It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Strange Voting Results....

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Guys and Gals,
I have just been playing around with the BBC's election calculator and have discovered something rather strange.

Even if the vote is split, ie; 35% Labour, 35% Cons with Lib Dems at 22% and the others making up the rest, Labour will still have 134 more seats than the Cons and an overall majority of 52.

This strikes me as somewhat biased in favour of the incumbent government?

BBC Election Calculator




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 08:21 PM
link   
It gets worse..

30.4% labour
23.7% conservative
39% lib dem
7% other

and Labour STILL comes out ahead (although with a hung parliament) I guess that's why the Lib Dems have been pushing for proportional representation all this time!

Seriously though, I can only think the model they're using is a bit ropey!



[edit on 22/4/05 by muppet]



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
This strikes me as somewhat biased in favour of the incumbent government?

BBC Election Calculator


- It's all about where you are starting from (ie how you did in the last election) and the way our 'First past the post' electoral system works stu.

It's how come even to get a 'hung parliament' the tories need a record swing to them never mind stand a hope of actually getting into gov.

This is because the British system is as much about getting a clear winner as it is about reflecting the views of the people accurately. In Britain 'we' have been encouraged to look at PR in Europe and see coalition gov as somehow 'less' for some reason.
(not that anyone gives much thought to the idea that the so-called 'worst example' - Italy - has had umteen govs come and go thanks to their PR system yet it doesn't stop the Italian standard of living being high, does it?)

But this trait of FPTP is why people can point to a PR system and - rightly - say it is more democratic.

The tory party have always been great supporters of FPTP as for many years as the 'decisive outcome' tended to favour them, now it might be that the boot is so far on the other foot that they will prove incapable of recovering again. On the other hand it might not.

(But then again the wheel always turn eventually, look at the Liberals for instance, maybe their time is coming and they are set to return as a serious prosect at tory expense, and why not?)

It's nothing shady (although personally I prefer the idea of one of the PR systems as more democratic).......and it's certainly nothing Tony Blair and Co. have cooked up between them!


This site seems reasonable explaining a fair bit of it -
www.historylearningsite.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   
It's just bloody daft I tell you! I was having a discussion last night at work with one of my mates and he explained this to me.

I think, regardless who you may want to win, that the fairest and most democratic way would be a PR system.

I mean, this is almost as bad as in the US where Bush only gets votes from little over 25% of the US populace but still wins.

In the system we have now, Labour could hang on to power even if they receive less votes than the rest of the parties!! How is that Democratic?

Bah! We're barking mad!



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
In the system we have now, Labour could hang on to power even if they receive less votes than the rest of the parties!! How is that Democratic?


- I know it is a possibility but in this particular case (if the polls are right - and with them all saying much the same thing, ie a definite Labour lead it appears the polls are) you needn't worry too much about such a perverse but theoretical outcome.


Bah! We're barking mad!


- I agree, now, which system of PR do you favour?
There are more than a few and if you think FPTP can be complicated!


[edit on 23-4-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 06:01 PM
link   


I know it is a possibility but in this particular case (if the polls are right - and with them all saying much the same thing, ie a definite Labour lead it appears the polls are) you needn't worry too much about such a perverse but theoretical outcome.


Bugger.....five more years....




- I agree, now, which system of PR do you favour?
There are more than a few and if you think FPTP can be complicated!



You mean there are more than one?....smeg!!

Sminkey...fill me in man! I must admit, I know more about the inner workings of Black Holes, Singularitys and their affect on Space-Time dilation than I do about the Political system.....

(note...I am not an Astrophysicist, a Stephen Hawkins clone, or even go to Uni and have an IQ of only 122
)



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   
here you go



The rationale underpinning all proportional representation (PR) systems is to consciously reduce the disparity between a party's share of the national vote and its share of the parliamentary seats. If a major party wins forty percent of the votes, it should win approximately forty percent of the seats, and a minor party with ten percent of the votes should also gain ten percent of the parliamentary seats. The use of party lists helps to achieve proportionality, whereby political parties present lists of candidates to the voters on a national or regional basis (see List PR). However, it can be achieved just as easily if the proportional component of an MMP system compensates for any disproportionality arriving out of the majoritarian district results (see Mixed Member Proportional). But preferential voting can work equally well: the Single Transferable Vote, where voters rank-order candidates in multi-member districts, is another well-established proportional system (see Single Transferable Vote).

PR systems are a common choice in many new democracies. Over twenty established democracies, and just under half of all "free" democracies, use some variant of PR (see The Global Distribution of Electoral Systems). PR systems are dominant in Latin America and Western Europe, and make up a third of all the systems in Africa. While seats are often allocated within regionally-based multi-member districts, in a number of countries (e.g. Germany, Namibia, Israel, Netherlands, Denmark, South Africa, and New Zealand) the parliamentary seat distribution is effectively determined by the overall national vote.


www.aceproject.org...

Basicaly means, under PR, if a party wins 40% of the votes it will get 40% of the seats in parliament.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   
This might be a good place to start (also check the links at bottom right of screen) about the various types of PR.

It's a pretty complicated topic and there is a ton of stuff about it (google PR, different systems) out there but dive in and enjoy!


www.politics.co.uk...$1996390.htm



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Cheers Smink
!

Hey, if we ever get a PR system in, maybe we won't have to put up with Labour...... (drifts off into Dreamland)


On a side note. Have you seen this about the BNP manifesto?




Leader Nick Griffin also called for EU withdrawal, the restoration of capital punishment and an end to immigration.

He said British troops should be pulled out of Iraq and used to patrol Dover and the Channel Tunnel to keep out illegal immigrants and asylum seekers.

And he pledged to introduce "firm but voluntary incentives for immigrants and their descendants to return home".

...........................

Mr Griffin also wants the reintroduction of national service and said everyone who had undergone it should be required to keep a modern assault rifle at home.

"It's there to shoot burglars with if they want, it's there to shoot people who invade this country if they want, and if in the end a tyrannical government wants to usurp the rights and freedoms of the people it is there to use against the government as well," he said.

He added that this would disprove the "smear" that his party was totalitarian.



BBC Election Site thingamy jig wotsit....



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
That stuff about giving ex-service people the 'right' to have an assault weapon......wtf is that all about?

I can think of fewer things more scary than a significant number (yes, I'm perfectly well aware it is not and would not be all ex-service people) of heavily armed post traumatic stressed traumatised right-wing ex-military people across the country.

They obviously think they would be creating the 'vanguard' for the new British order.


Thankfully my cat stands a greater chance of leading the nation than that lot.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   


Thankfully my cat stands a greater chance of leading the nation than that lot.


I have a cat too. Perhaps we can form the NFP and get them to stand against the BNP?



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
I have a cat too. Perhaps we can form the NFP and get them to stand against the BNP?


- Diversity and a representation of us as we are, yes, I'm all for that.

I would like to see the Euro influence extend over to the UK, Italy provides an excellent example for us.
Cicciolina (Ilona Staller) is a shining example to us all IMO.

Yes, I could lend a lot of enthusiastic support to a pussy party.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join