Green MP
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Adrian on 7 May 2010 06:06 boltar2003(a)boltar.world gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>There's 650 local elections, with the government being formed by the >>party who win most of them. >> >>It's really not a very difficult concept. > But its a concept that isn't particularly fair. It would be fine if the > number of people in each constituency were the same but they're not so > you can get the situation where more people vote for one party but > another actually wins. The BNP have no seats. The Greens have one seat. The BNP got twice the vote of the Greens. The DUP have eight seats. The BNP got four times the vote of the DUP. The SNP and DUP together have fourteen seats. The BNP have almost as many votes as the DUP & SNP together. Discuss.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 7 May 2010 06:11 On 7 May 2010 09:53:59 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: >If that %age is worked nationally, then - congratulations - you've just >reduced the number of parties in the last parliament from twelve to >three, so long as you use any percentage above 2.5%. > >Was that what you intended? > >Reduce it to 2% and you bring in the SNP. The SNP etc will *win* seats outright anyway. But certainly the decision on the threshold level is a vexed one and will be decided on self interest no doubt! -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 7 May 2010 06:12 On Fri, 7 May 2010 09:56:38 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)boltar.world wrote: >>Good, sooner the better, either we should have a democracy or we >>don't, at the moment we don't. > >True democracy doesn't work. At some point someone has to make decisions >that a large number of people might not like otherwise nothing will ever >get done. It only doesn't work if the politicians are extremist bigots who cannot accommodate different views -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 7 May 2010 06:15 On 7 May 2010 09:57:24 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: >The problem is that people shout about the national vote %age as if it's >relevant. It isn't. We don't vote nationally for a government. We vote >locally for an MP. >There's 650 local elections, with the government being formed by the >party who win most of them. > >It's really not a very difficult concept. we all understand how the current system works, that isn't the problem. The problem is it does not result in fair proportional representation of peoples voting. Its not a difficult concept. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: Adrian on 7 May 2010 06:18
ChelseaTractorMan <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>If that %age is worked nationally, then - congratulations - you've just >>reduced the number of parties in the last parliament from twelve to >>three, so long as you use any percentage above 2.5%. >> >>Was that what you intended? >> >>Reduce it to 2% and you bring in the SNP. > The SNP etc will *win* seats outright anyway. So you're not looking at a straightforward %age PR, but a mixed-bag of FPTP and a bit of PR to try to compensate? > But certainly the decision on the threshold level is a vexed one and > will be decided on self interest no doubt! |