Reforms 4% might be crucial in a close election, they won't be fielding a full slate, if even half and I seriously doubt they'd get 4% nationally in a GE anyway. They are the NOTA/Brexit option and in the booth choices will be made
Its funny Tice said on radio on Sunday he fully expects to field 600 plus at GE.
Words are cheap. They don't require deposits, or effort, or candidates, or infrastructure.
is to join the Guardian as political editor. Pippa has a remarkable track record of exclusives and has set the political agenda time and again. She joins us later this year
Reforms 4% might be crucial in a close election, they won't be fielding a full slate, if even half and I seriously doubt they'd get 4% nationally in a GE anyway. They are the NOTA/Brexit option and in the booth choices will be made
Its funny Tice said on radio on Sunday he fully expects to field 600 plus at GE.
I wonder if Dowden will complain to the Mail when Lice's 600+ drops to 300 in favour of the Tories again.
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
Interesting quirk about the British-administered Northern Ireland election:
In no less than 12 of 18 of the five-seat constituencies, the top 5 first-preference candidates were elected.
it's not a quirk, that's what generally matters in the majority of constituencies. I saw an analysis of the Republic elections over the last few years and that was invariably the case.
So why bother with STV?
The mechanism of STV ends up ranking the candidates on 1st Preferences, and parties who put up say 2 or 3 candidates in a 5 member seat usually enhances their place in the ranking compared to putting in 5 candidates. In a 5 memebr seat candidates need to get 16.7% of the vote by either 1st preferences or after transfers from below (or above in surpluses).
Reforms 4% might be crucial in a close election, they won't be fielding a full slate, if even half and I seriously doubt they'd get 4% nationally in a GE anyway. They are the NOTA/Brexit option and in the booth choices will be made
Its funny Tice said on radio on Sunday he fully expects to field 600 plus at GE.
I doubt they've got the money to waste. But if they do they do, their performance in elections since 2019 suggests 4% is a pipedream. 1.5% nationally tops imo if fielding 600, so there's a few hundred thousand votes to fight over. A party with a handful of councilors isn't getting 4%, there's no ground game.
Reforms 4% might be crucial in a close election, they won't be fielding a full slate, if even half and I seriously doubt they'd get 4% nationally in a GE anyway. They are the NOTA/Brexit option and in the booth choices will be made
Its funny Tice said on radio on Sunday he fully expects to field 600 plus at GE.
I wonder if Dowden will complain to the Mail when Lice's 600+ drops to 300 in favour of the Tories again.
No shortage of candidates in the tories' red wall seats. Much harder to get people to stand in the leafy shires I think.
The six constituencies in Occupied Northern Ireland where one or more of the Top 5 first preferences were NOT elected under STV were:
Belfast West - 5th place DUP East Derry - 4th place SF Foyle - 4th place UUP North Antrim - 4th place DUP Strangford - 3rd place TUV Upper Bann - 3rd place SF
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
It reminds me of OFSTED changing the middle classification for a school to "Only Satisfactory".
Cue Sunil announcing it's been FIVE Months and 4 days since the last Tory poll lead!
I just realised that these figures are from the 5th to the 6th May so do not include the last few days
More likely contamination of these data is the local elections, raising the profile of the greens.
What happens in the immediate future is interesting, but not as interesting as what the polls say after all the pieces currently up in the air have landed.
And then we have the grind of two years of getting slowly poorer to look forward to.
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
So is the Prime Minister, to an extent.
Boris has been able to have a quite successful Premiership getting stuff done despite his deep and obvious personal flaws not because the PM does stuff himself but because there's a whole infrastructure and myriad of support staff all the way down to the people who actually get stuff done.
Regarding Wales: quite brave by Labour as they won 50% of the seats with 36% of the regional vote last time. Also interesting that they are continuing with the same boundaries for now, which massively disadvantages Cardiff, which has seen much greater population growth than the rest of the country
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
We've now got some embarrassed looking guy in a really silly costume sitting in the back of a huge car thats all windows with a hat having the national anthem played to him.
Insightful. But.
If it isn't easy to make fun of, then it wouldn't be a ceremony. But the same would be true of any ceremony that the parodist finds personally important. Funerals. Weddings. The hajj...........and an endless list. What larks.
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
It reminds me of OFSTED changing the middle classification for a school to "Only Satisfactory".
I don't think we have had a particularly good Mayor of London yet, and that is probably significantly due to the limited range of powers they have. Johnson does not seem worse than the others so far though, probably similar to Khan in success if very different in character.
I think he would also at least be in the middle range of performers for an elected, but largely ceremonial, head of state. President Boris Johnson as a ceremonial head of state is far far better than PM Boris Johnson.
On a tangent I still expect him to run for President of the US, yes I know he is not eligible, but he is eligible enough to be allowed to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from the gullible over there.
We've now got some embarrassed looking guy in a really silly costume sitting in the back of a huge car thats all windows with a hat having the national anthem played to him.
If it upsets you so much why watch it
Upsets? Amuses! There is something profoundly silly about Pomp and Circumstance when it comes to the royal bit of the state.
The spell is definitely broken without Brenda. It becomes immediately apparent how banal and outdated the institution is.
