Snap General Election called

[Stom]

I actually like the system here in Hungary. It’s just the gerrymandering that kills it.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Is it worse than have a minority at the extreme end of 1 party holding that power? (see ERG in Cameron's government or DUP in May's; or that 1 senator in the US who's name I can't remember, but was the most right-wing Democrat in a 50:49 split).

IMO PR typically seems to bring a more collaborative parliamentary system, rather than combative; obviously far from completely so, especially in immature PR systems and coalitions.
I fail to see a way in which cooperation is worse than combat.

Besides, such warnings come across (to me) as a bit of "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the achievable"
There is no perfect system, but whilst we have political parties, FPTP is (about?) the least representative form of representative democracy.





Earlier this year (or was it last year?) there was a suggestion here that I thought was great, an adaptation of the Kiwi system.
If I've got this right:

You have X seats for a region, of which half are constituency MPs that are elected with FPtP as per normal. The other half are then filled up from the best performing losers in such a way that total X is fully proportional (and not just flown in by the party's preference).
A party only gets into the PR portion if they ran candidates in every constituency within the region (so SNP do for Scotland, PC do for Wales, Count Binface doesn't for wherever he stands).
Sensible to add transferable vote in there as well, which would boost the representational value of the PR portion.

To take a fictional region in England, and let's call it... Central.
Central has 60 seats in Westminster, split into 30 constituencies.
Those constituencies get their seats filled by FPTP, winner takes all.

Which may end up as (figures taken from yesterday's Electoral Calculus porediction) Con 3, Lab 24, Lib 3, Reform 0, Green 0
But with a vote split of Con 23.3%, Lab 44.7%, Lib 9.2%, Reform 11.8%, Green 5.8%, Other 5.2% (this "Other" really doesn't help the maths)

The losing candidates for each party in Central, are arranged in order of vote share locally
The 12 best performing, losing Conservatives candidates, get a PR seat for 25.0% regional representation
The 4 best performing, losing Labour candidates, get a PR seat for 46.7% regional representation
The 3 best performing, losing Lib Dem candidates, get a PR seat for 10.0% regional representation
The 7 best performing, losing Reform candidates, get a PR seat for 11.7% regional representation
The 4 best performing, losing Green candidates, get a PR seat for 6.7% regional representation

Each constituency gets the most popular local MP
Each region get represented proportionately, with the MP based on the vote share of each candidate.


Of course, if you're worried that a more accurate representation of voters being a bad thing, then you can always go for 30 FPtP, and 30 straight PR - so 3+7, 24+14, 3+3, 0+4, 0+2 - still a LOT better than the current system that would give 6, 48, 6, 0, 0 under FPtP




Personally, of courses, I'm in favour of devolved power (about the same as Scotland's) to the 9 English regions anyway (and bringing Wales and NI up to the same power-level), with elections as above, and then PR representation from each regional parliament to Westminster for national issues. But that's very much me.

Yep, that was me back in March (seems like longer ago . . . )

My preferred system (not in operation anywhere) would be the Kiwi system except that the 'top-up' MPs are chosen from the party's losing candidates in other seats, and selected in descending order of vote share in their constituencies. That way, you get a reasonable amount of legitimacy for all the MPs and you avoid unpalatable Mandelson types, or mates of the party leaders getting put at the top of the list.

[Puja]

I actually like the system here in Hungary. It’s just the gerrymandering that kills it.

What does Hungary do?

Puja

[Which Tyler]

Yep, that was me back in March (seems like longer ago . . . )

Gods, was it only 3 months ago?

Age is weird. That seems like about this time last year; but Kurt Cobain died about a decade ago (in reality, closer in time to the Beatle's debut album than today)

[Eugene Wrayburn]

agreed though not sure about your proportions there (20 from each on NI, Scotland, Wales, N England S England).

Sounds bloody good to me.

unless you are serious....

