The UK needs to ditch FPTP as soon as possible. It's bonkers that a party can get a supermajority on the back of 30% of the popular vote. A result based on proportional representation would more accurately reflect the views of the country.
November 8, 2025 at 2:55 PM
The UK needs to ditch FPTP as soon as possible. It's bonkers that a party can get a supermajority on the back of 30% of the popular vote. A result based on proportional representation would more accurately reflect the views of the country.
👇🎯
Gerrymandering is counter-majoritarian
FPTP single member districts in a country w/ our urban/rural population distribution are counter-majoritarian
Seniority-driven committee structures shaping agendas can be counter-majoritarian
~Every single institution we have is counter-majoritarian
Gerrymandering is counter-majoritarian
FPTP single member districts in a country w/ our urban/rural population distribution are counter-majoritarian
Seniority-driven committee structures shaping agendas can be counter-majoritarian
~Every single institution we have is counter-majoritarian
one thing i find crazy-making is the idea that getting rid of the filibuster would make congress a purely majoritarian institution. bicameralism itself is counter-majoritarian! equal state representation is counter-majoritarian! the fact that senate elections are staggered is counter-majoritarian!
November 8, 2025 at 10:42 PM
👇🎯
Gerrymandering is counter-majoritarian
FPTP single member districts in a country w/ our urban/rural population distribution are counter-majoritarian
Seniority-driven committee structures shaping agendas can be counter-majoritarian
~Every single institution we have is counter-majoritarian
Gerrymandering is counter-majoritarian
FPTP single member districts in a country w/ our urban/rural population distribution are counter-majoritarian
Seniority-driven committee structures shaping agendas can be counter-majoritarian
~Every single institution we have is counter-majoritarian
If people are really truly serious about third parties, then they need to move away from FPTP everywhere possible.
There is a lot of ways for elections to work but everywhere that is FPTP ... you trend towards two parties.
There is a lot of ways for elections to work but everywhere that is FPTP ... you trend towards two parties.
you cannot create a viable third party without changing the constitution.
to change the constitution, you need control of one of the major political parties, at minimum.
anyone refusing to accept this is a fucking child i'm tired of entertaining.
to change the constitution, you need control of one of the major political parties, at minimum.
anyone refusing to accept this is a fucking child i'm tired of entertaining.
November 10, 2025 at 8:13 PM
If people are really truly serious about third parties, then they need to move away from FPTP everywhere possible.
There is a lot of ways for elections to work but everywhere that is FPTP ... you trend towards two parties.
There is a lot of ways for elections to work but everywhere that is FPTP ... you trend towards two parties.
Well since Labour is polling behind the Greens, Labour voters need to not split the vote. Also if Starmer agreed with you he'd do away with FPTP
November 10, 2025 at 7:55 AM
Well since Labour is polling behind the Greens, Labour voters need to not split the vote. Also if Starmer agreed with you he'd do away with FPTP
Yes, which is why it makes no sense to compare final round RCV share to a FPTP vote share.
November 6, 2025 at 10:06 PM
Yes, which is why it makes no sense to compare final round RCV share to a FPTP vote share.
Or basic, non-financial stuff. Sorting out the BBC and GB 'News', getting off X, getting rid of voter ID, getting rid of FPTP, etc.
November 8, 2025 at 1:50 PM
Or basic, non-financial stuff. Sorting out the BBC and GB 'News', getting off X, getting rid of voter ID, getting rid of FPTP, etc.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
It is absolutely imperative that we have PR. This is what will neutralise Reform.
If Starmer/his government want to be heroes and be memorable they need to introduce what 80% of their own party wants: PR.
Belarus 🇧🇾 is the only other country that has FPTP.
It is absolutely imperative that we have PR. This is what will neutralise Reform.
If Starmer/his government want to be heroes and be memorable they need to introduce what 80% of their own party wants: PR.
Belarus 🇧🇾 is the only other country that has FPTP.
Britain’s two-party politics is fragmenting: what unintended consequences await? | Andy Beckett
On one hand, no more safe seats or long careers could mean less complacency. On the other, no big parties could mean greater corporate influence, says Guardian columnist Andy Beckett
www.theguardian.com
November 6, 2025 at 11:02 PM
www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
It is absolutely imperative that we have PR. This is what will neutralise Reform.
If Starmer/his government want to be heroes and be memorable they need to introduce what 80% of their own party wants: PR.
Belarus 🇧🇾 is the only other country that has FPTP.
It is absolutely imperative that we have PR. This is what will neutralise Reform.
If Starmer/his government want to be heroes and be memorable they need to introduce what 80% of their own party wants: PR.
Belarus 🇧🇾 is the only other country that has FPTP.
The long term effects of voting for the “lesser evil” under our First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system. It’s clear why the right support it and oppose Proportional Representation (PR). But Starmer, who now opposes PR, needs to explain himself. He is facilitating the rise of Farage’s Reform!
November 9, 2025 at 7:55 AM
The long term effects of voting for the “lesser evil” under our First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system. It’s clear why the right support it and oppose Proportional Representation (PR). But Starmer, who now opposes PR, needs to explain himself. He is facilitating the rise of Farage’s Reform!