Unsurprising views from a nihilist who wants to kill all his fellow Brits (and perhaps himself) via anti-vaxxery, and someone who loathes Britain so much he wants it broken up in any way possible - Scottish independence, united Ireland, you name it
Put it another way: I didn’t have you marked down as an avowed royalist who now, suddenly, sees the institution for what it is
Regarding Wales: quite brave by Labour as they won 50% of the seats with 36% of the regional vote last time. Also interesting that they are continuing with the same boundaries for now, which massively disadvantages Cardiff, which has seen much greater population growth than the rest of the country
Is this change being driven by Labour? Fair play to them if it is. It's not very often that a party does something that isn't in its interest.
We've now got some embarrassed looking guy in a really silly costume sitting in the back of a huge car thats all windows with a hat having the national anthem played to him.
If it upsets you so much why watch it
Upsets? Amuses! There is something profoundly silly about Pomp and Circumstance when it comes to the royal bit of the state.
We've now got some embarrassed looking guy in a really silly costume sitting in the back of a huge car thats all windows with a hat having the national anthem played to him.
If it upsets you so much why watch it
Upsets? Amuses! There is something profoundly silly about Pomp and Circumstance when it comes to the royal bit of the state.
Oh come off it.
I'm a republican but lets be honest, all states have their own Pomp and Circumstance in such ceremonies.
The Americans have plenty of Pomp and Circumstance with the President's equivalent State of the Union speech and other set pieces.
The French have plenty of Pomp and Circumstance too in their Presidential set pieces.
Of all the reasons to be a republican, the lack of Pomp and Circumstance in republics is not one of them.
The French surround their President with as much pomp as any monarch, and he is the head of France's main chivalric order.
Yes, they aspire to be a presidential monarchy. And Macron literally lives in a palace
I don't see the point in having a monarchy unless you get the Pomp and Circumstance. I don't want King William to turn up for the Opening of Parliament on an e-scooter, in a hoody
Royalty is meant to brighten the day with horses and swords and carriages and crowns. It is theatre. It is MEANT to be a bit silly and different and charmingly archaic, while also knitting modern Britons back into our incredible history, because there is such a density of symbolism, speaking of different eras and epochs. Like the symbolic hunt for explosives under the Commons!
I love it. If you get rid of all that we might as well have a cheap, tedious euro-style president
Wouldn't it be ace if Prince Harry went to deliver it and he rapped the Queens Speech to give parliament more meaning and relevance to modern Britain.
Regarding Wales: quite brave by Labour as they won 50% of the seats with 36% of the regional vote last time. Also interesting that they are continuing with the same boundaries for now, which massively disadvantages Cardiff, which has seen much greater population growth than the rest of the country
Is this change being driven by Labour? Fair play to them if it is. It's not very often that a party does something that isn't in its interest.
They are in coalition with Plaid so I'm assuming Plaid have pushed it more.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
Regarding Wales: quite brave by Labour as they won 50% of the seats with 36% of the regional vote last time. Also interesting that they are continuing with the same boundaries for now, which massively disadvantages Cardiff, which has seen much greater population growth than the rest of the country
Is this change being driven by Labour? Fair play to them if it is. It's not very often that a party does something that isn't in its interest.
They are in coalition with Plaid so I'm assuming Plaid have pushed it more.
Will there be a referendum on the change?
EDIT: from Wales online:
Any change like this requires the support of two-thirds of the current 60 member Senedd. Between the two parties, they have 43 seats out of the total 60 meaning that their proposals are likely to be approved. In a joint statement, they say changes should come into force by the next Senedd election in 2026.
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
So is the Prime Minister, to an extent.
Boris has been able to have a quite successful Premiership getting stuff done despite his deep and obvious personal flaws not because the PM does stuff himself but because there's a whole infrastructure and myriad of support staff all the way down to the people who actually get stuff done.
Partially agree but.. "myriad of" = immediate ban from PB for life.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
But that's simply wrong.
There isn't any electoral system that is "right", per Arrow's theorem.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Reforms 4% might be crucial in a close election, they won't be fielding a full slate, if even half and I seriously doubt they'd get 4% nationally in a GE anyway. They are the NOTA/Brexit option and in the booth choices will be made
Its funny Tice said on radio on Sunday he fully expects to field 600 plus at GE.
I doubt they've got the money to waste. But if they do they do, their performance in elections since 2019 suggests 4% is a pipedream. 1.5% nationally tops imo if fielding 600, so there's a few hundred thousand votes to fight over. A party with a handful of councilors isn't getting 4%, there's no ground game.
Ironically, the system for the UK's European elections really helped UKIP/ The Brexit party get momentum. First past the post in brave independent Britain, not so much.
Just seen that Graham Thorpe is in hospital in a serious condition. Hope he makes a full and speedy recovery.
After the shock death of Shane Warne earlier this year and now Thorpe hospitalised, it feels really weird having athletes I grew up watching getting sick or worse. They're young people still, fifties is no age to be getting seriously sick or worse, hope he makes a full recovery.
Cue Sunil announcing it's been FIVE Months and 4 days since the last Tory poll lead!
I just realised that these figures are from the 5th to the 6th May so do not include the last few days
More likely contamination of these data is the local elections, raising the profile of the greens.
What happens in the immediate future is interesting, but not as interesting as what the polls say after all the pieces currently up in the air have landed.
And then we have the grind of two years of getting slowly poorer to look forward to.
