People quickly forget that the Tories won because UKIP got 4 million votes namely taking votes from Labour.Ukippers must not vote tactically
If you're forced to vote tactically in an election for the least worst option we don't live in a democracy! All votes should count. Need PR.
-
-
-
I'll never vote tactically. I have principles & I stick to them. The system is at fault. Every vote should count. Need proportional system.
-
Precisely. Totally agree.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We do not need PR. PR would give us more coalitions we want strong governments
-
Not necessarily true. Conservatives would still have won last election with PR systemhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32601281 …
-
With 3.8m votes in GE2015
#UKIP would have had ~83 MPs. Actually more than 83, as under PR more ppl would have voted UKIP & not tactically. -
Fair enough. I stand corrected. Might have put pressure on Gov more. I voted ukip last time.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Like for MEPs? Thought you said that was undemocratic??
-
MEPs have no power. They cannot initiate legislation and are just ignored by the unelected commissioners and presidents.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Sad to see fellow UKIP member endorsing tactical voting.
-
I am not endorsing it at all. I'm saying the electoral system is broken. We need proportional representation. I would never vote tactically.
-
I'll let you off the hook ;)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We don't live in a democracy. If we did there would be proportional representation. First past the post preserves status quo party dominance
-
I agree with you on PR but it is silly to say that the UK is not a democracy.
-
Two votes a decade is meaningless. UK State moving towards totalitarianism; new taxes, laws, rules, policies, interference, regulations
-
I would like to see more devolution to local authorities and the three smaller nations.
New conversation -
-
-
Where London carries even more influence than it already does? And NI doesn't matter? Voting reform: Yes. Simple PR: No.
-
Nobody is asking for simple PR, most realistic options are AMS and STV, the systems already in use in UK's regional assemblies.
-
"Need PR"
-
PR = proportional representation. This is a general name given to all voting systems that give proportional results.
-
STV and AMS aren't 'simple PR', they retain a constituency link. But they are 'PR', because the results match how people voted.
-
Yes. AMS and STV fit that definition. But they retain a constituency link and are not 'simple PR'.
-
We'll have to agree to disagree. We would have lots of Kipper MPs rather than none on that definition. Whereas unknown on AMS and STV.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.