Fen CJan 2, 2023

Poll: #UK #Politics -

"We're f***ed at least until the #Tories are gone. We may still be f***ed afterward; and, unless we ditch #FPTP, they could come back and f*** us some more."

Broadly agree/disagree?

(Please boost for wider opinion.)

Broadly agree ✅
98.5%
Broadly disagree ❌
1.5%
Poll ended at .
Show threadtheothertomJan 3, 2023
@fencoul This feels like an "it's complicated" question. I dislike FPTP, as it means that my vote is basically worthless. However, I'm really not sure that trying to change the voting system is the best way to improve things.
Mostly my thinking is that it would need a complex and nuanced debate about the tradeoffs that a new system would have, which would require using a lot of time and political capital that could be spent on other things.
Show threadEcosaurian 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Jan 3, 2023

@fencoul
Really @tom?

The FPTP system is completely broken and allows the Tories to dominate ~80% of elections with less than half the vote share due to gerrymandering.

That's how we got Brexit. And many other societal disasters.

I'm open to people debating the merits and consequences of alternative systems, but 'now is not the time' is neoliberal speak for get back in your box and do what you're told.

...Which nobody in this country can afford to do unless they're part of the privileged super rich.

Show threadtheothertom
@Ecosaurian @fencoul I wasn’t saying that it’s not the time, more that the proposed approach is very risky. It feels especially so if framed as “we need to replace FPTP”, since that can be interpreted as meaning a variety of different things (by both supporters and opponents).
Considering how the AV and Brexit referendums went, the thing I would support is setting up a commission to design a new system based on defined goals, so people know what they’re choosing.
Jan 4, 2023 at 7:49amWeb
Show threadtheothertomJan 4, 2023
@fencoul @Ecosaurian for example, I remember AV being described as complicated and “giving some people more votes” (both I disagree with). Seems a proposed system must not just be “fair”, but also appear fair. As I understand it, the Condorcet method is technically the fairest voting system, but I’d say it fails the “seeming fair” test due to complexity.
Then there’s considerations around if and how the link between seats/parties/constituencies would be preserved
Show threadmarcoroboticsJan 4, 2023
@tom @fencoul @Ecosaurian has anyone ever proposed a super-simple FPTP with negative votes? Everyone gets a +1 vote and a -1 vote, and the winner would need not just a majority of +1 but the best difference between positive and negative votes.
Show threadEcosaurian 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Jan 4, 2023

@marcorobotics @tom @fencoul
It would certainly be an improvement on the current system, though the influence of the predominantly right-wing UK media would remain detrimental to democracy.

I'd like to see a move away from the party power structure - I want representatives who are willing to co-operate and work constructively for the common good instead of cheap partisan tactics like we see daily in the Scottish parliament with Labour, Libs and Tories all queuing up to snipe at anything the SNP do.

Getting off topic a bit, but the Gender Reform Bill was one of the few things I've seen in a decade that had almost unanimous cross party support - that's the way it should be rather than voting against a policy in Scotland, then proposing the same policy in England a month later!

Show threadtheothertomJan 4, 2023
@marcorobotics @Ecosaurian @fencoul I’ve not seen that, closest was https://www.ourcommons.ca/content/Committee/421/ERRE/Brief/BR8524815/br-external/NegativeVoteAssociation-e.pdf (you have one vote, for or against).
It’s an interesting idea, and feels like it might go some way towards avoiding vote-splitting, though perhaps doesn’t give as much indication of voters preferences as STV.
I do wonder if it might lead to parties attempting to split the negative vote too, which could be an interesting factor.