If 66 percent of people wanted me off sheffield forum..

[alchemist]

Would all those screaming unfair unfair be saying so if Labour had won.

 

Where you all screaming unfair unfair during the Labour wins of 1997, 2001, 2005 where more voted for some other party than Labour.

 

.

 

Yes, and I was.. And your point is??

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2015 at 20:22 ----------

 

Under PR, the cons would have had the most seats, but not enough to command the house. Even going into a coalition with The LibDems, DUP and UKIP they would still have been short of a few seats. Likewise Labour, SNP, PC, Greens and Lib Dems would also have not had enough seats to command the house.

 

Under PR, we would still be without a government now and the likelihood of another election would be very high.

 

You are conveniently ignoring the fact that if the election had been under a FAIR system then the vote percentages would have been different as tactical voting would go away. After all the only reason clegg got back in was by tories voting for him who under a fairer system would have voted tory

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2015 at 20:24 ----------

 

Even better. Not only can the members of SF not get over the fact the Tories are in power (note I didn't say won), but they're clutching at straws in the vain hope there will be another election.

 

.

 

There will be another election, in 5 years, and sadly that also will be an unfair one

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2015 at 20:27 ----------

 

That is an odd conclusion to draw 4 years after we had a referendum on electoral reform and the electorate said they didn't want it.

 

But that so called "electoral reform" was NOT PR, it was near enough FPTP under another name

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2015 at 20:31 ----------

 

Not a waste of time at all, it gets the conservative vote count up if nothing else. Even under other voting methods the Tory's still would have been the biggest party)

 

But under a proper system your vote would have counted for something. Whats the point of getting the tory vote up if your are in a solid labour area or labour in a tory one?

[WageSlave]

I don't seem to recall as much kerfuffle about the way we elect a government as we are seeing now.

 

Take the labour win in 1997 it was a landslide with 418 seats won yet more people voted for the tories and lib dems than voted labour. I think most people with any sense know that a party can win a majority with way less than 50.1% share of the vote.

 

My point been and I've said it before, quite a few people seem shocked that the tories won a majority, so the way we elect must be wrong and needs changing.

 

People bang on about ukip getting all these millions of votes but only got 1 mp. In all but 1 constituency ukip had someone stand in another party won more votes than them.

Edited May 17, 2015 by WageSlave

[taxman]

I vote whatshisname who runs the forum.

 

See he's so good we've even forgotten who runs the forum......honestly, it's become so part of me I can't remember the bloke who started it. I used to know him. Damn...that's scary. I can't remember his name.

[Mr Bloke]

I vote whatshisname who runs the forum.

 

See he's so good we've even forgotten who runs the forum......honestly, it's become so part of me I can't remember the bloke who started it. I used to know him. Damn...that's scary. I can't remember his name.

Is it Tim?

[Vague_Boy]

66 percent of people object by picking someone else, but 34 percent pick me, should I be allowed to run the forum...

 

I wonder. If googly-eyed Ed had won 36.9% of the vote (which is the correct and accurate figure [LINK], lord knows where you're getting 34% from), would you have started this thread?

 

The war criminal Blair got 35.19% in 2005 (LINK). Perhaps he should have been stopped from forming a government?

[SteveJ68]

I wonder. If googly-eyed Ed had won 36.9% of the vote (which is the correct and accurate figure [LINK], lord knows where you're getting 34% from), would you have started this thread?

 

The war criminal Blair got 35.19% in 2005 (LINK). Perhaps he should have been stopped from forming a government?

 

What a rant, you sound like a right tosser!

[the_bloke]

What a rant, you sound like a right tosser!

 

Not really, he's got a point. People are only banging on about PR and other voting systems because their party of choice lost the election. If they had won, they wouldn't be giving it a second thought.

 

Funny how the subject of PR on Sheffield Forum didn't crop up until after the election; I don't recall any threads from Tory or Labour supporters denouncing the current FPTP system even considering the polls at the time predicted a hung parliament in terms of votes cast that wouldn't have equated to a hung parliament in the number of seats won.

 

It's getting tiring. If it's that much of an issue, then people should vote for the party that wants to change the system at the next election - if there is one. Chances are it's only the little parties that would campaign for such a change, hoping that they can garner support on that policy and quietly sweep the other policies that don't win elections under the carpet.

[Dardandec]

Their just mad because there not going to get any increase in their free money.

[RonJeremy]

Does anyone know what the results would have been if we'd had av?

[Guest sibon]

Their just mad because there not going to get any increase in their free money.

 

I'm just mad because the Tories have overseen a collapse in the standard of spelling, punctuation and grammar in the posts on SF.

 

Their, there, they're.

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2015 at 23:34 ----------

 

Does anyone know what the results would have been if we'd had av?

 

UKIP would have held Tonypandy.