• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

If Election 2011 had been first-past-the post


FloatingVoterTralee

Well-known member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
997
In "The Week In Politics"'s report on the Constitutional Convention's meeting on electoral reform, Adrian Kavanagh provided analysis on how the 2011 election result would have looked if held under FPTP, and the differences are quite staggering:

Fine Gael 114 (36% of vote/69% of seats)
Labour 32 (19/19)
Independents & Others 11 (18/6)
Sinn Féin 6 (10/4)
Fianna Fáil 3 (17/2)

So, Fine Gael would likely have secured 10-15 years of single-party government, Labour would have secured a left-right divide as leaders of the opposition, and the two republican parties would have been looking at a merger to remain numerically relevant.
 

paulp

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
7,324
In "The Week In Politics"'s report on the Constitutional Convention's meeting on electoral reform, Adrian Kavanagh provided analysis on how the 2011 election result would have looked if held under FPTP, and the differences are quite staggering:

Fine Gael 114 (36% of vote/69% of seats)
Labour 32 (19/19)
Independents & Others 11 (18/6)
Sinn Féin 6 (10/4)
Fianna Fáil 3 (17/2)

So, Fine Gael would likely have secured 10-15 years of single-party government, Labour would have secured a left-right divide as leaders of the opposition, and the two republican parties would have been looking at a merger to remain numerically relevant.
FG would have been dominant, but you sees bigger swings between elections, so I think it's a leap to say 10-15 years of government.

That is the main argument for the system, that you are more likely to have a stronger single party government.
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
50,459
A lot of people would have voted in an entirely different manner; an utterly pointless comparison, in my opinion.
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
FG would have been dominant, but you sees bigger swings between elections, so I think it's a leap to say 10-15 years of government.

That is the main argument for the system, that you are more likely to have a stronger single party government.

We'd be living in a different country and the circumstances leading up to that GE might well have been entirely different.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,845
We'd be living in a different country and the circumstances leading up to that GE might well have been entirely different.
Yup. There would be far fewer parties for instance. FPP and PR create utterly different environments, there's no real use copying one countries format and putting it over another's. Looking at the 2011 results for instance you see around 7% shared out amongst assorted left groups. That wouldn't happen in an FPP country, they would just be subsumed into one larger Leftist party (Labour in this case)
 

Keith-M

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
15,779
Website
www.allkindsofeverything.ie
In "The Week In Politics"'s report on the Constitutional Convention's meeting on electoral reform, Adrian Kavanagh provided analysis on how the 2011 election result would have looked if held under FPTP, and the differences are quite staggering:

Fine Gael 114 (36% of vote/69% of seats)
Labour 32 (19/19)
Independents & Others 11 (18/6)
Sinn Féin 6 (10/4)
Fianna Fáil 3 (17/2)

So, Fine Gael would likely have secured 10-15 years of single-party government, Labour would have secured a left-right divide as leaders of the opposition, and the two republican parties would have been looking at a merger to remain numerically relevant.
No that's totally untrue, given the collapse in FG in the polls due to their ineptitude in government, they would be lucky to return one third of that 114 TDS. FF who are back to being the most popular party in the country would be the main beneficiaries and would probably be close to forming single party government.

That's the thing with FPTP, you get enormous swings against unpopular governments.
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
Yup. There would be far fewer parties for instance. FPP and PR create utterly different environments, there's no real use copying one countries format and putting it over another's. Looking at the 2011 results for instance you see around 7% shared out amongst assorted left groups. That wouldn't happen in an FPP country, they would just be subsumed into one larger Leftist party (Labour in this case)
Which is why UKIP have one chance to take seats from the Tories; fail in the next GE and they'll be written off and their voters will all drift home. It's possible to imagine England as a two-party country in 10 years time, with Scotland and Wales getting a bit more diversity because of their nationalist parties.
 