No way the LibDems stay so high when HikeGate hits home.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
It reminds me of OFSTED changing the middle classification for a school to "Only Satisfactory".
I don't think we have had a particularly good Mayor of London yet, and that is probably significantly due to the limited range of powers they have. Johnson does not seem worse than the others so far though, probably similar to Khan in success if very different in character.
I think he would also at least be in the middle range of performers for an elected, but largely ceremonial, head of state. President Boris Johnson as a ceremonial head of state is far far better than PM Boris Johnson.
On a tangent I still expect him to run for President of the US, yes I know he is not eligible, but he is eligible enough to be allowed to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from the gullible over there.
Taking this further, if the job of PM and ceremonial President had both been available back when Johnson launched his political career, he may well have aimed for being President and left the PM role to those willing to put in some serious work and thought.
He could still do his shiny boosterism, dressing up and jaunts overseas and we could have a functioning government, what is not to like?
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
Condemning him to a decade of meaningless small talk actually seems a decent idea. President without executive power, of course.
Just read the messages the Guardian claim to have showing work carried on until 1AM.
They look pretty convincing to me, I am sure they will be leaking soon.
Via your good self, Horse?
Hey! Hope you are keeping well.
I can ask my family friend but I don’t think they’ll be willing to share the documents themselves. If they even have them, I haven’t asked.
What I will say is that Starmer would not have made this decision without having evidence prior (and that was already turned over to the Police), without being very confident.
I probably shouldn’t say too much more - will keep you in the loop
Ah, was just joking really but I thought you meant you had the messages in your possession.
Good, thank you for asking. Bit of a spat with my wife last night (which was not fully resolved by this morning) over how to handle a tricky situation with a toddler and some other stresses in our lives - both tired and grumpy, but resolved it now. 19 mile cycle in to work (further than usual due to cycle path closure and temporary address during building work) gave some much needed perspective. Gorgeous morning with the wind assisting me too, suspect the return leg will be more of a challenge!
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
I admire Starmer hugely for saving Labour from the far left. No apologies for thinking that. The one thing that's really been within his gift since becoming Labour leader, and he's achieved it. I was worried for a while we were going to have a succession of Corbyns.
Salmond has always been a bit Salmondy. Yes, I can't argue that he was very effective at one point, but even that's now in the past. He's gone from genius who makes your skin crawl to just someone who makes your skin crawl. And it's not recent.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Just seen that Graham Thorpe is in hospital in a serious condition. Hope he makes a full and speedy recovery.
After the shock death of Shane Warne earlier this year and now Thorpe hospitalised, it feels really weird having athletes I grew up watching getting sick or worse. They're young people still, fifties is no age to be getting seriously sick or worse, hope he makes a full recovery.
A genuinely world class batsman, a very rare category for an England player of his era.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
Interesting quirk about the British-administered Northern Ireland election:
In no less than 12 of 18 of the five-seat constituencies, the top 5 first-preference candidates were elected.
it's not a quirk, that's what generally matters in the majority of constituencies. I saw an analysis of the Republic elections over the last few years and that was invariably the case.
So why bother with STV?
The mechanism of STV ends up ranking the candidates on 1st Preferences, and parties who put up say 2 or 3 candidates in a 5 member seat usually enhances their place in the ranking compared to putting in 5 candidates. In a 5 memebr seat candidates need to get 16.7% of the vote by either 1st preferences or after transfers from below (or above in surpluses).
A so-called proportional system where the number of seats you win depends on how many candidates you put up.
Just seen that Graham Thorpe is in hospital in a serious condition. Hope he makes a full and speedy recovery.
After the shock death of Shane Warne earlier this year and now Thorpe hospitalised, it feels really weird having athletes I grew up watching getting sick or worse. They're young people still, fifties is no age to be getting seriously sick or worse, hope he makes a full recovery.
Wait till you get to your fifties my friend. A fair few of my peers gone. More in very poor health. We all like to think we'll be sprightly at 80. But. It's coming to us all.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Davis?
Do you mean David Davis (think as mince?)
Yes, I mean David Davis. Sorry, I really like him.
PB Republicans need to imagine what a UK (except it would then be something else - the UR?) would look like
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
Volkswagen Group shares down 5% this morning. I wonder why that might be…?
Ah... Just bought an 'approved' used Seat fossil burner, taking it back Thursday for a couple of things to be fixed under the warranty (phoned yesterday to raise the issues). So that probably explains it
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
Surely ABBA system is better than alternate. Could be his Waterloo?
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Davis?
Do you mean David Davis (think as mince?)
Yes, I mean David Davis. Sorry, I really like him.
He is lazy but not thick at all, and gains credit for being an independent thinker.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
Interesting quirk about the British-administered Northern Ireland election:
In no less than 12 of 18 of the five-seat constituencies, the top 5 first-preference candidates were elected.
it's not a quirk, that's what generally matters in the majority of constituencies. I saw an analysis of the Republic elections over the last few years and that was invariably the case.
So why bother with STV?
The mechanism of STV ends up ranking the candidates on 1st Preferences, and parties who put up say 2 or 3 candidates in a 5 member seat usually enhances their place in the ranking compared to putting in 5 candidates. In a 5 memebr seat candidates need to get 16.7% of the vote by either 1st preferences or after transfers from below (or above in surpluses).
