Does the voting system influence attitudes towards elections? Lessons from Denmark.

July 3, 2026

Blogs, Grassroots-cat

Does the voting system influence attitudes towards elections? Lessons from Denmark.

Over the past few hundred years, our society and democracy have developed and changed beyond recognition. However, our voting system has failed to keep pace. We believe that First Past the Post has no place in a modern democracy, and should be replaced by a system of Proportional Representation. If you agree, sign the petition. If you want to know why, read on:

Minority rule

The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it's the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we've had single-party 'majority' governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn't vote for and don't agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.

Proportional Representation means majority rule, not minority rule. With PR, any government must have a majority of votes behind it - so in order to govern, a party needs to either work collaboratively with other parties, or persuade most of us to vote for it.

Demand Real Democracy

The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.The idea of a minority ruling over the majority goes against our most basic ideas about democracy. But with First Past the Post, it’s the norm. For about 90% of the time since 1935 we’ve had single-party ‘majority’ governments, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. The Conservatives currently hold a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share. Almost since the first general election, politicians who most of us didn’t vote for and don’t agree with have had the power to govern the UK however they like.

By Young Make Votes Matter volunteer Emma Hansen.

Two months before the November 2025 local elections in Denmark, candidates and manifestos were already a common conversation amongst my friends in Copenhagen. As a 24-year-old who grew up in England, and moved to Copenhagen 18 months ago, I was surprised at the engagement and excitement for even just the local election amongst my peers, so much so that I briefly mistook the lead up to the local election for a lead up to a general election. The streets were covered in posters with the faces of a wide array of candidates, and all different demographics of people were out campaigning, visibly engaging with political discourse. Political discussion was widespread and people generally seemed to be very well informed, knowledgeable and genuinely excited about the upcoming local elections. This is in stark contrast to my experiences of local elections in the UK, where my peers, even those politically interested, didn’t seem to be particularly engaged or enthusiastic about local elections, and being well informed seemed to be an uphill battle.

The Danish general election this past March was also worlds apart from my experiences in the UK. The energy leading up to election day was of excitement, clarity and hope. The campaign environment seemed genuinely constructive, and despite inevitable political disagreement. Political messaging was clear, rather than debates focussed around trying to win over the public by undermining your opponents. There was even a TV show where the twelve party leaders stayed in a hotel together for 24 hours, having real conversations and informative debates. What makes this collaborative, respectful environment possible? What encourages voter turnout to be 84%¹rather than 59.7%², which the UK witnessed in 2024? Why does Denmark have a level of 70% satisfaction with its democracy, compared to only 55% in the UK?³

These questions prompted me to think deeper about how electoral design can impact democratic culture, democratic trust and particularly the extent to which individuals feel their vote matters.

While the merits of Proportional representation (PR) versus First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) are well documented, witnessing it first-hand really cemented my belief that electoral reform is necessary for the UK to be able to move forwards from the current political polarisation, democratic distrust and political disillusionment.

I interviewed six young people between the ages of 22 and 28 to explore their personal experiences of voting and perceptions of democracy under PR. I probed them on how meaningful they find voting, their feelings about their candidate choices, and their general attitudes toward political participation and democracy in Denmark. I also introduced them to the UK’s FPTP system to gauge their reactions. The participants held a range of beliefs, with voters from different sides of the political spectrum, to gain a more holistic understanding of the importance of a fair voting system for people with varying opinions and levels of political engagement.

The Danish electoral system works as follows: ‘the seats in Parliament are distributed according to the proportional method. This guarantees that the parties receive the number of seats that correspond to their votes. For example, if a party receives 10 percent of the votes nationally, they must also receive 10 percent of the seats in Parliament. This method also means that all parts of the country are represented – and not just the bigger cities where many voters live.’ ⁴ Proportional systems such as this are known to allow for actual majority rule, political diversity, increased representation and collaboration, more equal societies and higher turnout and satisfaction with democracy. My interviews reinforced this knowledgeThe interviews strongly suggest that electoral systems do not simply determine how votes are counted, they shape how citizens feel about democracy itself.

The sentiment of disillusionment with electoral processes I have grown used to in the UK were not shared by the people I interviewed. All but one expressed that they feel their vote is meaningful. expressing a belief that voting is “making a small difference” and that “your vote can make a change.” One participant explained how Denmark has built a system “in which you feel your vote is meaningful

Strikingly, all participants expressed how positive they felt after casting their votes, saying they felt “fulfilled”, “great!” and “really good, I feel that I am doing something good for democracy.” This again reflects the high democratic trust and feelings of power to make change. One participant even explained “it is such a moving and beautiful feeling. I always feel very grateful to live in a country with a well-functioning democracy, voluntarism and freedom. I am always happy when I cast my vote.” For these young Danish people, voting is experienced as an exciting, meaningful and important opportunity to exercise their democratic rights and help shape a government that represents the public. The feeling behind voting is important. Where voting produces satisfaction and ownership, turnout and civic involvement are likely to follow.

