General election results 2015

[Beef Oven!]

It really isn't rocket science. The fact that all the political parties depend on this system for their perpetuation, however, means that they'll never put these facts to the electorate.

Is rocket science the most intellectually challenging science?

[Barbirollians]

They've already done that, without a majority.

No afraid not - they had a majority of 76 and the failure of the Lib Dems to stand up to many of their most objectionable policies accounts for its almost destruction today . Cameron will find he is governing with a very much reduced majority - with 40-50 MPs on his back benches who have more in common with UKIP than him .

It is 1992 all over again . As for Scotland words fail me that left wing Scots fell for the SNP's confidence trick and voted Nicola and got Dave . The last thing the SNP wants is a Labour Government as when Labour are in office at Westminster support for independence falls . They want to be able to say - look we represent Scotland yet we are imposed upon by an imperialist Westminster Tory Govt so they can whip up support for an early second referendum .

In office , their civil liberties policies are chilling and would have impressed Tony Blair .

[Beef Oven!]

We need to review FPTP. It's anti-democratic and only serves the interests of the established elite and its parties, not the people who vote.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32601281

[muzzer]

FWIW I think the tories had a much better understanding of the electorate and what it actually does in the polling booth as opposed to what it says it will do. And Labour never wins from the left. Scotland will be interesting. Do the Scots really want to have to pay for themselves....cos that's what I imagine Cameron will tell them they have to do, and that will be massively popular in the rest of the country.

[MrGongGong]

We need to review FPTP. It's anti-democratic and only serves the interests of the established elite and its parties, not the people who vote.

Given your previously stated allegiances this is a rather hilarious comment :LAUGH:

I think what we really need more than this (as we are unlikely to get PR in my lifetime) is a real examination of what processes are appropriate for which decisions.
The unquestioning belief in our 'democracy' with it's ridiculous idea that everyones opinion carries equal weight needs to be challenged. The alternatives are many and don't necessarily have to result in dictatorships or conspiracies.

[Bryn]

It has been very sunny in the very northern parts of Scotland lately, and then there's the whisky - which I believe you enjoy. Vegetables aren't a problem as far as I can see, though one has to take care not to get run down by dogs driving tractors.

As to vegetables, there's those lovely blue potatoes.

[Bryn]

We need to review FPTP. It's anti-democratic and only serves the interests of the established elite and its parties, not the people who vote.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32601281

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/uk_electoral_reform_locb/?biLYrab&v=58070

[jean]

Gordon Brown did make some questionable judgements: selling some of the gold, and cutting VAT when he did.

And PFI.

[jean]

It really isn't rocket science. The fact that all the political parties depend on this system for their perpetuation, however, means that they'll never put these facts to the electorate.

All the political parties who manage to come to power, that is.

The ones that don't (and UKIP is only the most glaring example this time round) never get the chance to put the facts to anyone.

[jean]

Labour never wins from the left.

Because FPTP means that the only votes that count are a few in marginal constituencies.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

As for Scotland words fail me that left wing Scots fell for the SNP's confidence trick and voted Nicola and got Dave

Not really - had they all voted for Ed, they/we'd've still got Dave. The Tory government is an entirely English responsibility.

[french frank]

Again we have the talk about FPTP and PR. Though why this result, in particular, should provoke the call, I don't know. If Labour had won and it was the usual 'pendulum', perhaps. But after five years of coalition between the Tories and the LibDems (who were under represented in terms of 'proportionality' from the start, and therefore had their power reduced), the electorate did NOT go back to Labour: they voted - almost unheard of - to strengthen the Tories' hand. 'Strong government so that we can get things done.'

People had their chance to make one small move towards PR and they whinged about it 'making things worse' when in a case like this it would probably made the Tory majority smaller.

The electorate seems (to me) not to want coalitions and not to want a reform of the voting system. And even people here only seem to want coalitions if they consist of the 'acceptable' parties.

[jean]

...the electorate did NOT go back to Labour: they voted - almost unheard of - to strengthen the Tories' hand.

'The electorate' is not a single entity; it does not speak with a single voice.

Thousands of individuals in the Northern cities which have suffered disproportionately from government cuts voted Labour, to the extent that majorities increased by up to 50%. But these votes count for nothing.

People had their chance to make one small move towards PR...

It wasn't a 'move towards' anything, and adopting it would have closed off the possibility of real PR for a considerable time.

[Dave2002]

The problem with FPTP is that it should not be applied to all situations. There are situations in which it is very reasonable and effective. Running the UK is a complex operation, and we are starting to see that "one size fits all" policies might not work.

I'll give a simple example.

Suppose a group of people want to have lunch each day, and the resources they can command include a cook, a kitchen and a budget for food.
If there are 21 people, they can each put in a request for a meal, but the cook only has limited time, and can only make one basic type of meal each day. If this is the situation, and 11 people want fish and chips, and 10 people want steak and Yorkshire pudding, then given the constraints everyone will get fish and chips (or not eat) using FPTP. Other methods of making a decision would be impractical, or unfair.

You may argue against this, because the scenario has been set up that way. Why not have more cooks? Why not have more money allocated to food ingredients etc. Also, just because the menu is fish and chips one day, it doesn't have to be that every day.

Most of us could see better ways to organise meals if the constraints are relaxed, and more resources put in.

When running a country, there may be some things where there is flexibility, and resources and constraints can be modified. There may be others where there is less flexibility, and there are servere constraints.

Until recently, in the UK, the tax system was I believe (fairly) uniform across the whole country. Now we have a situation where Scotland already has some different tax arrangeents (e.g stamp duty) and is seeking more control over its own taxes. Does that make sense? I don't know, but it's up for discussion.

Other examples include charges for higher education in Scotland compared with England, and also prescription charges in Scotland and Wales. Does it make sense for each part of the UK to have its own rules and resources? I don't know - again - it's up for debate.

We could say that local authorities should be managing local and regional affairs, though in many cases during the last decade they have been hampered from doing so to some extent by central government. It may be time for a re-evaluation of our governance structures, and to try to discover what aspects of our lives need to be managed/controlled centrally, and which can be left to local discretion. Otherwise we might get fish and chips every day, without the common sense relaxation of at least allowing different menus on different days of the week.

When considering voting systems and rules, how would PR or other systems handle the menus? Caviar and champagne for some? Bread and cheese for the rest? How?

[mangerton]

I have never voted for a candidate who became an MP, and I have voted in every election in which I was entitled or able to vote. I am sure I am not alone.

I could almost join you. I have voted in twelve general elections, in four constituencies, and last Thursday's election was the first where my chosen candidate was elected.