will move to UKIP than Labour ones, and reducing the Labour vote could help the Lib Dems hang onto a few more seats in marginals. Genuinely left-of-centre voters have few other places left to go except the Greens either.

That's the quandary I'm in; there's no way on Earth I could bring myself to vote Labour (spent the first part of my working life under a Labour government, as well as being part of the first generation to pay the university tuition fees that they pushed through) and the Tories are pretty much the antithesis of everything I believe in politically...but I don't know whether I could throw my hat in with Clegg's lot again as that would be pretty certain to be a wasted vote this time. Might HAVE to be Green, in spite of some pretty dubious and unscientific backgrounds and policies...

ICBM

Fretwired said:

We're heading for a presidential system .. the press are gearing up for a straight fight between Cameron and Miliband and even in Clacton people were moaning about Cameron and saying how much they liked Farage. The days of vote for your local MP are coming to an end IMHO. The are people where I live who'd love a chance to vote for Ukip - at the moment they can't as Ukip can't afford to put up a candidate.

That's always been the case at General Elections. Most people don't vote for the MP, they vote for the party they want as a government, based on national policies and who they want as PM. It's rare that an MP - almost always a long-serving one - can have such a track record of working for their community that they can command a personal vote big enough to overturn that. Personal vote and protest vote counts for more at By Elections, and I think both UKIP and everyone else should be wary of reading too much into Carswell's result.

I do think UKIP may get a few more seats at the GE, but look how long it took the Lib Dems to move from consistently doing well at By Elections to almost fluking getting just enough to tip them over the threshold needed to win a lot of seats at the GE. UKIP aren't there yet.

Phil_aka_Pip

guitarfishbay said:

Phil_aka_Pip said:

The AV system was never a credible alternative to FPTP. It was only offered so as to keep FPTP.

Can you explain why AV isn't credible?  And why FPTP is in relation?

AV isn't true PR. FPTP isn't credible either, but there was no advantage in going from FPTP to AV. It would just cost a lot of money and leave us no better off. The Tories knew that which was why they offered it, as well of course that they benefit from FPTP in a way they wouldn't, from PR). I (and may be others) would have voted for PR, but declined to vote for AV. I abstained, actually, by writing "WRONG BLOODY QUESTION" on my ballot sheet.

Why do I keep trying to type TFTP instead of FPTP??

Evilmags

PR is hardly a panacea either. It requires party lists and removes a lot of local accountability. If people wanted to improve democracy then more accountability is required, not less.

ICBM

There are schemes which can do both though - you still do need a party list because otherwise you wouldn't know who to transfer the votes to - and obviously that's the point of having 'parties' rather than a collection of independents - but you can have forms of PR where every MP is a local representative and yet the total vote distribution is fairly accurately reflective of the national picture. I don't really like the non-representative party list MSP system we have in Scotland, in fact... but it's still better than FPTP.

Given the ease and power of modern data analysis it's ridiculous to rely on an electoral system that was the best that could be achieved in the pre-industrial age.

Jalapeno

Damn !  He's right )