Aristodemus

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
3,741
Anyone advocating the British system of elections is seriously deluded
 

Passer-by

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
1,436
In "The Week In Politics"'s report on the Constitutional Convention's meeting on electoral reform, Adrian Kavanagh provided analysis on how the 2011 election result would have looked if held under FPTP, and the differences are quite staggering:

Fine Gael 114 (36% of vote/69% of seats)
Labour 32 (19/19)
Independents & Others 11 (18/6)
Sinn Féin 6 (10/4)
Fianna Fáil 3 (17/2)

So, Fine Gael would likely have secured 10-15 years of single-party government, Labour would have secured a left-right divide as leaders of the opposition, and the two republican parties would have been looking at a merger to remain numerically relevant.
Under FPTP, parties typically have bastions of strength which are virtually unassailable. In England, for instance, Lib Dem support is heavily concentrated in the SW of England and even though they have dropped support in opinion polls they will almost certainly retain those seats in the next election there

As such, I'd suspect the above analysis is flawed - it isn't very credible to believe that FF would only get 3 seats in Connacht whatever about anywhere else.
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
Under FPTP, parties typically have bastions of strength which are virtually unassailable. In England, for instance, Lib Dem support is heavily concentrated in the SW of England and even though they have dropped support in opinion polls they will almost certainly retain those seats in the next election there

As such, I'd suspect the above analysis is flawed - it isn't very credible to believe that FF would only get 3 seats in Connacht whatever about anywhere else.
At its simplest the question is 'how many constituencies did FF top the poll in?' Of course, in a FPTP system the constituency boundaries would not be the same as they are now.
 

RahenyFG

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,206
FG would have been dominant, but you sees bigger swings between elections, so I think it's a leap to say 10-15 years of government.
Can still be dominant. There is a lot to play for in the next two and a half years of government and the political situation, regarding opinion polls, is very volatile.

That is the main argument for the system, that you are more likely to have a stronger single party government.
That's why the UK have kept it and also to keep fringe elements like the BNP out of Westminister.
 

Odyessus

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
12,987
A lot of people would have voted in an entirely different manner; an utterly pointless comparison, in my opinion.
I agree. Not only would people's voting strategy have been diffferent, so would the constituencies and the strategies of political parties, candidate selection etc. As you say, a pointless comparison.
 

wishywashy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
2,616
In "The Week In Politics"'s report on the Constitutional Convention's meeting on electoral reform, Adrian Kavanagh provided analysis on how the 2011 election result would have looked if held under FPTP, and the differences are quite staggering:

Fine Gael 114 (36% of vote/69% of seats)
Labour 32 (19/19)
Independents & Others 11 (18/6)
Sinn Féin 6 (10/4)
Fianna Fáil 3 (17/2)

So, Fine Gael would likely have secured 10-15 years of single-party government, Labour would have secured a left-right divide as leaders of the opposition, and the two republican parties would have been looking at a merger to remain numerically relevant.

If Auld Cynic's mothers's sister had balls she'd be..................................................
 

forest

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
3,363
are they seriously looking at this again
I like to think the irish would never endorse FPTP it is a horrible system

The UK and France (which has a completely different political system to ours) are the only countries in the EU not to have PR

Now I may favour a list system but not FPTP
 

Ren84

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
50,016
Another good reason why we're better off with PR.
 

edwin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
6,139
At its simplest the question is 'how many constituencies did FF top the poll in?' Of course, in a FPTP system the constituency boundaries would not be the same as they are now.
Fair point but the likes of O Cuiv and Brendan Smith would have won in their own strongholds.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
48,236
In "The Week In Politics"'s report on the Constitutional Convention's meeting on electoral reform, Adrian Kavanagh provided analysis on how the 2011 election result would have looked if held under FPTP, and the differences are quite staggering:

Fine Gael 114 (36% of vote/69% of seats)
Labour 32 (19/19)
Independents & Others 11 (18/6)
Sinn Féin 6 (10/4)
Fianna Fáil 3 (17/2)

So, Fine Gael would likely have secured 10-15 years of single-party government, Labour would have secured a left-right divide as leaders of the opposition, and the two republican parties would have been looking at a merger to remain numerically relevant.
Except that if we had first past the post, we wouldn't have the same fractured make-up of parties and independents. Like all countries with FPTP, we'd have two major parties, with an assortment of micro-parties with few if any seats.
 

Mackers

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,526
Doesn't matter. The country would still be on a loser.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
48,236
Fair point but the likes of O Cuiv and Brendan Smith would have won in their own strongholds.
What "strongholds"? Individuals only have "strongholds" in PR-STV because of the very nature of the electoral system. Take away PR, and every vote cast becomes, more or less, a vote for one government or the other.
 
Top