In todays news...

[Mr. Dazzle]

Funny, isn’t it. A few weeks ago the country voted (overwhelmingly) for this lot. It’s a bit Brexit-like, except that was 52%, I think.

TBF, you could have started that petition the day after the overwhelming labour victory and still found thousands of people who'd sign it. Millions of people didn't vote for labour

[mangocrazy]

I've posted this elsewhere, but Labour didn't get an overwhelming share of the vote, they got quite a meagre one, but the votes they did get were used incredibly effectively. The electorate wanted to give the Tories a sound kicking (which they did) and Labour were the benficiaries.

Disproportional representation.JPG (99.56 KiB) Viewed 93 times

[Mr. Dazzle]

Maybe all the Reform voters should go and live in the same place. But if they did that, at least some of them would be immigrants

[Cousin Jack]

Last time I looked Twitter et al were not part of our voting system. We voted, and we had a result. Don't like it? Tough shit, try again next time.

[Wossname]

Funny, isn’t it. A few weeks ago the country voted (overwhelmingly) for this lot. It’s a bit Brexit-like, except that was 52%, I think.

No we didn't. We voted overwhelmingly against the previous lot.

Granted, but it seems we don’t want this lot either. Any (serious) suggestions?

[demographic]

Funny, isn’t it. A few weeks ago the country voted (overwhelmingly) for this lot. It’s a bit Brexit-like, except that was 52%, I think.

No we didn't. We voted overwhelmingly against the previous lot.

Granted, but it seems we don’t want this lot either. Any (serious) suggestions?

Preferential voting.
Say four parties, with the ones you want most given your number one slot, the next given the two slot and so on.

Think some parts of Australia have it.

[Count Steer]

Funny, isn’t it. A few weeks ago the country voted (overwhelmingly) for this lot. It’s a bit Brexit-like, except that was 52%, I think.

No we didn't. We voted overwhelmingly against the previous lot.

Granted, but it seems we don’t want this lot either.

What some people expect is a government to grant their heart's desire - low taxes, great infrastructure, high wages, security, good health, low prices, no crime, cheap energy, cheap houses (that still rocket in value once they have one), brilliant pensions for minimum contributions etc etc. But they don't want to pay for it. So, they want the moon on a stick, they want it now and they want it for nothing...and some of them even appear to believe the politicians that promise it. (Pretty much the definition of populism: 'What do you want? Zero - inward - migration? Bigger army? Better Health Service? Unicorns? Sunlit uplands? Vote for us and we'll give it all to you...honest we will...but don't ask how').

If politicians told the truth, the bare facts, the bottom line - they'd never get elected.

So, this is what we get. The rise of the 'moon on a stick' voters/parties and incessant whinging about not having the moon on a stick.

[Saga Lout]

No we didn't. We voted overwhelmingly against the previous lot.

Granted, but it seems we don’t want this lot either. Any (serious) suggestions?

Preferential voting.
Say four parties, with the ones you want most given your number one slot, the next given the two slot and so on.

Think some parts of Australia have it.

When I was at school our class did some mock elections. I think there were about 30 or 40 in the class and using FPTP, Conservative and Labour got about the same number of votes, the Liberals got about 3 or 4 so cam a long way third. Using preferential voting (3 points for first choice, 2 for second, 1 for third), the Liberals won,
Something like:
Labour: 8x3 + 2x2 + 8X1 = 24+4+8 = 36
Conservative: 8x3 + 2x2 + 8X1 = 24+4+8 = 36
Liberal: 4x3 + 16x2 = 12+32 =44
As a 12 or 13 year old, I wasn't particularly into politics but that didn't seem fair to me. Maybe it could be made to work e.g. by giving more points to the first choice but it would be complicated.

[Cousin Jack]

FPTP gets you a clear winner most of the time. Other systems often give no clear winner, with coalitions needed. Sometimes they fall apart every few months (Italy) or extreme minorities dictate policy (Israel). Neither offers a stable and popular government.

[Dodgy69]

The public pick a basket, but all the apple's are rotten. It's a lose-lose scenario.

[Count Steer]

FPTP gets you a clear winner most of the time. Other systems often give no clear winner, with coalitions needed. Sometimes they fall apart every few months (Italy) or extreme minorities dictate policy (Israel). Neither offers a stable and popular government.

You do tend to get flip-flopping from one ideological political mindset to another at frequent intervals with FPTP though. It's just possible that chugging along over a longer period with some sort of concensus might make for a bit more long-termism. (Provided you can stop the dick wagging the dog, as you say, when a bonkers minority holds the balance. Not that we don't get some of that effect here even with FPTP ).

Wonder where the best example of PR is?