Will Keir Starmer be gone by Friday 13th?

[malaise]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk

[bucolic_frolic]

1. I'm barely dimly aware of the British Parliament's traditions and methods

But that sure seems a more transparent system of informing the public than Sunday talking head shows. Imagine Trump in such a humble debate and I'm surely not capturing nor understanding the meaning of the use of "humble".

[Swede]

2. It's superior, in my view (I'm Canadian) to the cumbersome US system.

Question Period in Parliament, when the leader of the party HAS to stand up and answer questions. Trump would've failed in 2016 the first time he stood up.

Also the party can get rid of the leader (and therefore the Prime Minister) if they want to get rid of him.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Thanks, so theirs is more nuanced and situational, ours is more mechanical.

How long has been this same system in place for UK? Same as 1700s? Or evolved. Maybe our Founders were a bit too optimistic about human nature, power - too much Enlightenment.

[Swede]

4. They feared a monarchy and kinda created one with the office of the President.

I'm not sure how old this form of Parliament has been around. It is a work in progress.

[OnDoutside]

6. Evolved really since about the 14th century, and you could say that it stepped forward with the women's

right to vote in 1918. During the 18th and parts of the 19th century, seats could pretty much be bought and any vote was by male landowners.

EDIT : The biggest failing currently, is their first past the post system, so if you have 10 people running for a seat (like a congressional district) the person with the most votes wins, rather than the one who wins a plurality of the votes. So they could have 30% of the vote and be elected. There is no proportional representation, hence seats can remain in one party's control for generations.

[bronxiteforever]

5. As an American, I agree 100%. I remember Eugene McCarthy said a

parliamentary system is better than our system.

[Ocelot II]

7. Also, parliamentary systems allow for the formation of multi-party coalitions

so they don't often end up in legislative standoffs the way we do.

I'd love to see Trump having to face something like Prime Ministers Questions.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. The BBC political correspondent was explaining it's harder for Labour to bin a leader than the Tories

The Tories' rules allow backbench MPs to put in private letters of no confidence in the leader, and when a certain threshold is reached, there's a secret ballot of all the MPs, and if the leader loses that, challengers can come forward. That allows a general feeling of dissatisfaction with the leader to build and make itself known.

In Labour, however, the first stage is the challenge has to be in public. That means the challenger is risking a lot more, rather than being able to waffle "well, I was loyal to the leader, but it became clear they didn't have the confidence of the party, so to be public-spirited, I offer myself as an alternative, yadda-yadda ...".

Both May and Johnson survived their party no confidence votes:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46547246
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61709441

though May resigned 6 months later, and Johnson just a month after his party vote.