A so-called proportional system where the number of seats you win depends on how many candidates you put up.
Nonsense on stilts.
Ranking doesn't mean seats. Witness the Glasgow seat where the Greens ranked 1st on 1st preferences, but because they only put up one candidate. SNP still won 2 seats. Ranking counts for nothing next to who is actually elected.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Those who have wronged Oliver Queen or threaten Star City can be brought to justice by a masked vigilante archer.
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
So is the Prime Minister, to an extent.
Boris has been able to have a quite successful Premiership getting stuff done despite his deep and obvious personal flaws not because the PM does stuff himself but because there's a whole infrastructure and myriad of support staff all the way down to the people who actually get stuff done.
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
So presumably they are happy for this to go to a referendum in Wales, so that the people can decide if public money is best spent on 60% more politicians, their hangers-on, office space and generous expenses?
Cue Sunil announcing it's been FIVE Months and 4 days since the last Tory poll lead!
I just realised that these figures are from the 5th to the 6th May so do not include the last few days
More likely contamination of these data is the local elections, raising the profile of the greens.
What happens in the immediate future is interesting, but not as interesting as what the polls say after all the pieces currently up in the air have landed.
And then we have the grind of two years of getting slowly poorer to look forward to.
No way the LibDems stay so high when HikeGate hits home.
I'm still looking forward to news of the LD lockdown bar crawl breaking. Being LD, suitably restrained: 5-bar-gate
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
Interesting quirk about the British-administered Northern Ireland election:
In no less than 12 of 18 of the five-seat constituencies, the top 5 first-preference candidates were elected.
it's not a quirk, that's what generally matters in the majority of constituencies. I saw an analysis of the Republic elections over the last few years and that was invariably the case.
So why bother with STV?
The mechanism of STV ends up ranking the candidates on 1st Preferences, and parties who put up say 2 or 3 candidates in a 5 member seat usually enhances their place in the ranking compared to putting in 5 candidates. In a 5 memebr seat candidates need to get 16.7% of the vote by either 1st preferences or after transfers from below (or above in surpluses).
A so-called proportional system where the number of seats you win depends on how many candidates you put up.
Nonsense on stilts.
Ranking doesn't mean seats. Witness the Glasgow seat where the Greens ranked 1st on 1st preferences, but because they only put up one candidate. SNP still won 2 seats. Ranking counts for nothing next to who is actually elected.
The trick is not to be the last one eliminated. Which means your votes don't get transferred.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
But that's simply wrong.
There isn't any electoral system that is "right", per Arrow's theorem.
Indeed not. But I'm a pluralist, and FPTP is considerably wronger than many alternatives.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Volkswagen Group shares down 5% this morning. I wonder why that might be…?
Ah... Just bought an 'approved' used Seat fossil burner, taking it back Thursday for a couple of things to be fixed under the warranty (phoned yesterday to raise the issues). So that probably explains it
Please raise the issue with the dealer, that the VW CEO is a barely-disguised Nazi who thinks we should be appeasing Putin.
PB Republicans need to imagine what a UK (except it would then be something else - the UR?) would look like
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
I favour a more slimmed-down approach, but holding on to the institution for now. The country would be in too much of a confused and volatile position politically and socially to make such a big change for a long time anyway, I think.
What the country really needs most urgently is rebuilding of trust between metropolitans and conservatives, and less politically expedient culture war, as well as possibly the most extreme ends of identity politics on the left.
Just read the messages the Guardian claim to have showing work carried on until 1AM.
They look pretty convincing to me, I am sure they will be leaking soon.
Via your good self, Horse?
Hey! Hope you are keeping well.
I can ask my family friend but I don’t think they’ll be willing to share the documents themselves. If they even have them, I haven’t asked.
What I will say is that Starmer would not have made this decision without having evidence prior (and that was already turned over to the Police), without being very confident.
I probably shouldn’t say too much more - will keep you in the loop
Ah, was just joking really but I thought you meant you had the messages in your possession.
Good, thank you for asking. Bit of a spat with my wife last night (which was not fully resolved by this morning) over how to handle a tricky situation with a toddler and some other stresses in our lives - both tired and grumpy, but resolved it now. 19 mile cycle in to work (further than usual due to cycle path closure and temporary address during building work) gave some much needed perspective. Gorgeous morning with the wind assisting me too, suspect the return leg will be more of a challenge!
Hope you are well, too. How was the cricket?
Cricket was good - we lost but we were playing in the dark by the end which was very unfair but the Umpire was useless. Faced 11 got 8 not out, so pretty average performance.
I know you were joking but I do have a source (ish) inside Starmer's circle, I'm not sure I'll get anything out of them particularly fast but for example yesterday I knew a bit before everyone else that he was going to make that statement at 4. I posted it for the benefit of people betting, I think some people got on.
PB Republicans need to imagine what a UK (except it would then be something else - the UR?) would look like
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
Actually he would make a much better nominal head of state than someone in charge of selecting the cabinet and making law. He was an adequate Mayor of London.
The Mayor of London, like most other Mayors are just figureheads, directing the monies around. If Sadiq Khan can do it adequately, then Bozo the Clown could. The key word here is "adequate".
So is the Prime Minister, to an extent.
