Not you again - 2019 UK general election thread.

Discussion in 'Elections' started by Naughtius Maximus, Oct 31, 2019.

  1. dapip

    dapip Member+

    Sep 5, 2003
    South Florida
    Club:
    Millonarios Bogota
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
    So voter registration in the UK was privatized? Also, the company seems to be pro-Brexit and they seemed to have mismanaged overseas voting?


    This is an alarming development, as exposed in the thread below:


     
  2. ceezmad

    ceezmad Member+

    Mar 4, 2010
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Worth investigating, but based on the ass whopping labor took, it did not affect the election very much, but it will be useful to labor as an excuse on why they lost (conspiracy theories are fun and popular) and it will save them from having to self analyze and change (like Trump winning did for the GOP).
     
    charlie15 repped this.
  3. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I don't think anybody believes that.

    Our election counts are done by employees of the local councils, counting individuals pieces of paper, (the votes IOW), and are watched by people from the various parties.

    I was invited to attend as a 'counting agent', (but was too knackered to sit there for 4-5 hours after polling day), but we had about 30 people there who monitored what was going on and the other parties had people around for the same job.

    Also, I'm not clear what is meant by 'handling of postal ballots'...



    When postal ballots arrive in the post they're handled by council staff AFAIK and, again, we have people there when they're opened and are placed 'face down', (so they can't be counted).

    As the count progresses you can see the bundles piling up, (in 50's IIRC), which are then stacked on tables and, again, you can COUNT the bundles and see how you're doing.

    IOW, by the end of that process you know pretty much what the result is.

    Whether that result is then transmitted accurately to someone else is almost irrelevant because, if a different figure was given, there'd be several hundred people, (and that's apart from the local council and council employees), who'd know it was wrong.

    The only way to alter the result, in practical terms, is for people to fill out other people's postal votes and get them to sign the documents that go with them. That's alleged to have happened on occasion bu that amounts to outright criminality by individuals, not some high level conspiracy.
     
    DoyleG repped this.
  4. American Brummie

    Jun 19, 2009
    There Be Dragons Here
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain it to me?
     
  5. The Jitty Slitter

    The Jitty Slitter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Bayern München
    Germany
    Jul 23, 2004
    Fascist Hellscape
    Club:
    FC Sankt Pauli
    Nat'l Team:
    Belgium
    This is why I don't buy into the idea that a new leader cant fix most of labour's problems

    Team corbyn are simply bad at everything
     
    American Brummie repped this.
  6. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I would have thought it was bloody obvious, tbh. If people are voting in a particular electoral system, (FPTP, AV, AV+, MMP, whatever), they can vote appropriately for that, specific, system. If people are voting in a FPTP system they might vote tactically, (or not), so we can't just extrapolate their votes in THAT system and apply them, unfiltered, if they were voting in another. That might mean a higher or lower vote for a specific party but also it might mean that a particular set of policies would get a HIGHER, (or lower), number of votes spread across a number of parties and it's THAT that matters.

    That's probably why most of the countries without FPTP have lower levels of inequality than the ones that retain them.

    But, you know what... don't bother replying. You'll only try and interpret whatever I say so that you can manufacture yet another misunderstanding or pointless argument so, onto ignore you go :)
     
  7. American Brummie

    Jun 19, 2009
    There Be Dragons Here
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No I genuinely do not understand what you are saying. Do you mean FPTP and PR are incomparable because the electorate will differ, or do you mean Labour will get more votes in a PR system than it does now?
     
  8. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    A new leader won't change the voting system or the existence of the libdems, greens, SNP, PC, splitting the left vote and giving centrist voters an 'out'.

    Just ask yourself, when has a radical labour party offering EVER been elected in the UK under normal circumstances... and, no, I'm NOT just talking about the latest twitter outrage when a tory has said some dumb shit or introduced a racist/xenophobic policy. That IS normal.

    1945? There was a little matter of world war 2 that was very popular just before which made more people more likely to invest in a new idea. Unless we're planning to start a major European conflagration soon, that's not much help. It's also worth bearing in mind it was kicked out after 5 years, (well... sorta!).

    1964? What, WIlson's 'White heat of technology' speech? LOL... Leaving aside the rather obvious point that was after 13 years of tory (mis)rule, it was also after Profumo and had a whisker thin majority until 1966. It was also HARDLY a radical one, making changes on some social issues such as divorce but also changing laws on immigration making it harder, not easier for people to come here. Once we were IN power we could then get re-elected in 1966 but, again, it wasn't radical... far from it.