Basically, the radicalisation and demographic narrowing of the British right means Labour is now closer to being the 'neutral' option under FPTP.
I think that means the future is probably Labour majorities when Labour has its shit together, and unstable minority governments the rest of the time.
I think that means the future is probably Labour majorities when Labour has its shit together, and unstable minority governments the rest of the time.
November 9, 2025 at 1:14 PM
Basically, the radicalisation and demographic narrowing of the British right means Labour is now closer to being the 'neutral' option under FPTP.
I think that means the future is probably Labour majorities when Labour has its shit together, and unstable minority governments the rest of the time.
I think that means the future is probably Labour majorities when Labour has its shit together, and unstable minority governments the rest of the time.
Inevitable in FPTP voting?
Question. How many political parties are there represented at federal level in Canada?
Question. How many political parties are there represented at federal level in Canada?
November 10, 2025 at 8:25 PM
Inevitable in FPTP voting?
Question. How many political parties are there represented at federal level in Canada?
Question. How many political parties are there represented at federal level in Canada?
…of US politics as changes will be needed not just within the GOP (it needs to be dismantled).
Maybe the US will finally be ready for actual democracy and not this poor imitation of democracy that is the FPTP/duopoly system.
Maybe the US will finally be ready for actual democracy and not this poor imitation of democracy that is the FPTP/duopoly system.
November 9, 2025 at 2:47 AM
…of US politics as changes will be needed not just within the GOP (it needs to be dismantled).
Maybe the US will finally be ready for actual democracy and not this poor imitation of democracy that is the FPTP/duopoly system.
Maybe the US will finally be ready for actual democracy and not this poor imitation of democracy that is the FPTP/duopoly system.
There is no purpose to doomerism. We have one path forward to abolishing ICE: electing enough Democrats who support that platform to make it a political reality.
There is no revolution coming, no one is going to firebomb all the ICE offices, and third parties don't work in FPTP.
There is no revolution coming, no one is going to firebomb all the ICE offices, and third parties don't work in FPTP.
November 7, 2025 at 5:42 PM
There is no purpose to doomerism. We have one path forward to abolishing ICE: electing enough Democrats who support that platform to make it a political reality.
There is no revolution coming, no one is going to firebomb all the ICE offices, and third parties don't work in FPTP.
There is no revolution coming, no one is going to firebomb all the ICE offices, and third parties don't work in FPTP.
(There were lower winning primaries, in most cases in the form of FPTP votes without preferences, in the first two elections 1901 and 1903 though 1903 especially comes with asterisks about "winning" and uncontested seats.)
November 7, 2025 at 9:37 AM
(There were lower winning primaries, in most cases in the form of FPTP votes without preferences, in the first two elections 1901 and 1903 though 1903 especially comes with asterisks about "winning" and uncontested seats.)
One thing about the Minneapolis mayoral race is that the challengers basically ended up running a nebulous Anyone But Frey campaign. People in NY (clearly) HATED Cuomo but Mamdani still had run that primary like it was FPTP and not RCV.
November 5, 2025 at 5:51 PM
One thing about the Minneapolis mayoral race is that the challengers basically ended up running a nebulous Anyone But Frey campaign. People in NY (clearly) HATED Cuomo but Mamdani still had run that primary like it was FPTP and not RCV.
It's far from being the case that a clear majority of Brits want a Reform government but with Labour as they are, with our undemocratic FPTP electoral system, with a lack of left unity, it could very well happen anyway.
November 5, 2025 at 2:26 PM
It's far from being the case that a clear majority of Brits want a Reform government but with Labour as they are, with our undemocratic FPTP electoral system, with a lack of left unity, it could very well happen anyway.
Just waiting for everyone from NI to chime in with how amazing PR is.
No?
Oh no, that’ll be cus it’s fucking stupid.
Discussions about changing from FPTP to PR is literally like rearranging the deckchairs as the titanic sinks.
Think bigger.
No?
Oh no, that’ll be cus it’s fucking stupid.
Discussions about changing from FPTP to PR is literally like rearranging the deckchairs as the titanic sinks.
Think bigger.
November 8, 2025 at 3:41 PM
Just waiting for everyone from NI to chime in with how amazing PR is.
No?
Oh no, that’ll be cus it’s fucking stupid.
Discussions about changing from FPTP to PR is literally like rearranging the deckchairs as the titanic sinks.
Think bigger.
No?
Oh no, that’ll be cus it’s fucking stupid.
Discussions about changing from FPTP to PR is literally like rearranging the deckchairs as the titanic sinks.
Think bigger.
Every day I get a little bit more annoyed at the condescending "that's just how FPTP works, idiot" guff in response to people saying the underlying facts of the last election should set off massive warning lights for Labour
November 5, 2025 at 7:25 PM
Every day I get a little bit more annoyed at the condescending "that's just how FPTP works, idiot" guff in response to people saying the underlying facts of the last election should set off massive warning lights for Labour
Remember when opponents of PR would cynically argue that "but the far right would win seats, so we have to stick with FPTP"? I wonder how those guys are feeling rn when they look at polling.
