Labour and Lib-Dems sign a non-aggression pact

PR definitely increases choice. I always voted for the Party I wanted in the European elections.

Nezumi65

Septimia

It does reduce the choice for voters, though. Surely that's not good for democracy.

Maybe we need more Monster Raving Loony candidates - at least we'd understand when they live up to their name!

We don’t have a choice though. I’m a Lib Dem in Tory-Labour marginal. I have to vote Labour at GEs. No choice.

It’s the only way we’ll get rid of them. Hopefully PR brought in once they’re out?

I am sure the lie misinformation about reducing the choice has been answered elsewhere. I would help if you explain how and in what way it does this. As far as I can see it increases it.

Germanshepherdsmum

I'm sure you remember what happened to the LibDems after the coalition. Neither party really got what it wanted. A total mess.

That might just have been because the Conservatives were determined to destroy any positive gains the LibDems might make from being in power. They don't get collaboration being a good thing unless it makes them look good, do they? The Nasty Party - very well named.

Grown-ups can make 1+1 outstrip what two individual parties can do. As long as the Tories aren't included I believe it can be made to work.

Interesting, thanks Nezumi- will look into that.

I am hoping that Labour now realise with the shift in Scotland they need PR as well.

Kali2 - might be worth a vote swap? I always try and arrange one.

Nezumi65, I wrote to KS about this very matter last November. I’m still waiting to hear, but in general political parties only want PR when they’re not in power.

What does choice mean with FPTP- what choice is it to know that because of FPTP you might as well stay in bed and not bother, as it is clear your vote will go straight into the bin- because of where you live. (my case, all my life).

Septimia

It does reduce the choice for voters, though. Surely that's not good for democracy.

Maybe we need more Monster Raving Loony candidates - at least we'd understand when they live up to their name!

We don’t have a choice though. I’m a Lib Dem in Tory-Labour marginal. I have to vote Labour at GEs. No choice.

It’s the only way we’ll get rid of them. Hopefully PR brought in once they’re out?

Because an alliance with the Tories was totally un-natural and could never work.

I'm sure you remember what happened to the LibDems after the coalition. Neither party really got what it wanted. A total mess.

No party should ever be able to enact every policy proposed in its manifesto unless it gets over 50% of the votes.

If no party gets support from a majority of electors, it should have to co-operate with another party and agree a joint programme of legislation which involves compromise.

Compromise is not a dirty word. It is what grown-ups know they have to do. Only kindergarten children think they should get their own way all the time.

I’ve always believed it’s important to honour promises and I would never promise to do something I knew I couldn’t. Integrity. You so often hear interviewers asking for guarantees of thing - that for instance there will never be another lockdown. How could any politician guarantee something totally outside their power? Certainly the impact that covid has had on the economy will need to be factored into whatever promises are made in future manifestos. To ignore it in order to get votes would be foolhardy in the extreme (though there will always be those who insist it was all done with printed money - QE - so it’s irrelevant).

You’re probably right GSM. I’m not so closely involved with the government.
Forgive me for being a tad cynical, until we get a new government that doesn’t use the ‘sorting out the mess’ claim.
DH says it might be a bit different this time. If any party, including Tories get in next time, the claim will be we can’t fulfil our election manifesto promises because of the financial implications of Covid.
In real life, if I know I can’t, or probably can’t do something I wouldn’t make a promise and I don’t suppose you would either.

The party leaders are closely questioned on those matters in the run up to an election Mollygo, more so nowadays than ever before.

GSM the problem with policies from any government in recent years is that they don’t come with explanations of how the policies will be implemented and where the funding for these will be provided.
Then as soon as they’re elected and questions are asked, out come the “we have to sort out the financial problems from the previous government” claims.
Perhaps for the future, all manifesto promises should come with the information that, knowing the current state of finances, this is all they can actually promise to do.

Policies are set out in a manifesto prior to a GE are they not? So voters know what they’re voting for. And that’s a simple statement of fact not an invitation to talk about promises not fulfilled because of the unexpected global pandemic.

Germanshepherdsmum

Sorry but I don’t understand your post Daisy. How do I know what policies Johnson ‘would implement’? I don’t have a crystal ball. In any event he isn’t a dictator, he isn’t able to formulate and implement policies in isolation.

So, if you do not know what policies he stands on, you are just voting Conservative whatever that now means. You do seem to be saying the name matters more than the deeds.

Okay[shrug]

Look how many decent Conservative MP’s either left the party or were pushed out by the current leadership.

Sorry but I don’t understand your post Daisy. How do I know what policies Johnson ‘would implement’? I don’t have a crystal ball. In any event he isn’t a dictator, he isn’t able to formulate and implement policies in isolation.

It sounds more like:

Label = party no matter what the policies. Or are you saying the policies Johnson would impliment are those you agree with?

Policies = the party. Not the man.

Germanshepherdsmum

There is a difference. I don’t like the man and would like to see him replaced but I am a Conservative voter and am not ashamed to say that.

How does that differ from someone who supports Corbyn policies but not the man.

You cannot differentiate between the two, because policies= the man, or party leader.

So you also approve of Nadine Dorries, Rees Mogg, Liz Truss and the other front bench Conservatives currently running the country? Even my lifelong Conservative voting friend says she can no longer support the party.

There is a difference. I don’t like the man and would like to see him replaced but I am a Conservative voter and am not ashamed to say that.

Ah, so although you don't support Johnson, you support those who do. At least that is clear.