I am! The point is that it's just a revising chamber and Parliament shouldn't be doing anything that can't get genuine countryside support. To my mind restraint on that show is basically the only way of keeping the union. So as now finance bills would sail through but other stuff would need actual agreement

[Banquo]

Sounds bloody good to me.

unless you are serious....

I am! The point is that it's just a revising chamber and Parliament shouldn't be doing anything that can't get genuine countryside support. To my mind restraint on that show is basically the only way of keeping the union. So as now finance bills would sail through but other stuff would need actual agreement

I meant the proportions

[Eugene Wrayburn]

unless you are serious....

I am! The point is that it's just a revising chamber and Parliament shouldn't be doing anything that can't get genuine countryside support. To my mind restraint on that show is basically the only way of keeping the union. So as now finance bills would sail through but other stuff would need actual agreement

I meant the proportions

I know. Hence the talk of countrywide support (despite the typo) and the union. It's a great deal less disproportionate than the US Senate.

[Banquo]

I am! The point is that it's just a revising chamber and Parliament shouldn't be doing anything that can't get genuine countryside support. To my mind restraint on that show is basically the only way of keeping the union. So as now finance bills would sail through but other stuff would need actual agreement

I meant the proportions

It's a great deal less disproportionate than the US Senate.

not sure how that is relevent tbh, its hardly a paragon of governance. But I get how skewing it might mean acceptance, otherwise the south of england would have c 40% or so of reps, and England 70% or so.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Yep, that was me back in March (seems like longer ago . . . )

Gods, was it only 3 months ago?

Age is weird. That seems like about this time last year; but Kurt Cobain died about a decade ago (in reality, closer in time to the Beatle's debut album than today)

Yeah, on a related point I am convinced that music hasn't changed since the 90s (not that it's bad just that it's basically the same). There is a danger that (with age ) I am missing the nuance that distinguishes post-2000 styles but I refuse to believe it.

[Banquo]

Yep, that was me back in March (seems like longer ago . . . )

Gods, was it only 3 months ago?

Age is weird. That seems like about this time last year; but Kurt Cobain died about a decade ago (in reality, closer in time to the Beatle's debut album than today)

David Bowie's theory on those lines was that time passing perception is in proportion to your age; when you are 4, one year is 25% of your age, when you are 40, one year is only 2.5% (obvs)

[Stom]

I actually like the system here in Hungary. It’s just the gerrymandering that kills it.

What does Hungary do?

Puja

It's a mixed member majority system with a closed list.

So you elect a local MP through FPTP and you also elect from a party list. It's like the Italian system. Certain minority groups have representative parties (such as Roma) and are guaranteed X percentage of representation. So if they fall short, they're topped up by taking proportionally away from the other parties in the list vote.

There are two issues.

1) Transylvanians were en masse given the right to vote by Fidesz, and get to vote in the list election (not the MP vote), and have been consistently bribed to vote for the government. They are, however, starting to turn away. Finally.
2) The voting boundaries have been ruthlessly gerrymandered, much like in the US. There are two towns next to us, one is around 45-50% Fidesz, the other is around 80% not Fidesz. They are grouped together, along with a random selection of small towns and villages that are 80% Fidesz, meaning that 80% non Fidesz town always gets a Fidesz MP.

The main criticism of the system from within is that it promotes disunity among opposition parties, as they cannot have a joint list in the closed list part.

But this is just because the opposition are appallingly bad politicians. And, as I think I've already said, they know this. Or at least the good ones know it.

But there's a new man in town, and his name is Mr. Hungarian literally. Peter Magyar. He might just win. Though he's far from a socialist, it's not really possible to be worse than Fidesz, so he has most people's vote.

[Stom]

Farage is running That'll surely eat into the Tories a bit more.

Problem is...in that seat he could bloody win.

[Zhivago]

Farage is running That'll surely eat into the Tories a bit more.

Problem is...in that seat he could bloody win.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it might accelerate the Tory implosion. But on the other, we should not take lightly the quasi-fascist movement gaining traction.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Farage is running That'll surely eat into the Tories a bit more.

