@geomannie I've been running simulations of what Single Transferable Voting in multi-seat constituencies would look like, using constituency-level data for the last four elections and this is the summary. In short, the Tories would practically never have a majority without FPTP.
@geomannie The Electoral Reform Society have looked at it too (rather more carefully than I, I imagine) and their estimates make mine look "too conservative", in both senses
@Wen@geomannie Coalitions are very common in more proportional systems. In 2-party systems coalition formation (and the related horse-trading) takes place much more within the two main parties ("broad churches").
It surprises me that only one postwar election (2017) would have had a different winner had they been run under single-transferrable-vote. I'm by no means an expert on electoral systems but I'd have thought it would have made more of a change.
@passenger@geomannie I think you're misreading something. It would have changed many elections. Even under my analysis of the last four, STV would have killed all chance of a Tory majority in 2015, and they would have a 12% chance of a majority in 2019.
2017 stands out in that the difference between the simulated STV results and the May disaster was unusually small.
Yes, but when no party has an absolute majority, it's still usual for the largest party to form a government.
In countries with proportional representation where coalition governments are normal, it is theoretically possible for weird coalitions to form which exclude the largest party; but these aren't common and even where they exist, they tend to fall apart quite quickly. For example, think of the Israeli grand coalition to keep Netanyahu out of office, and how that worked out.
Add comment