It’s Christmas Eve! What Are We...
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Reform Have Handed No 10 To Labour.....
49 Answers
3/4 of the Lab gains from Con were down to reform. The latest just in was Poole, Labour by 18 votes, over 7000 reform voters elected Labour. This has happened in 3/4 of the Labour gains.
"Vote reform - get Labour" - it seems was bang on.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Reform were second in 98 constituencies. Every seat that Reform won needed over 1million votes, whilst Labour only needed 100,000 votes per seat won. This is a 10/1 disparity in our voting system and is further evidence that the historic rigged 2 party system was never designed to be to the advantage of the ordinary voter, or to pay heed to the wishes of the man in the street voter. Reform is needed more than ever!
https:/
i suspect this is exactly why labour pulled their candidate out of clacton in the last few weeks... they wantef farage to win because they want reform to split the right-wing vote again in the next election
very similar to labour and the SDP in the 1980s which kept the tories in
a good example of the dirty tricks that our stupid voting system rewards. i truly hope that right wing voters come around to seeing the folly of it now that the shoe is on the other foot
//The "no" side won by almost 2:1 so do you think a new referendum would produce a different outcome?//
It might if the proposed new system was better & better explained & understood and the inequity of the present FPTP "fix up" highlighted. Needs a good campaigner to take up the reins - I wonder who we could get🙄
//
Nigel Farage has launched a campaign against the first-past-the-post electoral system, saying his party would have won 100 seats under proportional representation.
The Reform UK leader and newly-elected MP for Clacton called the current voting system “outdated” and said he would “campaign with anyone and everyone” to change it as his party won its fifth and final seat on Friday evening. //
For all AB Lefties:
The light you imagine you see at the end of the tunnel is, I fear, the proverbial oncoming train.
Sunak a banker, saw the world through the prism of finance & Starmer a lawyer, sees the world through law, and will set about changing your life through a plenitude of crackpot legislation.
e.g. 'Islamaphobia' enshrined in law, scrapping Rwanda, zero carbon, re-joining the EU, remaining firmly in the ECHR & much more.
Also b.t.w. look at the stats; the Labour "Landslide", is an illusion and doesn't reflect the true feeling of the country at all.
Sir John Curtice (polling guru)
Writing in The Times, he said: "In the most disproportional electoral outcome in British electoral history, Labour’s strength in the new House of Commons is a heavily exaggerated reflection of the party’s limited popularity in the country.
"It is an outcome that may well breathe new life into the debate about electoral reform, perhaps not least within the Conservative Party."
Sir John also noted that Labour most likely lost voters to the Greens and that it had been badly hit by its support for Israel's war in Gaza.
The political scientist also believes that voters had failed to embrace Labour - despite rejecting the Tories.
Regarding votes cast, apparently Labour have lost in the past having gained more votes than they did this time. So for sure whereas a landslide of seats occurred, it was not accompanied by the landslide of support it should have implied. Many voters seem to have given up on the UK government this time around (possibly exasperated to an extent by the need to prove yourself with photo ID when that has never been an issue in the past), and the split caused by a disgraced Tory party continuing to stand candidates and consequently thwarting any emergence of a new government who seemed to be more in touch with what is needed; i.e. sorting causes of problems rather than sticking a plaster on symptoms.
Meanwhile the Labour aims seem very much a mixed bag. Some things definitely needing slinging asap. And it'll be interesting to see how it is all going to be funded.
//(possibly exasperated to an extent by the need to prove yourself with photo ID when that has never been an issue in the past)//
I was on poll clerk duty and the ID request was not a problem for the vast majority of voters. Perhaps 1 in a 100. These people knew that ID was required and all went home to fetch it. Again just 1 in a 100 had needed to apply for the voter ID document that was issued on request by the local Authority. Visual ID was always going to be necessary after allowing millions of people into the Country who have deliberately, in some cases, set out to deceive or thwart any effort to identify them. You are correct we have never previously needed Visual ID because we have never had an issue with organised cheating at the poll booth. We will unfortunately always need it henceforth, after importing the new and exciting attitudes to respect and fair play.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.