A projection of how the election results would look if we used Additional Member System (AMS), like in Scotland and Wales.
*removed externally hosted image*
Party | AMS | FPTP | Seat change |
---|---|---|---|
Labour | 236 | 411 | +175 |
LibDems | 77 | 71 | -6 |
Green | 42 | 4 | -38 |
SNP | 18 | 9 | -9 |
Plaid Cymru | 4 | 4 | 0 |
Reform | 94 | 5 | -89 |
Conservative | 157 | 121 | -36 |
Northern Ireland | 18 | 18 | 0 |
Other | 4 | 6 | +2 |
He would win as long as people want him to win, surely? The question is do you think that's more democratic or not?
No, with the party list system, any one party which gets north of something like 60,000 votes gets an MP and the party chooses who gets the seat, so the leader cannot lose their seat. They are immune from becoming unelected, no matter how unpopular.
In our current system, if you can't find a locality that wants you, you lose. Reform might have got a lot of votes, but its candidates are very unpopular, for good reason, and they don't win elections much. It's only because the Conservatives have been a total shit show that they got any MPs at all.