posted on May, 17 2010 @ 06:40 AM
Originally posted by DISRAELI
a) It is still more than voted for anybody else.
b) The last fraction quoted is a little dishonest, given that the 62 million is not the electorate; it includes everybody too young to vote.
It's not dishonest, as everyone, no matter what their age, is valid as part of a functional economic unit and is represented, whether by parents or
otherwise in voting terms. Also, those are the figures which are used by the electoral commission. Your "it's still more than" statement is
'dishonest', even by your own standards. Read on and I'll tell you how.
In reply to your point '(a)', by that kind of *logic*, you could say that if 1 person voted and no one else did that it would be meaningful as a
measure of who should govern by 'more than'. You're not getting the difference between the numbers and whether they are meaningful or not. Also,
this election saw a large number of tactical voters - more so than in previous elections, so the numbers are skewed. For example, many Labour voters
voted Lib Dem tactically. If they had voted Labour despite the marginal they lived in the overall Labour voted would have been much higher.
And another fact you can't get away from is that no one voted for the coalition.
You say you think that it is fine for the Tories to govern because they had the most votes - in that case they should have been forced to form a
minority government, but in the UK we do have the 'majority rule' for a reason!
However, can you explain how you think it is justified that the party that got the least votes - the Lib Dems - get to rule over the country? That
they get the Deputy Prime minister, 5 cabinet places and many other ministerial posts? That the party that got the least posts is making, and
deciding on, major policy? Even if you think the Tories should have got a majority government- which actually goes against the constitution of the UK
with the number of votes they got, you simply cannot justify how the Lib Dems conned their way into government with less votes than Labour . If any
coalition should have been formed it should have been a Tory and Labour coalition as they were the two parties that got the most votes. You can't
argue with that.