Boris has been able to have a quite successful Premiership getting stuff done despite his deep and obvious personal flaws not because the PM does stuff himself but because there's a whole infrastructure and myriad of support staff all the way down to the people who actually get stuff done.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Volkswagen Group shares down 5% this morning. I wonder why that might be…?
Ah... Just bought an 'approved' used Seat fossil burner, taking it back Thursday for a couple of things to be fixed under the warranty (phoned yesterday to raise the issues). So that probably explains it
Please raise the issue with the dealer, that the WV CEO is a barely-disguised Nazi who thinks we should be appeasing Putin.
PB Republicans need to imagine what a UK (except it would then be something else - the UR?) would look like
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
Fuck that, I want Ed Sheeran on my £20 notes.
By the time that happens, the security hologram will include him singing a song that the shopkeeper checks using second factor authentication.
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
So presumably they are happy for this to go to a referendum in Wales, so that the people can decide if public money is best spent on 60% more politicians, their hangers-on, office space and generous expenses?
No, just needs 2/3 of the Senedd to get it through (Labour and PC have 43 out of 60 seats).
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Hate to say it, but when you start to look back wistfully on how things were better back in the day, it's a sign
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Cue Sunil announcing it's been FIVE Months and 4 days since the last Tory poll lead!
I just realised that these figures are from the 5th to the 6th May so do not include the last few days
More likely contamination of these data is the local elections, raising the profile of the greens.
What happens in the immediate future is interesting, but not as interesting as what the polls say after all the pieces currently up in the air have landed.
And then we have the grind of two years of getting slowly poorer to look forward to.
No way the LibDems stay so high when HikeGate hits home.
I'm still looking forward to news of the LD lockdown bar crawl breaking. Being LD, suitably restrained: 5-bar-gate
Sadly, there’s not enough of them for a gathering to have broken the rules.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Hate to say it, but when you start to look back wistfully on how things were better back in the day, it's a sign
There are much bigger signs than that, my friend
I met some old pals for a drink the other day. I was shocked to see one of them - only a year or two older than me - sporting A HEARING AID
I can accept spectacles. Happens to many in later middle age. But a hearing aid? I associate that with absolute old age
I nearly abandoned him as a friend there and then! But I relented due to being middle aged and mellow
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Hate to say it, but when you start to look back wistfully on how things were better back in the day, it's a sign
Yes , 70's were happy days , 8 pints for a pound, pay rises every month, sunny uplands indeed.
Good poll for the Tories from Yougov. However more a product of the Greens on 8% cutting down Labour to 36% than a Tory surge given the Conservatives are still on 35%.
Would still likely see a Labour minority government supported by the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament though
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
So presumably they are happy for this to go to a referendum in Wales, so that the people can decide if public money is best spent on 60% more politicians, their hangers-on, office space and generous expenses?
No, just needs 2/3 of the Senedd to get it through (Labour and PC have 43 out of 60 seats).
Aren’t they about to get into lots of hot water on the gender thing? Seems like an unnecessary introduction of a trans argument they could have ducked.
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
So presumably they are happy for this to go to a referendum in Wales, so that the people can decide if public money is best spent on 60% more politicians, their hangers-on, office space and generous expenses?
Quotas are always such a turn on for voters, and always nice to know you got the second seat for your party purely because of your boobs/winky. Hopefully nobody would dare game Drakefords zipper system by just declaring themselves a girl or boy. What if the list is 1) female 2) non binary, do we miss men and have a woman at 3? And how can they then ensure equal numbers? Not be allowed the last one or force them to find someone who identifies as a cat?! Away and tape off the book section you twit Drakeford
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
So presumably they are happy for this to go to a referendum in Wales, so that the people can decide if public money is best spent on 60% more politicians, their hangers-on, office space and generous expenses?
No, just needs 2/3 of the Senedd to get it through (Labour and PC have 43 out of 60 seats).
Aren’t they about to get into lots of hot water on the gender thing? Seems like an unnecessary introduction of a trans argument they could have ducked.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Fairness:
20% of the votes gets you 20% of the seats.
How is it fair when the candidate order is chosen by the parties themselves.
A fair system allows the voter to decide who are the people elected to represent them.
Dan Hannan did a brilliant piece on d’Hondt, sadly now lost in a Telegraph platform change, congratulating himself on his re-election a week before the vote. You see, he was Conservative list #1 in the South East, it was next to impossible for the electorate to choose not to elect him.
Just seen that Graham Thorpe is in hospital in a serious condition. Hope he makes a full and speedy recovery.
After the shock death of Shane Warne earlier this year and now Thorpe hospitalised, it feels really weird having athletes I grew up watching getting sick or worse. They're young people still, fifties is no age to be getting seriously sick or worse, hope he makes a full recovery.
Wait till you get to your fifties my friend. A fair few of my peers gone. More in very poor health. We all like to think we'll be sprightly at 80. But. It's coming to us all.
Interesting if true. 🇭🇺Ambassador to 🇺🇦 says Hungary "has never been against" Ukraine's accession to NATO, and won't oppose it - Interview with Espreso
Good poll for the Tories from Yougov. However more a product of the Greens on 8% cutting down Labour to 36% than a Tory surge given the Conservatives are still on 35%.
