further proof today that we badly need Proportional Representation...

and the "winning" party, like last time, only got 36% of the votes...

ironically a Lib Dem-Labour co-allition would actually be MORE democratic as the two combined have 52% of the vote...same with a Conservative-Lib Dem co-allition...

IMO, a co-allition that has more than 50% of the seats and votes should govern.

thats the will of the nation it seems even under the old system we have used, the Conservatives DO NOT have a majority.

So, if Manchester United don't get enough points to win the league tomorrow, could they form a coalition with Portsmouth?

Your analogy doesn't work... at all. 

Labour would need to form a coalition government with at least three other parties which is very unlikely. The most likely outcome is a Con/Lib coalition. 

One question though; if the UK rejected Brown, what the hell did they do to Nick Clegg? Yet he will most likely be part of the new government...

Yeah i know that, but the point behind it still stands.

I think it's pretty stupid that despite getting (a LOT) more votes than both Labour and Lib Dem, the Conservatives don't outright win.

Oh well, i don't make the rules. I just think it's pretty obvious that the country have voted against Gordon and Labour.


As for the Lib Dems... lol

sounds like Cameron is seeking an agreement with the Liberal Democrats...

all he did was state where they agreed...which is only a small number of issues...

and he offered a "commitee" on electoral reform...which essentially means not even a refferendum...

its a pretty shoddy offer imo, the one Labour made him is much more desirable (speaking as a Lib Dem voter)

Who won my area?? (Portsmouth)

Conservatives won Portsmouth North from Labour. 

Lib dems held Portsmouth South. 

I thought you didn't care though?

Labour's saving grace is that a Labour/Lib dem coalition is a majority in terms of actual votes (52%).

I still want to know!

edit - thanks btw