46

Because Labour gets more seats with regional representation. Even the famed Tony Blair landslide majorities were never actually a popular majority. In 2005, Labour won 55% of the seats with 35% of the vote. In 2001, Labour won 63% of the seats with 41% of the vote. In 1997, Labour won 63% of the seats with 43% of the vote. And even when Labour doesn't ...


26

There is a strategic reason, and a philosophical reason, but they are related: With something like the current range of views in the UK, it is very unlikely that Labour could ever win a majority under PR. They would need to form a coalition, and probably a 3-way coalition with the Liberals and the SNP. And while there is some political overlap between the ...


12

Something else to consider: People vote differently in different voting systems. Right now, a lot of people vote for either Labour or the Conservatives not because they actually want to vote for them, but because a vote for some smaller party would be "wasted" under FPTP. Under PR that's no longer a consideration and I predict you'd see a massive ...


10

This has actually happened. Lesotho is one of the four or so countries to use the MMP system. In the 2007 general election, the ruling party voluntarily split in two, fielding only electorate candidates in one party and instructing their followers to vote for the other party for their list vote. They obtained something like 75% of the seats for only 52% of ...


9

PR is often promoted as being more representative because it results in greater plurality, i.e. a greater variety of views and parties in government. The alternative you mention, First Past the Post, tends to result in two or three parties gaining the majority of the seats and less popular ones getting nothing. An example of this is the 2015 General ...


9

This may be a ridiculous suggestion, but it's possible that not all politicians are cynical. 😉 The question's premise is that Proportional Representation would be in the Labour Party's selfish interest, and other answers have looked at whether that premise is true. But even if it was true, that might not be sufficient reason to adopt it as policy: after all,...


8

Everyone who resides in the 50 states of the United States is counted, including noncitizens. U.S. Armed Forces personnel and federal civilian employees stationed outside the United States are also counted. From the US Census Bureau website: Who is included in the apportionment population counts? The apportionment calculation is based upon the total ...


8

They cannot guarantee that their leader will be the first person elected in their party. However, there are a few things they can do to improve those odds (though it's hard to quantify the effect these can have): Placing them at the top of the list that appears on the ballot paper: people who are more interested in the party than the politician sometimes ...


8

Many countries (in Europe and elsewhere) use some sort of proportional representation with multiple seats per district. Districts are very stable, possibly as large as a US state or even just a single national district. If demographic changes are so large as to threaten the balance between different regions, you can rebalance by removing or adding seats in ...


7

Leaving aside the obvious illegitimacy and dishonesty in this course of action (which would cost some votes and more reputation) and the ability of courts in common law countries to mitigate patent fraud (unless the Crimson and Pink parties actually put forward separate legislative platforms to the voters, rivals could simply bring suit to treat them as the ...


7

The IDEA book, has among the advantages of first past the post one that might answer your question (on majority-biased outcomes): [b.] It gives rise to single-party governments. The ‘seat bonuses’ for the largest party common under FPTP (e.g. where one party wins 45 per cent of the national vote but 55 per cent of the seats) mean that coalition ...


7

Morally, I agree with the message of the other current answers that in the absence of more information on the intentions of your fellow voters, it is often worth honestly stating your full ordering of preferences for candidates under STV. However it is worth noting that because the order in which candidates are eliminated influences the final result, the ...


6

While it is the case today that most European countries have a form of proportional representation, that apparently was notthe case when they first introduced democracy/elections, as described in a paper by Jonathan Rodden, which says During the period from around 1890 to 1920, most European countries dramatically expanded the franchise to include the ...


6

Look at places like Israel or Germany, compared to the US. From this limited sample: PR leads to some smaller fringe/extremist parties in parliament. PR keeps large center-right or center-left parties from drifting to the fringes. PR may require coalition governments which give those small fringe parties influence out of proportion to their seats.


