The last paragraph just about sums it all up.

The choice is Labour’s, to go on trying to secure narrow, shallow and occasional FPTP victories on policies only acceptable to those who want nothing to change, especially on climate, or mobilise and build the progressive majority that exists in our country. Infrequent, weak single party government or strong progressive alliances most of the time? The flick of a switch in terms of how we count votes is a game changer for progressives and the planet.

I don’t want a system that relies on the least worst option. This system is low hanging fruit for abusive regimes with a war chest to spend on campaigns.

  • HelloThere@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Sure Labour could add it, and yes 70%+ do support it, but you’re ignoring the fact that tories don’t need to convince >50% that electoral reform isn’t needed, they only need to convince enough people to swing the vote in swing seats to keep themselves in power. That’s maybe a few 100k people across the entire country, much much less than 50% of the electorate.

    And more so, I feel this needs to be kept in the limelight to remind Labour that it is an item that is high on the voters want lists.

    Bluntly, it doesn’t matter what people who are already voting Labour want. I live in one of the safest Labour seats in the country, policies that turn a 25k majority in to a 26k majority are meaningless.

    People who are already progressive leaning, if voting in a tory target seat, are likely to vote tactically against the Tories, regardless of party or manifesto (Lab, Lib, or Green).

    So you’re back to tory swing voters, and if they care about it. This is precisely why we need electoral reform, but it’s precisely the thing that stops it.

    The priority order must be

    1. Get the Tories out (via winning)
    2. Keep the Tories out (via electoral reform)
    • Syldon@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      And if we get the Tories out and Starmer doesn’t announce it for the next election in 2028, what would be the point of voting Labour then?

      • HelloThere@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Depends on where you live.

        If you can vote for a party with ER in their manifesto, and doing so doesn’t risk a tory government, then absolutely do it.

        If you can’t, you’ve got to make a choice.

        • Syldon@feddit.ukOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I live in a very Labour dominant area. My MP is a total waste of space. I am going to pinch really tight on my nose when I vote the next time around.

          • OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I mean if you genuinely live in a labour dominant area, you can vote for whomever you like, unless the polls change drastically.

            It’s not like it will suddenly swing Tory at the next election, with no warning.

            • Syldon@feddit.ukOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              I think we have all seen that there is no guarantees with politics these days. So no, that is not an option if I want to remove the Tories. Give me PR voting then I will vote for what I want, rather than what I don’t want, which is the case currently.