Would still likely see a Labour minority government supported by the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament though
Agree with this - but I don't see any hit to KS's numbers which I was expecting to see if I am honest
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
Interesting quirk about the British-administered Northern Ireland election:
In no less than 12 of 18 of the five-seat constituencies, the top 5 first-preference candidates were elected.
it's not a quirk, that's what generally matters in the majority of constituencies. I saw an analysis of the Republic elections over the last few years and that was invariably the case.
So why bother with STV?
The mechanism of STV ends up ranking the candidates on 1st Preferences, and parties who put up say 2 or 3 candidates in a 5 member seat usually enhances their place in the ranking compared to putting in 5 candidates. In a 5 memebr seat candidates need to get 16.7% of the vote by either 1st preferences or after transfers from below (or above in surpluses).
A so-called proportional system where the number of seats you win depends on how many candidates you put up.
Nonsense on stilts.
Ranking doesn't mean seats. Witness the Glasgow seat where the Greens ranked 1st on 1st preferences, but because they only put up one candidate. SNP still won 2 seats. Ranking counts for nothing next to who is actually elected.
That's not the point I was making.
In the example you give, the Greens put up one candidate to give the best chance of winning a seat. If they had fielded a full slate of five candidates they may not have won a seat, even with the same number of first preference votes.
Charles gives his first King's speech in effect, the first of many to comeas he stands in for the Queen at the State Opening of Parliament. William there too to learn the ropes
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Charlie Kennedy. Disagree with him on much, but he was brilliant at advancing his party and being more influential than the pure numbers should have allowed.
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
So presumably they are happy for this to go to a referendum in Wales, so that the people can decide if public money is best spent on 60% more politicians, their hangers-on, office space and generous expenses?
No, just needs 2/3 of the Senedd to get it through (Labour and PC have 43 out of 60 seats).
Aren’t they about to get into lots of hot water on the gender thing? Seems like an unnecessary introduction of a trans argument they could have ducked.
Oh I do hope so.
I'm looking forward to Drakeford ordering the Women's Equality party to increase the sausage content of its list
PB Republicans need to imagine what a UK (except it would then be something else - the UR?) would look like
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
I would agree, but then I look at the Brexit vote. You can argue about whether being in or out was better and whether having monarchy or republic is better, but either way there's a fair bit of pain changing it. So you'd better be sure that the alternative is better. That was a chunk of my remain vote and would make me hesitant if there was a vote to rejoin in the near future. Yet it happened.
PB Republicans need to imagine what a UK (except it would then be something else - the UR?) would look like
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
Fuck that, I want Ed Sheeran on my £20 notes.
You might hope that their value would × but it would more likely ÷.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Fairness:
20% of the votes gets you 20% of the seats.
How is it fair when the candidate order is chosen by the parties themselves.
A fair system allows the voter to decide who are the people elected to represent them.
Dan Hannan did a brilliant piece on d’Hondt, sadly now lost in a Telegraph platform change, congratulating himself on his re-election a week before the vote. You see, he was Conservative list #1 in the South East, it was next to impossible for the electorate to choose not to elect him.
This is a fundamental part of the voting process for me: you must be able to vote for a named candidate.
Say I was a voter for party Y. I am a believer in pro-choice when it comes to abortion, as generally does Party Y - but it is not a big issue for them. They then inflict a candidate on me who is vehemently anti-abortion.
Or any other issue people feel strongly about.
Before any election, I try and look at the views of the candidates. It matters.
Good poll for the Tories from Yougov. However more a product of the Greens on 8% cutting down Labour to 36% than a Tory surge given the Conservatives are still on 35%.
Would still likely see a Labour minority government supported by the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament though
Yes, very good point. The Green-Labour clawback is real, not least because often the Greens don't even stand a candidate. Conservative donors could get a lot more bang for their buck by donating to the Green branches in marginals to encourage them to stand 😏
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
Interesting quirk about the British-administered Northern Ireland election:
In no less than 12 of 18 of the five-seat constituencies, the top 5 first-preference candidates were elected.
it's not a quirk, that's what generally matters in the majority of constituencies. I saw an analysis of the Republic elections over the last few years and that was invariably the case.
So why bother with STV?
The mechanism of STV ends up ranking the candidates on 1st Preferences, and parties who put up say 2 or 3 candidates in a 5 member seat usually enhances their place in the ranking compared to putting in 5 candidates. In a 5 memebr seat candidates need to get 16.7% of the vote by either 1st preferences or after transfers from below (or above in surpluses).
A so-called proportional system where the number of seats you win depends on how many candidates you put up.
Nonsense on stilts.
You are deliberately misrepresenting the rules of STV. As mentioned earlier, the order of 1st preference votes doesn't matter, the candidates will be elected if they achieve a quota of votes. It doesn't matter when they do it, so the order is irrelevant. It would be ridiculous for a party to put up 5 candidates in a 5 member seat as they would need to achieve 100% of the vote to get them all elected. To make things easier for all concerned it is normal to put up less candidates than FPTP, which is a good thing. Less candidates required overall. Smaller parties are obviously going to put up fewer to concentrate resources. The most likeable aspect is you can prioritise candidates within your party, which d'Hondt doesn't let you. Candidates who don't achieve a quota on their own have to be transfer friendly to progress.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Fairness:
20% of the votes gets you 20% of the seats.
Resulting, in nearly all cases, in a government that 0% has voted for.