6

Assuming you are talking about the Irish General Elections that are coming up (seeing your account states you are Irish) That works as follows: The 160 members of Dáil Éireann will be elected by single transferable vote (STV) from 39 constituencies, each returning between three and five TDs (Dáil deputies). Voters complete a paper ballot, numbering ...


6

If you intend to do your utmost to ensure that this candidate does not get elected, it would be wise to rank every other candidate higher than them. It is possible to think of an STV election as a series of voting rounds as candidates are eliminated and/or win seats. If the final "voting round" is between your two least favourite candidates (that is, ...


6

If we add the condition that parties with the same number of votes must have the same number of seats, then this is impossible, unless you give out 1 seat per vote in which case your Parliament consists of the entire country. Suppose there are, 100000 parties that received 1 vote. And suppose that another party got 100000 votes, and 1 seat. If the 100000 ...


5

I think most countries do not allow expatriates to vote at all. The idea is that you are not affected by most of what the government of your home country does, so you should have little or no say about it. Think about everything that the Romanian government does which stays in Romania. I'm not sure about Romania specifically but I'll bet that includes ...


5

Here is a piece from Pacific Standard which quotes the following explanation: "When a candidate is perceived as adhering to a set of religious values, voters see them as moral and possessing high levels of integrity and honesty," write political scientists Scott Clifford of the University of Houston and Ben Gaskins of Lewis & Clark College. &...


5

It is not related to proportional representation. Most states for every election use first-past-the-post (FPTP). The Senate has no rules for how Senators are elected, except that it is done by popular vote. They were originally appointed by state legislatures. Senators, unlike Representatives, can be appointed when a vacancy arises (rules depend on state). ...


5

As you've identified in the question, there is a groundswell within the party in favour of proportional representation. In addition to the 100 local labour party branches that have voted to support PR, the Make Votes Matter #PledgeForPR campaign during the 2019 general election recorded the support of MPs across the country, including over 60 current Labour ...


5

Another important point is that the assumption that the 3 liberal (progressive) parties together would command a majority is flawed. The biggest problem with PR is that you tend to get many more parties running for election. For example, in the last election you would have had separate pro-Europe and anti-Europe Labour parties. You would also pick up many ...


5

Of the 300 members of their National Assembly, South Korea elects 253 members using first-past-the-post in single member districts and 47 members proportionally. The proportional component was recently amended, a short time before the 2020 election so that 30 members were elected in a compensatory manner: A party with 33% of the vote and zero district seats ...


4

This question assumes that in the US the minority and special interest parties are frozen out of the political process by the 2 major parties. However what actually happens is that the minority parties that form (at least the ones that have formed in the last 80 years) form based on specific issues. Women's rights, workers rights, black's rights, gun ...


4

Duverger's Law indicates that plurality (first past the post) systems devolve into two parties per seat, while proportional systems support many parties. Because the United States has a national presidential election, this essentially forces the US into a two party system. If the US switched to a proportional system, it would make it easier for third ...


4

As most users haven’t actually asked the titular question, I’ll take a stab. Theories First, keep in mind that there are multiple, competing theories on why authoritarian leaders rise from democratic systems. An entire branch of political science / political philosophy is often devoted to asking this question. These theories (broadly speaking) can include ...


4

There is no perfect mathematical formula that can guarantee a degree of proportionality where the number of votes you receive will always perfectly correspond to the same number of seats you win. (That is assuming the number of seats is fixed.) When you get to that level of granularity, the only way to improve the proportionality is to tweak the mathematical ...


4

Canada is going to be starting its seat redistribution process imminently, so I'll use their process as a reference (which you can find in more detail here). After it's determined (by formula found in the constitution) how many seats each province gets, an independent commission will be appointed for each province to do their respective boundaries. The ...


3

You should know that this is an active area of research in Political Science. Proportional representation is quite widespread in Europe. I would recommend the paper The Adoption of Proportional Representation (Leemann & Mares, 2014) which in the very first page lists the major comparative works made on the subject, and the two most common explanatory ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible