By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - UK General Election, Election Day and Results Thread

 

UK General Election, Election Day and Results Thread

New Labour - Gordon Brown 9 17.65%
 
Conservatives - David Cameron 15 29.41%
 
Liberal Democrats - Nick Clegg 21 41.18%
 
UKIP - Lord Pearson 3 5.88%
 
Green Party - Caroline Lucas 0 0%
 
Others (National Parties,... 3 5.88%
 
Total:51
headshot91 on 11 May 2010
kowenicki said:
bazmeistergen said:
headshot91 said:
kowenicki said:
I am getting rather annoyed with the lib-dems...

It is patently obvious that they arent now working in the best interests of the country at all.

The ONLY thing they want guaranteed is political reform, thats about the best interests of the Lib-Dems and not the people of this country. Whats happened to all their principles on "fairness" in the economy and the massive change in immigration and defence.. you know real issues that affect people every day.... all of these can apparently be sacrifised apparentrly so long as tyhey get political rfeform. Weak, spineless self serving politicians... as per usual.

Labnour are even worse... they are saying they will agree to everything and anything to hang in there. sickening.

If we end up with a coalition of losers then I, and I think the vocal majority, will be mighty pissed off. I'd expect Nick Clegg to get an absolute mauling in the press if he sells his soul and integrity for a slice of power... a slice of power that wont last 6 months in my opinion. A lib/lab agreement is built on sand and would evaporate very very quickly.

Gordon Brown hasnt won anything ever... he didn't win an election of even his peers to become party leader, he didn't win an election to become prime minister and now he has lost another election as leader... and he has the chance to stay as Prime Minsiter.... and this is democratic is it? Do me a favour... it stinks!!!!

That statement does not make ANY sense. Lib dems got 6 mill votes. Labour got 8 mill. Conservaties got 10 mill. YET, LD got LESS than a quarter of the conservative seat count. How is that fair? How is that not good for the people, when LD get almost 2/3 of conservative, and almost 3/4 of labour votes, but are stuck with less than a quarter of the seats. Of course its for the LD, they are not being represente well, even though they got so many votes. Proportional representation is what they want, and its best for everyone.

I agree with you. Kowenicki is so blinded by a single perspective that he doesn't acknowledge that there are all sorts of equally valid views about what the Lib Dems are doing. Why don't we just say that Con-Lib would be a coalition of two unpopular groups? After all, the Conservatives only managed 36%... It is silly really. People are bleating all over the place without realising they sound daft. Everybody is right and wrong at the same time.

As for Gordon Brown, didn't he win his seat? Again?

And why politicians get served everytime is beyond me... they are just like any of us and seeing the worst in them all the time is just ridiculous.

With respect....

We dont have PR yet, you are putting the cart before the horse and are talking like we have PR already.

This is about a strong government NOW!

lab and lib would bring 315 seats (not even a majority)

Con and Lib would bring 363 seats

Lets not be silly about this.  Only one of the above is anywhere near strong government.  A rainbow coalition would be required for the lab/lib deal and that is utterly unworkable and stupendously naive.

 

No I'm not, I'm saying that PR is the way to go. Even if the conservatives formed an alliance with the lD, it would still mean more than 40 percent of the parliament is against them!

I need to reiterate this i think.

Lib dems got 6 mill votes. Labour got 8 mill. Conservaties got 10 mill. YET, LD got LESS than a quarter of the conservative seat count. How is that fair? To say that "all they want" is political reform and it sonly in the "interests of the lib dems", is rubbish, its unfair that 6 million people voted for them, and they get such a pitiful representation in govt!



