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.
Comments
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.