Problem is...in that seat he could bloody win.

This should be fun.

(Although my head says it would be better if the cunt disappeared to the US for good).

[Son of Mathonwy]

Farage is running That'll surely eat into the Tories a bit more.

Problem is...in that seat he could bloody win.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it might accelerate the Tory implosion. But on the other, we should not take lightly the quasi-fascist movement gaining traction.

Exactly.

[Sandydragon]

Farage is running That'll surely eat into the Tories a bit more.

Problem is...in that seat he could bloody win.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it might accelerate the Tory implosion. But on the other, we should not take lightly the quasi-fascist movement gaining traction.

It will hurt Labour a
Bit, it will hurt the Tories a lot more. This is where I’m grateful for FPTP, because they will build up loads of steam and energy but probably not win that many seats.

This could get very very nasty for the Tories. I see Sunak got ahead of the announcement with a reminder that a vote for Darage means Starmer,
But that just sounded panicked. And Farage really wants to destroy the Tories.

[Puja]

Farage is running That'll surely eat into the Tories a bit more.

Problem is...in that seat he could bloody win.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it might accelerate the Tory implosion. But on the other, we should not take lightly the quasi-fascist movement gaining traction.

Exactly.

He'll win in Clacton (citation - I used to live there and it's chock-full of racists) and that gives both him and his party legitimacy. Genuinely worrying.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it might accelerate the Tory implosion. But on the other, we should not take lightly the quasi-fascist movement gaining traction.

Exactly.

He'll win in Clacton (citation - I used to live there and it's chock-full of racists) and that gives both him and his party legitimacy. Genuinely worrying.

Puja

They have won 15% of the vote previously and had MPs (albeit defections) so hard to argue they didn’t already have any legitimacy. And to be clear I detest UKIP/Reform.

The only positive in all this is that they peel some support from the scum of the BNP, the ‘quiet’ racists who just want immigrants to go home but wouldn’t dream of assaulting them. Not sure that’s worth the damage that party has done to this country of late.

On another note, I wonder if Farages decision was influenced by a certain guilty verdict? No point going to the US to be Trumps mate if he’s not going to get elected. I suspect Farage has made a decision over what’s best for Farage and he can be too busy with the UK election to be that closely associated with Trump.

[Puja]

On another note, I wonder if Farages decision was influenced by a certain guilty verdict? No point going to the US to be Trumps mate if he’s not going to get elected. I suspect Farage has made a decision over what’s best for Farage and he can be too busy with the UK election to be that closely associated with Trump.

I would've said it's more likely influenced by no-one in America having the slightest bit of time for him - I'd be surprised if Trump even remembers his name, let alone is desperate for his help. I imagine he'll probably rake in more from a raised UK profile as an MP, or even just as leader of the Reform Party, than he would for 2-3 appearances on Fox News.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

On another note, I wonder if Farages decision was influenced by a certain guilty verdict? No point going to the US to be Trumps mate if he’s not going to get elected. I suspect Farage has made a decision over what’s best for Farage and he can be too busy with the UK election to be that closely associated with Trump.

I would've said it's more likely influenced by no-one in America having the slightest bit of time for him - I'd be surprised if Trump even remembers his name, let alone is desperate for his help. I imagine he'll probably rake in more from a raised UK profile as an MP, or even just as leader of the Reform Party, than he would for 2-3 appearances on Fox News.

Puja

I expect Farage's decision was at least partly because the bribe he was angling for from Sunak wasn't forthcoming.

There is a perfect scenario where Reform split the Tory vote, letting in a bunch of LibDems and Labour MPs, destroying the Tories in parliament but yielding no MPs for Reform. But that's too neat. The real horror would be Farage in parliament, the Tories in disarray, merging with Reform, Farage taking leadership. Reality somewhere inbetween I guess.

[Puja]

On another note, I wonder if Farages decision was influenced by a certain guilty verdict? No point going to the US to be Trumps mate if he’s not going to get elected. I suspect Farage has made a decision over what’s best for Farage and he can be too busy with the UK election to be that closely associated with Trump.

