please empty your brain below
Anyway, congratulations to Sadiq, personally I feel he is a better man than Zac, even though I didn't vote for either of them as some of their policies are very worrying/gimmicky.
I feel we had a very disappointing choice of candidates this time around, and would have preferred more energetic/heavyweight candidates like good ol' Boris
"1st S/Z, 2nd someone else" versus "1st someone else, 2nd someone else"?
FirstPreference: 37,007
Second Preference: 117,080
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Such a disappointing result.
As he keeps saying he is a "bus drivers son" perhaps he will get some cheaper better buses to replace the Boris Bus.
Hope he does something about diesel car fumes.
Part of the downfall of London as a major city, next the downfall of the UK if Brexit occurs.
Then if Boris becomes PM and Trump become US President interesting and not too pleasant times could lay ahead.
Now as Trump wants to ban Muslims suppose he has to visit London with a Muslim mayor...
The 2007 Scottish Parliament elections coincided with local elections, and the multiple voting systems in use were blamed for a large number of rejected votes.
This meant that the Scottish election which was due for 2015 was postponed to this year; but with 4 year terms, the next one would also be due in 2020, so might have to be moved again. Essentially the Fixed Term Parliaments Act has de facto extended the term of the Scottish Parliament to 5 years. Might we see the same with the Mayorship?
dg writes: Fixed now, thanks.
Gave 2nd preference vote to someone other than Sadiq or Zac: 1,574,414 voters (56%)"
Yup, people failed to realise what SV is about entirely.
A second vote that was not Sadiq or Khan was a wasted vote, and that should have been obvious from the start. I am going to assume that they just put someone because they could.
The best explanation was Heart, then Head. Who you truly WANT as your first vote, then The Tactical Choice according to your Political Leaning as the SECOND. E.g., hate the Tories, like someone who knows about transport policy - Sian then Khan.
Nice to see the Greens get 6%.
I didn't use my 2nd pref for Khan (or Goldsmith) because it was obvious he was a dead cert, and I disagreed with his inability to think of policies himself and his position on the garden bridge. Is that so bad?
Maybe that's not far from what actually happened?
First Choice: Sadiq
Second Choice: Khan
(or vice versa! :)
I suggest that it really depends why you are voting. If your only desire is to get the one you think is the best candidate in place, then you should use a second preference however unlikely-to-make-any-difference you think it is.
But if you have squashier feel-good reasons for voting (people have died to get you the vote, old ladies are staggering out in the snow to vote, etc), then you should do whatever your heart says, including possibly writing "none of the above" all over it. That will have no practical effect, but it might make you feel better.
And since the result seemed certain before anyone even voted, feeling better might be the best you could achieve.
I always always told that if you are disillusioned with all candidates, it is still worth going to vote and spoiling your ballot, as they are still added up and included in election data. Politicians in want of votes can then pander to these people as they're effectively a source of votes with no clear political alliance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gbDAvK42yA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above
The result of 'winning' varies.
At least according to the declaration on the London Elects site here: https://www.londonelects.org.uk/sites/default/files/Barnet%20and%20Camden%20-%20Mayor%202016.pdf
Presumably due to London Elects slowness at getting the final results up (and everything else) DG will have compiled this off the live count progress charts, which ceased to be updated once the count got to 90% complete. At that point, Goldsmith was still ahead in Barnet & Camden (https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/election-results/count-progress-2016?contest=25). The last 10% must have been from some Labour-leaning polling districts and flipped it narrowly for Khan.
The London Elects website was a code-driven real-time beauty up until the early evening, after which it changed to a lumpen repository of hard-to-flick-through pdfs.
I'm dreading responding to Mayors Questions from the UKIP AMs.
The electoral system used for the London-wide seats (the 'Modified d'Hondt formula') uses a formula which takes into account the number of constituency seats each party has won, with the intention of producing an overall composition of the Assembly that is more proportional - as well as ensuring that parties other than Labour and the Tories (no-one else has ever won a constituency seat) are represented. The Tories therefore 'benefited' on the London-wide result by a relatively low score of constituency seats. Labour, on the other hand, lost a London-wide seat largely because it picked up an additional constituency (Merton & Wandsworth), leading to what can look like the bizarre situation of a sitting Labour member (Murad Qureshi) being kicked off the Assembly because his party was too successful.
The formula is basically dividing the number of votes won by the number of constituency seats won, plus one, so Labour's London-wide vote was divided by 10, the Tories' by 6 and everyone else's by 1. The first seat is then allocated to whoever then has the highest number - hence the first seat went to the Greens. You then repeat the process for all eleven seats, adding any London-wide seats won to the number divided by. Had there been a 12th seat, it would indeed have gone to the Tories, but UKIP had a 600ish majority for the 11th seat.
There's also a 5% threshold for eligibility for London-wide seats - if that was not in place, the Women's Equality Party would have taken the 11th seat, not UKIP.
8,000+ with second preferences - 99,654 for Sadiq versus Zac's 91,096 (by my count anyway, since the hard-to-flick-through PDFs make things even harder by not including a helpful total of 1st and 2nd pref for each candidate).
TridentScan | Privacy Policy