The Liberal Democrats

[Don Karleone]

Lib Dems released their manifesto.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

 

[Vic]

Not sure off the top of my head, but it was certainly the most they have ever had, and were ahead of lot of those who were elected on first preference votes, and would have been in double figures in the assembly if it was based on first preference votes only per constituency (some constituencies return 6 members to the assembly).
And the point still stands, STV is different and preferable to PR

Make a claim but can't even check Wikipedia?

So far as I can see, no TUV candidate has ever got more than 20% first preferences in any vote in any election (and anyone near that would be elected).

Like I said, you need second and third preferences to get elected, and TUV is unlikely to get more of them with this alliance:

"The TUV, which did not run in the 2019 General Election, has formed an electoral alliance with Reform UK ahead of July’s poll and is standing in 14 constituencies in Northern Ireland."

 

[law74]

Make a claim but can't even check Wikipedia?

So far as I can see, no TUV candidate has ever got more than 20% first preferences in any vote in any election (and anyone near that would be elected).

Like I said, you need second and third preferences to get elected, and TUV is unlikely to get more of them with this alliance:

"The TUV, which did not run in the 2019 General Election, has formed an electoral alliance with Reform UK ahead of July’s poll and is standing in 14 constituencies in Northern Ireland."

The reason why I used TUV as my example for why STV is preferable to PR is that they have a small dedicated core of support while the majority (of Unionists never mind the entire electorate) find their policies repulsive.
Under FPTP they would have a number of seats, under PR they would have a greater number of seats than they have under STV.
Under STV we retain our constituency basis for government Anne our elected MP's would have a general support of the people, and every vote would count, leading to greater accountability.

 

[domalino]

This is where the Lib Dems need to display a level of street smarts I'm not entirely sure they possess.

This is such an obvious tactical voting situation, and yet they don't seem to be getting the message across. Lib Dems cannot win this seat, but they can take out Badendoch and get themselves 1 seat closer to being the opposition.

The fact Labour are putting this kind of stuff out suggests they aren't playing ball.

 

[Vic]

The reason why I used TUV as my example for why STV is preferable to PR is that they have a small dedicated core of support while the majority (of Unionists never mind the entire electorate) find their policies repulsive.
Under FPTP they would have a number of seats, under PR they would have a greater number of seats than they have under STV.
Under STV we retain our constituency basis for government Anne our elected MP's would have a general support of the people, and every vote would count, leading to greater accountability.

Then we disagree only in that you don't think STV is a proportional voting system. I think the guy who invented it thought it was PR and in the Colonies it was "British proportional representation" (good enough for the natives but not for the rulers).

 

[Vic]

This is where the Lib Dems need to display a level of street smarts I'm not entirely sure they possess.

This is such an obvious tactical voting situation, and yet they don't seem to be getting the message across. Lib Dems cannot win this seat, but they can take out Badendoch and get themselves 1 seat closer to being the opposition.

The fact Labour are putting this kind of stuff out suggests they aren't playing ball.

Are you expecting the LibDems to ask people not to vote LibDem?

 

[law74]

Are you expecting the LibDems to ask people not to vote LibDem?

It wouldn't be "asking people not to vote for them" but prioritising resources (time, people, money etc), to seats where they are most likely to unseat a self-servative and from some of the interviews a couple of weeks ago, that seemed to be their intention

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

It wouldn't be "asking people not to vote for them" but prioritising resources (time, people, money etc), to seats where they are most likely to unseat a self-servative and from some of the interviews a couple of weeks ago, that seemed to be their intention

I’m pretty sure from what I’ve heard from certain constituency residents on other online forums (mainly the UK politics subreddit) they are doing that. And I’ve also heard that Labour are reciprocating.

Obviously, that’s not at all good evidence just online rumour. But we know they have focused their leaflet distribution on the seats they can actually win as there was an article a few weeks back talking about them sending millions of leaflets to the Home Counties/South West and none in some areas like Wales and the midlands.

If there’s one thing the LibDems have it’s a really good ground game. It’s possibly the only reason they’re still relevant.

 

[Vic]

I’m pretty sure from what I’ve heard from certain constituency residents on other online forums (mainly the UK politics subreddit) they are doing that. And I’ve also heard that Labour are reciprocating.

Obviously, that’s not at all good evidence just online rumour. But we know they have focused their leaflet distribution on the seats they can actually win as there was an article a few weeks back talking about them sending millions of leaflets to the Home Counties/South West and none in some areas like Wales and the midlands.

If there’s one thing the LibDems have it’s a really good ground game. It’s possibly the only reason they’re still relevant.

And it's easier this time as they don't have to say different things in Tory seats they want to win and in Labour seats they want to win.