I would've said it's more likely influenced by no-one in America having the slightest bit of time for him - I'd be surprised if Trump even remembers his name, let alone is desperate for his help. I imagine he'll probably rake in more from a raised UK profile as an MP, or even just as leader of the Reform Party, than he would for 2-3 appearances on Fox News.

Puja

I expect Farage's decision was at least partly because the bribe he was angling for from Sunak wasn't forthcoming.

There is a perfect scenario where Reform split the Tory vote, letting in a bunch of LibDems and Labour MPs, destroying the Tories in parliament but yielding no MPs for Reform. But that's too neat. The real horror would be Farage in parliament, the Tories in disarray, merging with Reform, Farage taking leadership. Reality somewhere inbetween I guess.

I mean, the perfect scenario would be him standing in North West Essex and splitting Badenoch's vote, but we don't always get what we want.

The Tories can't merge with Reform, because they are two completely different entities - the former is a political party that is beholden to its members and has rules, traditions and principles, whereas the latter is a company acting as a political vehicle, that is beholden to no-one but the rich men who own it. Reform terrify me - we may complain about the 1822 Club, the Tory Party Conference, and the Tory Membership's perverse decisions to elect Liz Truss as leader, but they at least do vote and have some form of accountability. As seen from today, all that's needed for Reform to change leader is for the owners to will it.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

I would've said it's more likely influenced by no-one in America having the slightest bit of time for him - I'd be surprised if Trump even remembers his name, let alone is desperate for his help. I imagine he'll probably rake in more from a raised UK profile as an MP, or even just as leader of the Reform Party, than he would for 2-3 appearances on Fox News.

Puja

I expect Farage's decision was at least partly because the bribe he was angling for from Sunak wasn't forthcoming.

There is a perfect scenario where Reform split the Tory vote, letting in a bunch of LibDems and Labour MPs, destroying the Tories in parliament but yielding no MPs for Reform. But that's too neat. The real horror would be Farage in parliament, the Tories in disarray, merging with Reform, Farage taking leadership. Reality somewhere inbetween I guess.

I mean, the perfect scenario would be him standing in North West Essex and splitting Badenoch's vote, but we don't always get what we want.

The Tories can't merge with Reform, because they are two completely different entities - the former is a political party that is beholden to its members and has rules, traditions and principles, whereas the latter is a company acting as a political vehicle, that is beholden to no-one but the rich men who own it. Reform terrify me - we may complain about the 1822 Club, the Tory Party Conference, and the Tory Membership's perverse decisions to elect Liz Truss as leader, but they at least do vote and have some form of accountability. As seen from today, all that's needed for Reform to change leader is for the owners to will it.

Puja

I get what you're saying, although I fear this merely makes a formal merger more difficult rather than impossible. And an informal one, where Farage (and/or Tice) gets the leadership or significant control within the Tory party is more possible. The best defence they have right now is that Farage would be a massive threat to the ambitions of any of the major Tory figures (dear god, I am genuinely considering Braverman to be a major figure here ), so they'd be mad to let him in.

But we saw in 2019 how opportunistic and short-termist the Tories were in selecting Johnson (who, as predicted, crashed and burned himself and the party). It could happen again if they saw Farage as their best hope for regaining power. And the Tory members would elect Farage as leader without a second thought.

It is scary. It would be good if the LibDems stood aside (or, more realistically, didn't try too hard) to give Labour a clear run in Clacton, while the right-wing vote is horrifically split. Labour were a distant second in 2019 but obviously will see a significant swing this time.

[Puja]

I expect Farage's decision was at least partly because the bribe he was angling for from Sunak wasn't forthcoming.

There is a perfect scenario where Reform split the Tory vote, letting in a bunch of LibDems and Labour MPs, destroying the Tories in parliament but yielding no MPs for Reform. But that's too neat. The real horror would be Farage in parliament, the Tories in disarray, merging with Reform, Farage taking leadership. Reality somewhere inbetween I guess.

