
First past the post voting distorted British election - joker3
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/world/europe/uk-election-brexit.html
======
core-questions
Isn't it disingenuous to say that an election which proceeded according to the
laws of the country, without any vote-counting scandal, is a "distortion"?
This from the same people who like to say that the Electoral College is a
distortion, as well?

If you don't like the result, it doesn't mean the system is broken. It might
even mean that the system is doing exactly what it was designed to do.

------
rvz
Well, this is going to get flagged pretty quickly since this orange site will
suppress all debate due to it being 'off topic' and would most certainly keep
the echo-chamber quiet of having an opinion.

In terms of this baseless claim from the New York Times about possible
distortion in the election due to first past the post, there was a reason
people were told to vote tactically to stop the one from getting a majority
and the result was made clear regardless of that. Proportional Representation
(PR) would still result in the Brexit Party winning anyway. So would that be a
'distortion' even under a different system?

Do they believe that the previous elections were also distorted, given that
they were under FPTP? I can sense that this was written by those who cannot
accept the result of a democratic process.

------
everybodyknows
Actual title of the linked article is "The UK Election Explained, In One
Number".

