please empty your brain below
|
|
Two words: proportional representation.
Blue Witch | Homepage | 10.06.17 - 7:17 a.m. | #
|
|
No. 7. 1945 to 2017 is 72 years not 77.
Sara | 10.06.17 - 7:24 a.m. | #
|
Interesting that in 2001 Labour won 412 seats with 41% of the vote, yet yesterday with 40% of the vote they only won 262.
Boundary changes to blame?
Rob | 10.06.17 - 7:56 a.m. | #
|
@ Sara - This week's election covers (theoretically) the period 2017 to 2022.
1945 to 2022 is 77 years.
NLW | 10.06.17 - 8:17 a.m. | #
|
@Rob
No, the reason is more simple: a return to 2 party domination. The paradox of Mrs May's 'failure' is brilliantly explained by DG's charts. She increased the Conservative share by 5 percentage points, more than DC ever did, but Labour increased their share by 10 percentage points, as the smaller parties not only got squeezed but actually throttled.
Numbers guy | 10.06.17 - 8:20 a.m. | #
|
|
A further thought. Bath, Cambridge and Reading, for example, are very prosperous places but the Conservatives lost Bath and Reading East and were beaten in Cambridge. Why? The student vote. I believe there is a strong case for students voting where they live not where they study, after all approximately one third of their number will be gone for good within a week or two but yet their political choice may well represent the permanent population for the next 5 years. I hope so anyway because frankly I am tired of perpetual campaigning!
Numbers guy | 10.06.17 - 8:28 a.m. | #
|
@Rob
The last major boundary changes were, I think, before the 1997 election so I don't think that's the reason. It depends on where those votes rea focussed. This is why the SNP got three times as many seats as the LDs, despite only getting half as many votes.
In 2001 the LD vote was larger (18%) than it was this year (12%). That meant that the two big parties were only fighting over 80% of the votes instead of nearly 90%, and meant that 41% was enough to win a seat in 2001 but not in 2017.
@Sara. The diagram shows this Parliament lasting the full five years laid down by the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which brings us to 2022. And I can't see the PM calling another snap election any time soon!
timbo | 10.06.17 - 8:31 a.m. | #
|
|
Given the way things are going - it might be better to subdivide between the various nations, the leader of the 'Tartan Tories', Ruth Davidson, with thirteen MPs, is starting to make noises, it may be in the words of Boris Johnson (who was writing at the time about Labour and the SNP in 2015), that truckloads of English case are sent to Northern Ireland and Scotland to keep them sweet.
Still anon | 10.06.17 - 8:34 a.m. | #
|
|
Column 5 - What made all those extra people go out and vote in the 1950s?
scrumpy | 10.06.17 - 9:13 a.m. | #
|
|
Nothing better to do.
Madison | 10.06.17 - 9:54 a.m. | #
|
1950s - might be an appreciation of democracy having survived WW2, also many people were party members in those days.
Conversely the drop in 2000s might be the Iraq effect, plus the Tories were face down in the water at this point.
BTW - it makes Gordon Brown's decision not to call a snap election shortly after he took over a better call now.
Still anon | 10.06.17 - 10:56 a.m. | #
|
|
I can see now *why* May had miscalculated. What a pity actually. Seems that having 3rd or 4th parties to drain your opponents is better than trying to fight the last vote against your biggest nemesis.
Patrickov | 10.06.17 - 11:58 a.m. | #
|
To answer BW, I live in a country which has PR.
Proportional representation requires polictical parties to compromise, something which IMO is very difficult for British people to do, as compromise is seen as being weak.
Michael | 10.06.17 - 12:06 p.m. | #
|
|
@Michael: IMHO only big parties have to compromise because PR automatically means victory for parties like the Green and UKIP.
Patrickov | 10.06.17 - 12:13 p.m. | #
|
|
8) surely the blue chart should point to the right and the red to the left?
Grumpy Anon | 10.06.17 - 1:16 p.m. | #
|
@ Numbers guy
The Conservatives also lost Canterbury because there was a voting campaign by the 30,000 students in the city. It had never had a Labour MP since the constituency was created in 1918.
In the 70s students could register only in their home constituencies, which prevented permanent locals being outvoted by transient students.
Similarly, until 1950 there were University Constituencies.
Gerry | 10.06.17 - 3:54 p.m. | #
|
And the point of this exercise is?
(shrug, I'm American)
Miles Archer | 10.06.17 - 3:57 p.m. | #
|
Numbers Guy and Gerry, that's an interesting question, where do students 'live'?
Presumably around a third of them may not be in the constituency in which they voted next year, but then probably an even higher percentage won't be in the constituency where their parents live either. Many university towns now provide jobs where a high proportion of students do stay. Bath and Cambridge being two, I suspect others also. So on balance I think I favour the status quo.
Bathonian | 10.06.17 - 4:54 p.m. | #
|
Thanks for the visual representations DG. I find it so much easier to understand.
The Tories have been limping to the finish line lately, and twice now they have not even reached it!
Never before has a party failed to get a majority, not once but twice within the same decade!!
Time for a change I say!
Cornish Cockney | 10.06.17 - 5:38 p.m. | #
|
Someone here will know I suspect... how do they stop those with more than one address (students, those with second homes etc) registering to vote and then voting twice (maybe once by postal or proxy vote)? Yes, I know it's illegal, but is it policed?
And as an aside - it really is time that one was required to produce both a polling card and a form of ID at a polling station.
Blue Witch | Homepage | 10.06.17 - 6:29 p.m. | #
|
|
students are allowed to be registered in two places, but are not allowed to vote in both in the same election (so they could, for example, vote in two simultaneous council elections but not in a two constituencies in the same election) How (if?) it is policed I don't know - it was probably a very minor problem until postal/proxy votes became obtainable as of right rather than only for good cause.
timbo | 10.06.17 - 8:46 p.m. | #
|
|
@Blue Witch: That is a pet peeve of mine, not so much Students voting twice but that there is no checking of who is voting. Russia and Iran have "safer" elections than the UK. Once again we had a card posted to us for someone not living here and I could have easily voted with it as Brits are quite happily have CCTV everywhere and the Government snoop on their mails but when it comes to ID cards complain about the privacy concerns that would bring.
Max | 10.06.17 - 8:51 p.m. | #
|
From the Electoral Commission's 'Analysis of cases of alleged electoral fraud in the UK in 2016'
"The most frequently reported types of voting fraud related to the offence of personation (voting as someone else) either at a polling station (44 cases), using a postal vote (25 cases) or using a proxy vote (5 cases)."
"In the majority of cases of alleged electoral fraud relating to voting offences police forces took no further action following the conclusion of their investigations. In 20 cases this was because it was clear that no offence had been committed.
"One case resulted in a conviction."
diamond geezer | Homepage | 10.06.17 - 9:12 p.m. | #
|
|
Nice HTML action.
drD | Homepage | 11.06.17 - 12:21 a.m. | #
|
|
DG has included a quote from the Electoral Commission, but how much credibility do they have?... The fraudulent election of Mayor Rahman a few years ago included all sorts of electoral fraud and the EC just looked the other way - it took a difficult and expensive campaign by some Wapping residents to expose it.
IslandDweller | 11.06.17 - 7:20 a.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|