I mean, the perfect scenario would be him standing in North West Essex and splitting Badenoch's vote, but we don't always get what we want.

The Tories can't merge with Reform, because they are two completely different entities - the former is a political party that is beholden to its members and has rules, traditions and principles, whereas the latter is a company acting as a political vehicle, that is beholden to no-one but the rich men who own it. Reform terrify me - we may complain about the 1822 Club, the Tory Party Conference, and the Tory Membership's perverse decisions to elect Liz Truss as leader, but they at least do vote and have some form of accountability. As seen from today, all that's needed for Reform to change leader is for the owners to will it.

Puja

I get what you're saying, although I fear this merely makes a formal merger more difficult rather than impossible. And an informal one, where Farage (and/or Tice) gets the leadership or significant control within the Tory party is more possible. The best defence they have right now is that Farage would be a massive threat to the ambitions of any of the major Tory figures (dear god, I am genuinely considering Braverman to be a major figure here ), so they'd be mad to let him in.

But we saw in 2019 how opportunistic and short-termist the Tories were in selecting Johnson (who, as predicted, crashed and burned himself and the party). It could happen again if they saw Farage as their best hope for regaining power. And the Tory members would elect Farage as leader without a second thought.

It is scary. It would be good if the LibDems stood aside (or, more realistically, didn't try too hard) to give Labour a clear run in Clacton, while the right-wing vote is horrifically split. Labour were a distant second in 2019 but obviously will see a significant swing this time.

I just looked up the MRP polls to see about the chances of a Labour win and got very depressed as it looked pretty bad for Labour unless there was a 50/50 split of votes (and it's the kind of seat where the Tory vote will peel straight over to Reform if given a star to vote for). However, I then read the small print and realised I was looking at the old seat and the boundaries have since changed to this, where Labour were already predicted to win 40.2% to 39.7% before Farage ever got involved! The seat has been extended inland to cover Great Bentley, Frating, and Little Oakley, all much more affluent, less deprived, and higher educated (not an insult - the coastline has some of the worst educational outcomes in the country) areas than the coastline. It's still a strong right constituency, but it's not the same demographic mix as that which elected UKIP in 2015. I don't think the Lib Dems would be trying very hard in that seat any which way; it's not their natural territory.

Hopefully Farage will peel more of the Conservative vote who despise the Tories but can't bring themselves to vote for Corbyn and Communism, than he will the people who were considering LAbour because they wanted to vote for change, and he'll end up humiliated for an 8th time.

Puja

[Stom]

I mean, the perfect scenario would be him standing in North West Essex and splitting Badenoch's vote, but we don't always get what we want.

The Tories can't merge with Reform, because they are two completely different entities - the former is a political party that is beholden to its members and has rules, traditions and principles, whereas the latter is a company acting as a political vehicle, that is beholden to no-one but the rich men who own it. Reform terrify me - we may complain about the 1822 Club, the Tory Party Conference, and the Tory Membership's perverse decisions to elect Liz Truss as leader, but they at least do vote and have some form of accountability. As seen from today, all that's needed for Reform to change leader is for the owners to will it.

Puja

I get what you're saying, although I fear this merely makes a formal merger more difficult rather than impossible. And an informal one, where Farage (and/or Tice) gets the leadership or significant control within the Tory party is more possible. The best defence they have right now is that Farage would be a massive threat to the ambitions of any of the major Tory figures (dear god, I am genuinely considering Braverman to be a major figure here ), so they'd be mad to let him in.

But we saw in 2019 how opportunistic and short-termist the Tories were in selecting Johnson (who, as predicted, crashed and burned himself and the party). It could happen again if they saw Farage as their best hope for regaining power. And the Tory members would elect Farage as leader without a second thought.

It is scary. It would be good if the LibDems stood aside (or, more realistically, didn't try too hard) to give Labour a clear run in Clacton, while the right-wing vote is horrifically split. Labour were a distant second in 2019 but obviously will see a significant swing this time.

