Stuart Bramley 🍏🇪🇺🇺🇦🍒

Creatives need to go on strike to protest this, like the Hollywood writers did.

Among the many, many reasons this is nuts: the bulk of British Muslims are Sunni, while Iran is a Shia theocracy. Sunni-Shia rivalry and mutual hostility goes back roughly a thousand years and has played as large a role (if not larger) as Protestant-Catholic rivalry/conflict in Europe

..and yes, PR will force a change of political culture so that people will actually have to think a bit more about the principles of the people they are voting for rather than it just being transactional. That is a good thing.

It's a process of building consensus, and it means that governments have to take account of the interests of minorities and groups that did not vote for them. You don't end up with the largest minority having an effective dictatorship for 5 years where they get to rule rough shod over the majority.

That was their record in government..

Again the EU referendum only happened because UKIP splitting the Tory vote threatened the Tories in a way they couldn't have done with PR.

Fascist owner aside, I've never understood why people like them. They're just bigger Ford Mondeos. Ugly, boring cars.

Weird. I'm sure I saw Alan Johnson on Kuenssberg's programme saying that Prime Ministers simply couldn't possibly come out and say such things and what a ludicrous thing it was for @zackpolanski.bsky.social to suggest it.

Also - no-one goes back 5 years and holds governments accountable based on their manifesto. No-one remembers the manifesto. People vote based on the incumbents record in government. Largely based on little more than the 6-12 months preceding the vote..

Give us PR and these parties break apart and are replaced with smaller, more clearly delineated ideologically distinct parties -Labour breaks into Corbynist/Blairite left/right groups.. Tories break into One Nation/Bruges group etc. Then you can vote for the ideology that actually represents you.

This is precisely the point I came in at. You can't identify broad church parties' principles because they have to try and represent multiple contradictory constituencies. They change position to move to where they believe voters are, rather than attract voters to their position.

Manifestos and policy pledges are ditched all the time. They're constitutionally irrelevant. Principles are far more important.. It's a change to political culture that will be socially beneficial much more widely..

Brown was willing to resign to make a deal happen.. but it just wasn't viable.. would have been confidence & supply, a minority government or a tiny majority rainbow coalition..

PR obviously changes the calculations and power dynamics. They'd have been a much more equal partner with Labour.

Of course, under PR, we wouldn't have the two big broad church parties anyway which makes it all rather moot - they'd split and people could vote for the flavour of left/right that they actually believe in.

Why would they? Brown's Labour and the Lib Dems had far more in common but it couldn't have been made to work. They went into coalition with the Tories because the parliamentary arithmetic made that the only viable option.

I haven't talked about Israel because, frankly, I don't know a lot about Israeli domestic politics. I don't have time to change that right now. I do know that Likud is the biggest party and think it's unsurprising if they engage with other similar far right parties to form governments though.

PR is irrelevant to the rise of the NSDAP. It's all about the fragility of the Weimar Republic, post-WWI economic collapse, the treaty of Versailles and the shaming of German national identity, the desire of many conservatives and corporates to return to autocratic government and end democracy..

The fact as I have outlined elsewhere is that at no point did PR give the NSDAP the right to form a government. They had a bigger share of the vote than our current government do, and FPTP gave that government a large majority of seats in parliament. Goering even lamented this at trial!

Indeed, or Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, the Heritage Foundation, Turning Point or any of the other numerous malevolent US actors.

It's fuel for their politics of grievance and it's designed to undermine faith in democracy so that their supporters will be OK with them ending it if they get into power..

The Lib Dems + Labour did not have enough seats to form a majority government in 2010. They would have been 11 short.

PR had nothing to do with the rise of Hitler. That's a myth that has been debunked over and over.

FPTP elected the ConDem coalition. The Tories had 36.1% of the vote but 47% of the seats. Labour 29% but 39% of seats. The Lib Dems got 23% of the vote but only 8% of seats.

Under PR the ConDem government never happens. It's a Labour-Lib Dem coalition instead.

The NSDAP were partnered in government by conservatives who voted with them to change the law, outlaw the communist party and pass the enabling act which allowed Hitler to pass laws without parliamentary consent. At no point did PR give them a majority or make it easier for them to gain power.

The NSDAP got 37.27% of the vote in 1932. That did not give them enough seats to form a government. Our Labour government got 33.7% of the vote under FPTP and that gave them 411 MPs, a majority of 167 - 63.2% of the seats. FPTP would have been better for the Nazis.

Bring back the trams

I know it's a shit result for us but.. lol@scotty parker

One of the worst refereeing performances this season. Absolutely lost the plot, no consistency whatsoever, some comically bad decisions both ways and ended up just forgetting basic laws of the game. We probably got away with one in regards Adams though, thought that looked a red where I was.. #afcb

VAR should be able to review and award yellow cards for simulation.. Le Fee was embarrassing today. #afcb

#afcb

You'd have to delegate full authority at the outset of the process.. it couldn't come back to the government of the day at any point. I don't know how/if that works from a constitutional point of view though..

My approach however, so that government could not be accused of reforming the system to one that suits themselves - would be to create a royal commission to produce recommendations for electoral reform, and then put that to a citizen's assembly to make a final decision.