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 11 May 2010
zuvuyeay said:
PR could be a disaster for labour,because scots and welsh might feel better voting SNP/PC as they will get represented more

Big possibility... with straight PR you would pretty much ALWAYS need a coalition as far as I can gather.  So any 4th party that gets reasonably big becomes "King Maker" and gains a ton of influence.



zuvuyeay on 11 May 2010
Kasz216 said:
zuvuyeay said:
PR could be a disaster for labour,because scots and welsh might feel better voting SNP/PC as they will get represented more

Big possibility... with straight PR you would pretty much ALWAYS need a coalition as far as I can gather.  So any 4th party that gets reasonably big becomes "King Maker" and gains a ton of influence.


thats right,also if you think about it in PR,the conservatives would always have the most votes out of any party,obviously they won't have total power but will always be the biggest,labour will be the loser i think out of everbody



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

zuvuyeay on 11 May 2010

depending on what type of PR you have,as far as i'm concerned you either have true PR and get on with it,or keep it the way it is



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

Soleron on 11 May 2010
zuvuyeay said:
...


thats right,also if you think about it in PR,the conservatives would always have the most votes out of any party,obviously they won't have total power but will always be the biggest,labour will be the loser i think out of everbody

Yeah, this election. But at some point Labour's vote will recover and go ahead of the Conservatives. PR disadvantages the two big parties equally.



Around the Network
zuvuyeay on 11 May 2010
Soleron said:
zuvuyeay said:
...


thats right,also if you think about it in PR,the conservatives would always have the most votes out of any party,obviously they won't have total power but will always be the biggest,labour will be the loser i think out of everbody

Yeah, this election. But at some point Labour's vote will recover and go ahead of the Conservatives. PR disadvantages the two big parties equally.

thats true,i'm very biased/pro england and for some reason think tories who voted labour in 1997/2005 will never do it again,but obviously i'm wrong

i wonder if in true PR as in every vote counts whether people who don't vote now would as they feel their vote counts,i wonder who that would benefit most in the political world 



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

Soleron on 11 May 2010
zuvuyeay said:
...

thats true,i'm very biased/pro england and for some reason think tories who voted labour in 1997/2005 will never do it again,but obviously i'm wrong

i wonder if in true PR as in every vote counts whether people who don't vote now would as they feel their vote counts,i wonder who that would benefit most in the political world 

I don't think it would affect turnout that much, it wasn't all that different this election between ultra-marginals and very safe seats.

I voted Conservative this time, but if:

- they screw up badly on the economy or corruption, and
- Labour have a new ideology and a credible leader

then I would vote for them. The former is inevitable, and the latter would be possible if they stop spending money without controlling where it is spent and so uilding up a huge deficit for little gain in the real world (which is my main issue with them today).



Kantor on 11 May 2010

STV is complicated, but I can somewhat understand it. Rank candidates, they get votes based on their rank, multiple seats for a district. Not great, but not too bad.

Alternative Vote...seriously, what the HELL is it? It seems to have the same candidate ranking, but after that...what happens? What I thought was AV seems to be STV, in actual fact.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

Kasz216 on 11 May 2010
Kantor said:
STV is complicated, but I can somewhat understand it. Rank candidates, they get votes based on their rank, multiple seats for a district. Not great, but not too bad.

Alternative Vote...seriously, what the HELL is it? It seems to have the same candidate ranking, but after that...what happens? What I thought was AV seems to be STV, in actual fact.

Alternate Vote is a instant runoff system.

Picture this... for a seat

 

Conservatives 40%

Labour 35%

Liberal Democrats: 20%

UKIP 3%

BNP 2%

 

So... nobody has reachers 51%.  So you eliminate the BNP... and they vote for their second choice... lets say Half UKIP, half Conservative.  So now the Conservatives are at 41%, Labour 35% and LD 15%.

Ukips out next.  Lets say that gets the conservatives to 45%.

Liberal Democrats are out next.... So say 16% of them go Labours way while 4% goes Conservatives. 

Labour wins they now have 51% of the vote... the seat is now a Labour seat.

 

Now you see why Labour wants the AV.



Soleron on 11 May 2010

kowenicki said:
Labour are gone. Brown is gone.

Don't rule anything out yet. We've had far too many changes of heart already.

I agree that it's extremely unlikely.

One way it could happen is that the Lib Dems fail to get 75% of their MPs and 75% of their executive to approve the Conservative deal. Then we'd need Labour to carry on until negotiation resumes or another election happens.

 

@Kasz216

Right. That's a fairly likely result. If Labour wins every seat that they're behind by 5% in before runoff, that's a massive bias (on top of the existing FPTP bias towards them in votes v. seats won).