I just looked up the MRP polls to see about the chances of a Labour win and got very depressed as it looked pretty bad for Labour unless there was a 50/50 split of votes (and it's the kind of seat where the Tory vote will peel straight over to Reform if given a start to vote for). However, I then read the small print and realised I was looking at the old seat and the boundaries have since changed to this, where Labour were already predicted to win 40.2% to 39.7% before Farage ever got involved! The seat has been extended inland to cover Great Bentley, Frating, and Little Oakley, all much more affluent, less deprived, and higher educated (not an insult - the coastline has some of the worst educational outcomes in the country) areas than the coastline. It's still a strong right constituency, but it's not the same demographic mix as that which elected UKIP in 2015. I don't think the Lib Dems would be trying very hard in that seat any which way; it's not their natural territory.

Hopefully Farage will peel more of the Conservative vote who despise the Tories but can't bring themselves to vote for Corbyn and Communism, than he will the people who were considering LAbour because they wanted to vote for change, and he'll end up humiliated for an 8th time.

Puja

Oh that is interesting. Ha.

Could be fun if Farage takes enough of the Tory vote that Labour win Clacton, lol. Those 60 year old racists will have fun shouting their mouths off then.

[Son of Mathonwy]

I mean, the perfect scenario would be him standing in North West Essex and splitting Badenoch's vote, but we don't always get what we want.

The Tories can't merge with Reform, because they are two completely different entities - the former is a political party that is beholden to its members and has rules, traditions and principles, whereas the latter is a company acting as a political vehicle, that is beholden to no-one but the rich men who own it. Reform terrify me - we may complain about the 1822 Club, the Tory Party Conference, and the Tory Membership's perverse decisions to elect Liz Truss as leader, but they at least do vote and have some form of accountability. As seen from today, all that's needed for Reform to change leader is for the owners to will it.

Puja

I get what you're saying, although I fear this merely makes a formal merger more difficult rather than impossible. And an informal one, where Farage (and/or Tice) gets the leadership or significant control within the Tory party is more possible. The best defence they have right now is that Farage would be a massive threat to the ambitions of any of the major Tory figures (dear god, I am genuinely considering Braverman to be a major figure here ), so they'd be mad to let him in.

But we saw in 2019 how opportunistic and short-termist the Tories were in selecting Johnson (who, as predicted, crashed and burned himself and the party). It could happen again if they saw Farage as their best hope for regaining power. And the Tory members would elect Farage as leader without a second thought.

It is scary. It would be good if the LibDems stood aside (or, more realistically, didn't try too hard) to give Labour a clear run in Clacton, while the right-wing vote is horrifically split. Labour were a distant second in 2019 but obviously will see a significant swing this time.

I just looked up the MRP polls to see about the chances of a Labour win and got very depressed as it looked pretty bad for Labour unless there was a 50/50 split of votes (and it's the kind of seat where the Tory vote will peel straight over to Reform if given a star to vote for). However, I then read the small print and realised I was looking at the old seat and the boundaries have since changed to this, where Labour were already predicted to win 40.2% to 39.7% before Farage ever got involved! The seat has been extended inland to cover Great Bentley, Frating, and Little Oakley, all much more affluent, less deprived, and higher educated (not an insult - the coastline has some of the worst educational outcomes in the country) areas than the coastline. It's still a strong right constituency, but it's not the same demographic mix as that which elected UKIP in 2015. I don't think the Lib Dems would be trying very hard in that seat any which way; it's not their natural territory.

Hopefully Farage will peel more of the Conservative vote who despise the Tories but can't bring themselves to vote for Corbyn and Communism, than he will the people who were considering LAbour because they wanted to vote for change, and he'll end up humiliated for an 8th time.

Puja

That sounds a lot more positive. Surprising that Farage would pick that seat, even, given he has the whole country to choose from. He could do Labour's job for them .