I approve. A simple system that delivers proportionality (when each constituency has enough seats).
Way, way better than STV.
A the danger of starting down a rabbit hole, I wholly disagree. D'Hondt gives far too much power to parties, and too little to voters. Simplicity isn't itself a virtue.
If simplicity is a virtue, stick with FPTP...
Fairness is also a virtue. Switch to d'Hondt.
Simplicity and fairness.
Define "fairness", taking into account Arrow's theorem.
Fairness:
20% of the votes gets you 20% of the seats.
Resulting, in nearly all cases, in a government that 0% has voted for.
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Hate to say it, but when you start to look back wistfully on how things were better back in the day, it's a sign
There are much bigger signs than that, my friend
I met some old pals for a drink the other day. I was shocked to see one of them - only a year or two older than me - sporting A HEARING AID
I can accept spectacles. Happens to many in later middle age. But a hearing aid? I associate that with absolute old age
I nearly abandoned him as a friend there and then! But I relented due to being middle aged and mellow
Time to get your order in for the little blue pills...
And? He could be removed the coterie of wastrels can't.
I'm so glad you have that much faith in the quality of our politicians that you think having more of them is a good idea.
Some of our politicians are brilliant. I've got a lot of time Hunt, Starmer, Sturgeon, Davis. Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
Oh fer fucks sake. Starmer. Not even starmer’s mum would call Starmer “a brilliant politician”
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
Previous post highlights why UK is so F***ed up, not one of the supposed good ones has ever done anything other than line their own pockets , lie , cheat or be incompetent.
Yes. A pretty desperate list
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
Lembit Opik. Christopher Chope. H'Angus the monkey and Count Binface. Legends
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60 It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
Do we know what is to happen if a candidate is turfed out of the party under which s/he got a list seat? That was not resolved at Holyrood before it happened (the person stayed).
Just thinking, more generally, the Tories must be really panicking in Wales if they feel the need to have a d'Hondt system in order to survive at all, as in Scotland.
Also - for those of us who can't bear the thought of forever being haunted by the Drake, Mr Davies ART, etc., fill in gap for your worst dreams:
bear in mind that all they have to do is to put themselves at the head of the list for a suitable area and they can in practice never be voted out even if not one would win a FPTP. That's how a lot of ScoTories, including some of those who constituted what Ms Davidson pretentiously called the Opposition Front Bench (as if there was one at Holyrood!), managed to stay MSPs at all. .
The Sxcottish experience is that dHondt is a Tory Preservation Order.
Comments
Katharine Viner
@KathViner
·
35m
I’m delighted to announce that
@PippaCrerar
is to join the Guardian as political editor. Pippa has a remarkable track record of exclusives and has set the political agenda time and again. She joins us later this year
For a bit of fun, the NI FPTP results (on Party first preferences).
SF 9, DUP 6, Alliance 3.
On top candidate.
SF 12, DUP 2, Alliance 2, UUP 1, Ind 1.
Belfast West - 5th place DUP
East Derry - 4th place SF
Foyle - 4th place UUP
North Antrim - 4th place DUP
Strangford - 3rd place TUV
Upper Bann - 3rd place SF
It reminds me of OFSTED changing the middle classification for a school to "Only Satisfactory".
What happens in the immediate future is interesting, but not as interesting as what the polls say after all the pieces currently up in the air have landed.
And then we have the grind of two years of getting slowly poorer to look forward to.
Boris has been able to have a quite successful Premiership getting stuff done despite his deep and obvious personal flaws not because the PM does stuff himself but because there's a whole infrastructure and myriad of support staff all the way down to the people who actually get stuff done.
A new Schools Bill (that) will give the schools regulator powers to crack down on unregistered schools in England, and introduce attendance registers
Given that the DfE and Ofsted already have those powers in abundance, this is a weird Bill.
Is the rest of the QS so pointless, and is that why I've not read any comment here on the substance of the speech?
Just because we get twats like Boris, Corbyn, Salmond, Patel, doesn't mean they're all bad.
If it isn't easy to make fun of, then it wouldn't be a ceremony. But the same would be true of any ceremony that the parodist finds personally important. Funerals. Weddings. The hajj...........and an endless list. What larks.
I think he would also at least be in the middle range of performers for an elected, but largely ceremonial, head of state. President Boris Johnson as a ceremonial head of state is far far better than PM Boris Johnson.
On a tangent I still expect him to run for President of the US, yes I know he is not eligible, but he is eligible enough to be allowed to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from the gullible over there.
Put it another way: I didn’t have you marked down as an avowed royalist who now, suddenly, sees the institution for what it is
Salmond on the other hand WAS quite brilliant. Nearly single handedly broke up one of the grandest old nations in the world, pretty much by sheer force of personality
He is now a corpulent sleaze bag but all political careers end thusly
King Andrew
(two heartbeats away until Charles had children)
As others have pointed out, President Johnson could at least be booted out after a few years...
EDIT: from Wales online:
Any change like this requires the support of two-thirds of the current 60 member Senedd. Between the two parties, they have 43 seats out of the total 60 meaning that their proposals are likely to be approved. In a joint statement, they say changes should come into force by the next Senedd election in 2026.
"myriad of" = immediate ban from PB for life.