    1974? The tories had placed Britain on a 3 day working week because of the miners strike. Even after that we only just managed to scrape in because the tories and liberals couldn't agree and we had another election later that year where we gained a majority of a handful of seats, (2 or 3 IIRC). Of course, we then lost that majority a few years later and it all came crashing down around our ears and was followed by 18 years of Thatcher et al.

    Then fast forward to Blair in 1997. That isn't what I'd call 'radical'.

    So from 1945 until, say, 2024, (nearly 80 years :(), a radical labour government hasn't been elected in normal circumstances. What difference do you think a new leader will make now?

    To get elected we have to tack back to the centre and probably by some distance. We also have to reclaim British 'patriotism' as a labour value. That wasn't much of an issue for some previous labour governments as they'd had guys like Denis Healey who was a beach commander at the Anzio landings. It's hard to call someone like THAT 'soft on defense'. But it's an issue now for some of the Corbynites.

    We also need to reclaim the successes of the Blair government, (such as they were), as we're not just insulting Blair when we slag them off... we're insulting the positive changes the voters saw in their own lives.

    So I'm thinking about all this now. I haven't decided who I might go for as leader but it has to be someone who comes across well on the telly rather than in a public meeting. But they also need to be largely untainted by the previous lot... and the lot before THAT! :D
     
  9. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    What he’s saying makes sense to me. Under PR (assuming the representation threshold is sufficiently low), both major parties would lose vote share assuming there is some level of tactical voting occurring in a FPTP system. Who would lose more and if that would be sufficient to tip the scales of power is difficult to determine.

    Like extrapolating popular vote results from the electoral college, we also don’t know how PR would influence GOTV and general party investment at a local level. A heavy Labour area may not be as heavy under PR where vote proportions matter (and vice versa). We also don’t know how PR would alter the overall investment and quality among all parties at a national level. Or how issues may fracture differently if more parties are added to the mix in PR. Or even how major parties run on specific issues if it’s completely a 2 horse race but without FPTP. Example: if our districts congressional districts in the US were awarded proportionally, then it would likely be much more difficult for the GOP to run as right as they do either economically, socially or both. The results in our current system wouldn’t necessarily be useful because the issues would move in a different system.
     
  10. American Brummie

    Jun 19, 2009
    There Be Dragons Here
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Do you believe there isn't tactical voting under PR???
     
  11. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    Of course there is, but who is voting tactically, the extent to which that affects individual party vote share and party positions will differ under both systems. And that compounds over time. For that reason (and all the others mentioned) projecting which party wins under different systems over multiple cycles isn’t a straight mathematical exercise.

    It’s kind of like assuming that the rules of soccer changed in 1950 and projecting how that would affect the outcome of European Cup/CL winners. Tactics change player and personnel decisions over generations, in game tactics, how players are developed, the relative importance of different skills and roles, etc.

    The premise ignores the time travel paradox. But that ignores the nature of party coalitions, who leads, on what issues, the narratives cast by different actors over time, etc. it’s not just one election. We’d be rewriting 60 years of political history. Farage could be leading the UK at the moment. Or he could be running a cigar shop.
     
  12. American Brummie

    Jun 19, 2009
    There Be Dragons Here
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What makes you believe this? For example, are the kinds of voters who vote tactically more educated under PR?
     
  13. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Just on the issue of voting systems, I actually favour the system that the Jenkins commission developed back in late 90's rather than a PR one...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_vote_plus

    Of course, it's up to politicians to offer the electorate things they find attractive but then, that's kinda the whole point of democracy, isn't it. If they don't, NO voting system will make things better.

    As you say, with both that and PR the way people vote is difficult to predict because people some of them will change their votes to impact the new system but the plain truth is that, as things stand, the tories KEEP getting elected over here despite not getting more than about 2/5th of the vote.

    I suspect, with BOTH options, it would mean more people would vote and some of them would vote for extreme politicians like the EDL or communist party. Whilst that would be rather embarrassing if they're elected, tbh, that might be a price worth paying and, in any event, they would likely balance each other out.

    Anyway, it's something worth thinking about as the present system seems flawed to put it mildly.

    I saw something the other day, (can't find it now :(), that said that, of the top 20 richest and poorest areas in Europe, 10 of the poorest were in Britain and the richest one was ALSO in Britain.

    The alternative, as I said, is that labour just has to offer a tory-lite offering which, in some areas, (like climate change), just aren't enough to do what's required.
     
  14. ceezmad

    ceezmad Member+

    Mar 4, 2010
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    If England went full PR, I am pretty sure both main parties would win a smaller number of seats.