Labour could have mitigated this but introducing electoral reform, proportional representation, but of course they don't want to do that because, like the Tories, they want complete control with only 30% of the vote. So we will have to suffer because working with the Greens/SNP etc. is anathema.
November 5, 2025 at 2:34 PM
Remember when opponents of PR would cynically argue that "but the far right would win seats, so we have to stick with FPTP"? I wonder how those guys are feeling rn when they look at polling.
@jamesbowes01.bsky.social I disagree with Sky News here I think Reform and Tories wouldn’t mind Labour adopting Denmark’s polices. It would further split Labour’s vote like it has in Denmark. But Denmark doesn’t have FPTP so vote splits have a different impact to the UK. news.sky.com/story/denmar...
Reform's been pretty quiet since Labour started exploring Danish migration model - and this is why
Many on the left are deeply alarmed about the UK following a more draconian Danish path - with MPs like Nadia Whittome and Clive Lewis describing their ideas as "hardcore", "dangerous", "far right" an...
news.sky.com
November 9, 2025 at 9:39 AM
@jamesbowes01.bsky.social I disagree with Sky News here I think Reform and Tories wouldn’t mind Labour adopting Denmark’s polices. It would further split Labour’s vote like it has in Denmark. But Denmark doesn’t have FPTP so vote splits have a different impact to the UK. news.sky.com/story/denmar...
Really hope my friends in the UK are able to get a similar result with the Greens at their next election, though in a FPTP world, I think it's a tough struggle. Still, it is fucking marvellous to have hope.
November 5, 2025 at 7:17 PM
Really hope my friends in the UK are able to get a similar result with the Greens at their next election, though in a FPTP world, I think it's a tough struggle. Still, it is fucking marvellous to have hope.
Let us keep the UK out for now.
We still can’t trust them to honour a simple FTA (TCA).
Let them prove that they can honour those deal already in place before we discuss any new deals with them.
As long as you can win absolute power in the UK from 30% of the vote (FPTP) they are not a reliable
We still can’t trust them to honour a simple FTA (TCA).
Let them prove that they can honour those deal already in place before we discuss any new deals with them.
As long as you can win absolute power in the UK from 30% of the vote (FPTP) they are not a reliable
November 7, 2025 at 2:05 PM
Let us keep the UK out for now.
We still can’t trust them to honour a simple FTA (TCA).
Let them prove that they can honour those deal already in place before we discuss any new deals with them.
As long as you can win absolute power in the UK from 30% of the vote (FPTP) they are not a reliable
We still can’t trust them to honour a simple FTA (TCA).
Let them prove that they can honour those deal already in place before we discuss any new deals with them.
As long as you can win absolute power in the UK from 30% of the vote (FPTP) they are not a reliable
Any flavour of government that wins a significant majority under FPTP is not going to be interested in PR. Therein lies the problem. Self-interest always trumps public interest.
November 9, 2025 at 8:14 AM
Any flavour of government that wins a significant majority under FPTP is not going to be interested in PR. Therein lies the problem. Self-interest always trumps public interest.
If you think this sounds far-fetched given current polling, remember that the Canadian Liberals were reduced to 11% of seats and then came back to win a majority.
In a fragmented, realigning FPTP system, there is a benefit to being the least 'disruptive' seeming party.
In a fragmented, realigning FPTP system, there is a benefit to being the least 'disruptive' seeming party.
Basically, the radicalisation and demographic narrowing of the British right means Labour is now closer to being the 'neutral' option under FPTP.
I think that means the future is probably Labour majorities when Labour has its shit together, and unstable minority governments the rest of the time.
I think that means the future is probably Labour majorities when Labour has its shit together, and unstable minority governments the rest of the time.
November 9, 2025 at 2:03 PM
If you think this sounds far-fetched given current polling, remember that the Canadian Liberals were reduced to 11% of seats and then came back to win a majority.
In a fragmented, realigning FPTP system, there is a benefit to being the least 'disruptive' seeming party.
In a fragmented, realigning FPTP system, there is a benefit to being the least 'disruptive' seeming party.
Yeah, PR vs. FPTP. Big difference. Also, asylum aside, the Welsh and English decided in 2016 that the UK would micromanage all labor migration with visas and work permits -- hard to compare general UK immigration policy to an EU state with FoM.
November 10, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Yeah, PR vs. FPTP. Big difference. Also, asylum aside, the Welsh and English decided in 2016 that the UK would micromanage all labor migration with visas and work permits -- hard to compare general UK immigration policy to an EU state with FoM.
That's the problem of FPTP systems: you have de facto only two parties that have an experience of being in the government, the others have been perpetually opposition parties with no direct experience of government, unlike in proportional systems where almost everyone has been at a certain point.
November 7, 2025 at 1:23 PM
That's the problem of FPTP systems: you have de facto only two parties that have an experience of being in the government, the others have been perpetually opposition parties with no direct experience of government, unlike in proportional systems where almost everyone has been at a certain point.