The participants’ feelings of personal and political representation, and trust in their chosen candidates, highlight the importance of a system that allows for true and fair representation. All participants said they usually feel positive about the candidate they vote for, with one explaining that feeling certain about the candidate they choose is “a prerequisite for me to be able to place the trust of my democratic mandate in a political representative”, suggesting that he would only vote if he fully supported a candidate. Another expressed that “I believe in my good man (his chosen candidate) and his values. I believe in his work ethic, and he will fight for what he campaigned to do.” and another said they feel “almost always 100%.” For many people in the UK, feeling 100% positive about who you’re voting for is an unrealistic dream, which makes sense when your options are so limited, and you’re often forced to vote for the least bad option. In the recent Danish general election, there were 12 parties and countless candidates for each, allowing voters to pick the one they support the most. This allows for ballots to be cast on the basis of one’s true values and assessment of the merits of each candidate, rather than the fear of another party winning.

When asked about how they would feel if they had to vote for a “lesser evil” option, the participants were very clear about the negative impact it would have on their democratic participation and feelings of representation. Two participants said they would feel “powerless” with others expressing they would feel “disillusioned” and “frustrated.” They explained how “being pragmatic with voting decreases motivation and passion for the political process” and that a system which leads to tactical voting means that politics cannot “reflect the wants and needs of the public.” Another hypothesized that such a system “leads to politics that loses many nuances, since many opinions are not voiced.” This goes to the heart of democratic legitimacy. A system that pressures citizens to vote tactically instead of sincerely weakens the link between public preferences and political outcomes, and leads to a decreased desire to participate.

It was very revealing to hear the participants’ immediate reactions to our voting system here in the UK. It was described as “surprising”, “ridiculous,” “crazy,” “undemocratic,” and “not fair or reflective of the population.” They immediately predicted many of the flaws that arise from FPTP such as decreasing political diversity, reducing representation, political deadlock and increased potential for populist movements.

One participant explained how he believed “meaningful change and meaningful representation will slowly be blocked in such a system” and that our system “is much more volatile in a negative way.” Another suggested that it would “cause massive political unrest in the long run, it’s a terrible system for democracy.” All participants had immediately negative reactions to the idea of FPTP, and when asked how they would feel if Denmark implemented such a system they were very direct in expressing it would be a terrible idea and that it would reduce their likelihood to vote and their feeling of representation. One said, “it would bias me so much away from everything I’ve said is positive about Denmark…Implementing such a system would destroy practically everything that is positive about Danish democracy.” The sentiment of democracy being completely eroded was repeated several times, with one stating simply it would “somehow take a part of democracy away from you.”

The debate around electoral reform in the UK often stalls at two familiar questions: what would we replace First-Past-The-Post with, and would any alternative actually receive genuine public support? My interviews suggest the answer to each is yes. There are workable alternatives, and proportional systems foster trust, engagement, and democratic satisfaction.

When I asked participants how they felt about politics, democracy, and the Danish electoral system, they recognised Denmark isn’t a perfect country however every respondent spoke positively about the way democracy functions in practice. They each described a clear sense that representation is broad, accurate and meaningful. That distinction matters. Support for an electoral system does not require believing it is perfect; it requires believing it is legitimate, responsive, and preferable to the alternatives. One participant explained how the Danish system functions “generally, very, very well” and that it “lends itself very well to high trust, high transparency, politically representative, meaningful elections.” Another explained that “the system is really good” and that he does “feel represented, even though it is still clear that certain social classes, professions, and population groups may be represented to a greater extent, but that is also part of democracy.” Despite not being 100% satisfied with the distribution in government, the respondent still felt that the system gave people a real voice and reflected the electorate in a meaningful way.

The overwhelmingly healthy democratic attitudes and positivity about their individual and collective ability to make change expressed in these interviews, reflect what I have observed over the past two years in Denmark. Proportional representation is not a utopian and unrealistic theory; it is a functioning reality in countries where citizens feel their vote matters, they are represented and where democracy creates a high trust society. Electoral design shapes democratic culture, and FPTP has caused democratic culture in the UK to be one of cynicism, polarisation and disengagement. Electoral systems help shape the relationship between citizens and the state, influencing whether people feel heard, respected, and motivated to participate in politics. The case for proportional representation is not only about fairer elections, but about creating a healthier democratic culture and better societal outcomes for people in the UK.

References

IFES. IFES Election Guide | Elections: Danish Parliament 2026 General. Electionguide.org. Published 2026. Accessed April 27, 2026. https://electionguide.org/elections/id/5094/

Sturge G. 2024 general election: Turnout. House of Commons Library. Published September 5, 2024. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/general-election-2024-turnout/

Hunter L. Global democracy poll: Low EU approval in Denmark as faith in governments declines worldwide. The Copenhagen Post. Published May 8, 2024. https://cphpost.dk/2024-05-08/news/politics/global-democracy-poll-strikingly-low-eu-approval-in-denmark-and-declining-faith-in-governments-worldwide/

The Danish Parliament. Elections and voting. thedanishparliament.dk. Published 2026. Accessed April 27, 2026. https://www.thedanishparliament.dk/democracy/elections-and-voting

Blogs, Grassroots-cat

Does the voting system influence attitudes towards elections? Lessons from Denmark.

Minority rule

Similar articles

Why Make Votes Matter is proud to support Better!

Our message to Andy Burnham: Make electoral reform a priority

“You’re joking – not another one!” Why First Past the Post is to blame for Britain’s political chaos.

Frustration in Makerfield at a system no longer fit for purpose

Report Launch: What Could Future Electoral Systems Look Like?

Do the Local Elections Strengthen the case for Electoral Reform? APPG for Fair Elections event with Sir John Curtice