    But I am guessing Labor would be affected even more than the conservatives.

    The biggest winners would be the Liberal Democrats, following by the greens.

    The Scottish Nationals would also be big losers, they poll about the same as the greens (a few % more) but gain a shit lot of seats with a small percentage of votes thanks to regional strength.


    Ok, but the insinuation was that Labor would be better off under a different system (since they are being squeezed out under FPTP).

    There is no way on knowing that, Labor could also be squeezed out under a PR system.


    A change to a PR system would also have to come with changes to how coalitions are formed and more restrictions on when a government can be brought down.


    Otherwise you could end up looking like Israel or Spain.
     
  15. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    No. I said almost the opposite of that...

    IOW even if labour gets fewer seats, if the the regressive right-wing parties can't control it, THAT'S what matters. Put more simply, the majority of people in this country aren't particularly right-wing and yet we KEEP ending up with the right-wing in charge.

    But, as I said, I don't particularly favour a vanilla PR model as it allows in a significant number of extremist idiots and, if there are enough of them, they can do a great deal of damage in combination with a major party with weak or ineffective leadership.

    The Jenkins commissions proposal was for only 20%, IIRC, of PR seats which sounds about right. Even with that you'd want a minimum percentage of people to vote for a party in a particular area of, say, 5-10%.
     
  16. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    I'm not placing value judgments on who is more or less likely to vote tactically under various systems. What I do believe is that when the rules of the game change, some (not all) people incorporate the new rules and the decision points and using that information, make different choices. If that wasn't the case, we'd only have two brands of peanut butter. In the short term, partisanship/affiliation may win out. But given enough time, everyone recalibrates to the new rules/system: parties, voters, policy wonks, the media, etc. If more room is made in Parliament for different parties, then I would expect the outcomes to be different. How and in what way over multiple election cycles is impossible to know.


    I'm not getting why this is difficult/contentious. If you believe that the same choices would be made by the same voters regardless of system, then are you arguing that electoral systems don't matter? Is that what you're trying to say? Why would you believe that voters/pols would not deviate from current tactics in a different system?

    If we were to let a different system out of the bag c 2017, then you're probably right. But if we're talking about a different system over multiple cycles, we're venturing into a Harry Turtledove Politics 2.0 scenario. There could be no Brexit referendum. Or perhaps it's some alt world Labour PM that makes the Cameronian blunder. The parties would look somewhat different. Different variations of alternative to FPTP would have different effects. The choices would be different. It would be silly to speculate.
     
  17. American Brummie

    Jun 19, 2009
    There Be Dragons Here
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Perhaps you should assume that a political scientist who has dedicated over a decade to learning this stuff might want to know what sources you are drawing on, what things you are reading, to make you believe something that is at odds with a lot of literature he reads.

    Political parties are successful when there are enough social cleavages in the country to justify them. PR doesn't magically make new ones.

    So again, why do you believe what you believe here? I am genuinely asking.
     
  18. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I've seen various figures regarding tactical voting from only a few percent up to around 20% in some areas and with specific issues and that's even with our present system.

    I read one article that said it would have been higher than that last time but, (maybe because of labour's changed position regarding a 2nd referendum), that didn't really materialise.
    I agree in general but, despite the problems with discussing counterfactual arguments, what we have now doesn't seem to be working because many people are voting AGAINST one party than for another and it's been that way for a while now, tbh.

    That's why I tend to take an overview of how other countries have developed over an extended period of time. I don't think it's unreasonable to let that provide some guidance as to how things might have gone.

    Subjectively our national character is more like a typical northern European, non-latin style of approach to life so, theoretically, our polity should be similar to countries like Germany, Holland, Denmark, etc. etc. The thing is, I can give you a pretty good rundown on the manifesto's of the parties since the mid-70's and if you look at the policies, (apart from the last 2 elections), labour and liberal have often been quite similar... yet we KEEP getting tory governments elected with around 40% of the vote.

    Personally I like the idea of some versions of the AV system because it usually retains the connection of an individual to their constituency but I'd be interested in discussing other methods if people don't like that.

    We had a referendum on it in 2011 and it was ejected but that was probably because NEITHER of the major parties in the UK wanted it, only the liberals.

    As it happens I DID vote for it but there we are.
     
  19. Walia Ibex

    Walia Ibex Red Card

    Arsenal
    Ethiopia
    Oct 2, 2019
    How are they well off? Are they pensioners, got all the well paying union jobs and have locked out the young?
     
  20. Walia Ibex

    Walia Ibex Red Card

    Arsenal
    Ethiopia
    Oct 2, 2019
     

Share This Page