Dream on. PR will only be introduced when it benefits the party in power
Or all the parties in opposition.
Of course FPTP suits two main parties entirely down to the ground, because they know that these things are cyclical and they'll get their time in the sun again. It narrows their competition to one party.
Spoiling a ballot is a waste of time, because no record is ever made of why it is spoiled or what the message behind it is. You just get filed in a box with all the bozos who can't complete a ballot paper properly. Hell, even the person counting it probably won't read what you've got to say.
61653 HTAFC said:
Namely that some seriously unpleasant individuals and parties may get representation. The assortment of right-wing nutjobs that ran in the Batley & Spen by-election which was only needed because another right-wing nutjob had decided to murder the brilliant MP we had previously, was a warning there.
You set a floor, below which you don't get any seats. Perhaps 5% of total votes cast.
FPTP elections increase the presence of the nasty and the weird because FPTP makes it so easy to get their voice heard. You only have to persuade a small number of people of your position. Not that either of them were weird or nasty, quite the opposite, but we saw that most famously with Martin Bell, whose entire position was that he wasn't Neil Hamilton, and with Dr Richard Taylor who became an independent MP in Kidderminster on a platform about saving the local hospital.
There are pros and cons to PR. I prefer the German system, where there are constituency MPs and then the seats are topped up, but rather than have a party list I would have the "losers" with the biggest vote share dropped into Parliament, so it would also reward those who come close in local constituencies.