SF 29 (+2). DUP 26 (+1). APNI 16 (-2). UUP 9 (=). SDLP 6 (-2). TUV 2 (+1). Ind 2 (=). Green 0 (-1).
After the shock death of Shane Warne earlier this year and now Thorpe hospitalised, it feels really weird having athletes I grew up watching getting sick or worse. They're young people still, fifties is no age to be getting seriously sick or worse, hope he makes a full recovery.
Do you mean David Davis (think as mince?)
The statement from Mark Drakeford, the Labour leader, and Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru leader, says:
The Senedd should have 96 members - up from the current 60
It should be elected using closed proportional lists with integrated statutory gender quotas and mandatory zipping - which requires parties to put forward equal numbers of male and female candidates and alternating between men and women when preparing their candidate lists
Seats should be allocated to parties using the D’Hondt formula (which is the current formula for electing members of the Senedd)
He could still do his shiny boosterism, dressing up and jaunts overseas and we could have a functioning government, what is not to like?
Simplicity and fairness.
Good, thank you for asking. Bit of a spat with my wife last night (which was not fully resolved by this morning) over how to handle a tricky situation with a toddler and some other stresses in our lives - both tired and grumpy, but resolved it now. 19 mile cycle in to work (further than usual due to cycle path closure and temporary address during building work) gave some much needed perspective. Gorgeous morning with the wind assisting me too, suspect the return leg will be more of a challenge!
Hope you are well, too. How was the cricket?
Salmond has always been a bit Salmondy. Yes, I can't argue that he was very effective at one point, but even that's now in the past. He's gone from genius who makes your skin crawl to just someone who makes your skin crawl. And it's not recent.
Nonsense on stilts.
A fair few of my peers gone. More in very poor health.
We all like to think we'll be sprightly at 80. But.
It's coming to us all.
The crown is woven into every corner of our national life, from the law to parliament to the army and navy to our stamps and money and shared and collective memory
It would be an act of near-impossible vandalism to get rid of all that. A huge emotional and constitutional wrench. And for what? To what end? How would we be better? We’d need some elected figurehead so it would be president fuck knows. Ed sheeran? President Mister Tumble off of CBBC?
It’s just never going to happen. Even if republican sentiment went over 50% people would look at the pointless chaos and say Nah
Could be his Waterloo?
But I'm a pluralist, and FPTP is considerably wronger than many alternatives.
What the country really needs most urgently is rebuilding of trust between metropolitans and conservatives, and less politically expedient culture war, as well as possibly the most extreme ends of identity politics on the left.
I know you were joking but I do have a source (ish) inside Starmer's circle, I'm not sure I'll get anything out of them particularly fast but for example yesterday I knew a bit before everyone else that he was going to make that statement at 4. I posted it for the benefit of people betting, I think some people got on.
Vanishingly few politicians are “brilliant”. In the last 40 years of British political life I’d suggest salmond and thatcher. With the possibility of early Blair. That’s it
20% of the votes gets you 20% of the seats.
I met some old pals for a drink the other day. I was shocked to see one of them - only a year or two older than me - sporting A HEARING AID
I can accept spectacles. Happens to many in later middle age. But a hearing aid? I associate that with absolute old age
I nearly abandoned him as a friend there and then! But I relented due to being middle aged and mellow
Would still likely see a Labour minority government supported by the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament though
What if the list is 1) female 2) non binary, do we miss men and have a woman at 3? And how can they then ensure equal numbers? Not be allowed the last one or force them to find someone who identifies as a cat?!
Away and tape off the book section you twit Drakeford
A fair system allows the voter to decide who are the people elected to represent them.
Dan Hannan did a brilliant piece on d’Hondt, sadly now lost in a Telegraph platform change, congratulating himself on his re-election a week before the vote. You see, he was Conservative list #1 in the South East, it was next to impossible for the electorate to choose not to elect him.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Botham
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D'Margio_Wright-Phillips
🇭🇺Ambassador to 🇺🇦 says Hungary "has never been against" Ukraine's accession to NATO, and won't oppose it - Interview with Espreso
Russia's an aggressor country, 🇭🇺 has no territorial claims to Zakarpattia, Ambo István Íjgyártó says.
https://mobile.twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1523995412797046785
In the example you give, the Greens put up one candidate to give the best chance of winning a seat. If they had fielded a full slate of five candidates they may not have won a seat, even with the same number of first preference votes.
Say I was a voter for party Y. I am a believer in pro-choice when it comes to abortion, as generally does Party Y - but it is not a big issue for them. They then inflict a candidate on me who is vehemently anti-abortion.
Or any other issue people feel strongly about.
Before any election, I try and look at the views of the candidates. It matters.
Just thinking, more generally, the Tories must be really panicking in Wales if they feel the need to have a d'Hondt system in order to survive at all, as in Scotland.
Also - for those of us who can't bear the thought of forever being haunted by the Drake, Mr Davies ART, etc., fill in gap for your worst dreams:
bear in mind that all they have to do is to put themselves at the head of the list for a suitable area and they can in practice never be voted out even if not one would win a FPTP. That's how a lot of ScoTories, including some of those who constituted what Ms Davidson pretentiously called the Opposition Front Bench (as if there was one at Holyrood!), managed to stay MSPs at all. .
The Sxcottish experience is that dHondt is a Tory Preservation Order.