UK Election Results 2010

[bhsup]

The Conservatives want to make each constituency the same size, which either means splitting their big rural seats or combining labour's smaller urban seats. Either way they're just rigging it for themselves.

They are not the same size now?? So how...I mean...what is the swing for how many people are represented by each MP?

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

Can't see the Tories going for it.

The Lib Dems should vote against the Tory Queen speech if they won't budge. Never mind that this opportunity might not come again - we have it right now and if we throw it away then what's to say we'll have the balls to demand it next time? The Lib Dems have nothing to lose under the current electoral system since, hated or loved, they'll never take serious numbers of seats. A pact with Labour is not attractive, but if Cameron won't shift then we shouldn't give them their Queen's Speech, and we should either take the plunge with Labour or force a second election.

 

[lithium30]

The main problem is that neither Labour or the Lib Dems can really afford another election.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8666824.stm

Please tell the BBC about your case. The electoral commission needs to be hung for the mess they created this year

I've contacted the BBC, the electoral commission and my local council. Perhaps the volcanic ash situation delayed my registration forms

Maybe I'll get the chance to vote fairly soon anyway

 

[lovett]

They are not the same size now?? So how...I mean...what is the swing for how many people are represented by each MP?

Take a look. The vast majority are between 65,000 and 75,000, but there's a significant number between 50,000 and 60,000 (mainly non-English). The Isle of Wight is the largest (by a long way) at 103,000 but it's hard to see what one would do with that; it's an island.

Notably this is all on 2000 census figures so it's a bit off. An independent commission (The boundary commission) reviews and recommends changes for constituency boundaries; it takes no account of voting patterns so there's no gerrymandering.

 

[Kal'thzar]

The Conservatives want to make each constituency the same size, which either means splitting their big rural seats or combining labour's smaller urban seats. Either way they're just rigging it for themselves.

Uh. if that were the case prepare for eternal rule by the scottish electorate...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Uh. if that were the case prepare for eternal rule by the scottish electorate...

They want to scale it by a factor inversely proportional to the number of chip shops selling deep fried mars bars though.

 

[Darth_Pugwash]

A Conservative - Lib Dem coalition isn't really on the cards imho, for two reasons: first there are too many policy differences between the parties, and second the Cons will not want to give up any real ground on the issue of proportional representation which I imagine will be point numero uno on the Libs list of objectives in any such co-operation. My feeling at this point is that the Tories will attempt a minority government.

 

[Mael Sechlainn]

Lib will work with labour who will also get SNP(who said they would only work with labour however are probably praying for a conservative leader because when conservatives strip Scotland of its resources, independence could come). SDLP also take the labour whip as they have always done, DUP could swing for either party but so far I think labour will make it.

 

[Brighteye]

The Conservatives are very much against electoral reform of any meaningful sort. I hope that the Lib Dems refuse to accept any worthless PR offer that promises an investigation, examination or consideration of the possibility.
A free vote is no offer at all, since everyone will know that it's only there as a sop and will vote against it.

Lib Dems and Tories will not work together in any way that satisfies me.

Even if the Lib Dems suffer a lot of negative publicity in somehow pushing PR, it'll be worth it. They stand to gain almost 3 times as many seats as they have now. If they lost a full third of their vote they'd still double their numbers in parliament.

 

[Takhisis]

Now is the time for Clegg to make a stand. Proportional representation or death.
(SNP would have got double their seats, so, yeah, why not?)

 

[nonconformist]

Ach, quite a disappointing night, bloody Tories

cheering myself up with this:

 

[Takhisis]

Could have been worse. SNP might have lost seats.
Sinn Féin got 4, good.

 

[Shekwan]

I want to agree with the opinion here that its PR or nothing for the LDs.

Ach, quite a disappointing night, bloody Tories

cheering myself up with this:

LAND IS POWER!

He got 57 votes. Its baffling how anyone can have that few votes. I mean if you get the lads down the pub and their mates to vote for you, as well as firing up a few nutjobs you'd easily break 100.

 

[sumit1207]

Right, except a +1% swing in popular vote with a loss of 6 seats isn't much of a mandate for electoral reform. Isn't the majority of Labour against it? Meaning neither party would comply with their demands, and so Conservative minority government it is.

 

[Shekwan]

A quarter of the population voted for them and they got feck all seats.

This has been happening for ages.

Theres your mandate.

 

[Traitorfish]

A quarter of the population voted for them and they got feck all seats.

This has been happening for ages.

Theres your mandate.

*Arms outstretched and jabbing; frequent monodirectional jerks of the head*

 

[nonconformist]

Anyone spot the Druid covered in blood?

 

[Snerk]

A quarter of the population voted for them and they got feck all seats.

This has been happening for ages.

Theres your mandate.

This.

Britain, you need to get your electoral system sorted, it's well unfair at the moment.

Also, stop being obsessed at wanting a single party majority. In a hung parliment: if the second and third largest party can form a majority coalition government, then that is no less democratic than if the largest party wants to rule alone somehow. I keep hearing that Brown does not have a mandate from the people to rule. WTF? A sh!tload of people voted for him and Labour. A possible Lib-Lab coalition will have a big majority of the popular vote, and any argument that they would then not have a mandate by the people to have the PM and rule parliament (as Labour is largest, Brown would be the natural choice of PM) is IMO absurd.

Every time I learn about the state of another foreign electoral system, the less upset I become of the few shortcomings of the electoral system here in Norway.

 

[Traitorfish]

Also, stop being obsessed by wanting a single party majority. In a hung parliment: if the second and third largest party can form a majority coalition government, then that is no less democratic than if the largest party wants to rule alone somehow.

The British have a peculiar obsession with "stability", typically interpreted as "single party rule", which most of Europe lacks. It's been used to justify every democratic injustice, past and present, and to what we attribute our history of relative political stability. Apparently, simply because we claim to have "invented" democracy, we are under little, if any, obligation to update it.

I keep hearing that Brown does not have a mandate from the people to rule. WTF? A sh!tload of people voted for him and Labour.

This is because a lot of Britons are dribbling imbeciles who don't understand the difference between parliamentary and presidential elections, or realised which ones just occurred. They're the same people who moaned when Brown assumed the premiership, and will moan every time something which they don't understand occurs.

Every time I learn about the state of another foreign electoral systems, the less upset I become of the few shortcomings of the electoral system here in Norway.

And every time I learn about Norway (in general!) I become more upset about the many, many shortcomings we have here.