General election results 2015

[jean]

...more people voted 'against' any other party than the winning one...

I'd like to see this set out mathematically.

[Richard Barrett]

I'd like to see this set out mathematically.

I'd like to see it set out in comprehensible English!

[P. G. Tipps]

I'd like to see this set out mathematically.

In what way 'mathematically'?

If you mean "arithmetically" the figures (or 'numbers' these days) can be easily sought, found and digested via Google or an alternative search engine of your choice.

[P. G. Tipps]

I'd like to see it set out in comprehensible English!

It was certainly set out here in plain English.

Whether it proved comprehensible or not to the reader is entirely a matter for him/her and is no responsibility of the writer or, indeed, the language.

[Dave2002]

I look forward to them staying in power in 2020. Labour won't have got their act together by then and unless the Tories nail these unnecessary strikes in the bud PDQ then the country will be heartily sick of unions and by association Labour that the Tories will probably be still in power post-2025!

I don't disagree with all that you write, though it may well be that the opposition will have come round by 2020. The thought that the Tories could maintain what some would call power indefinitely fills me with horror, though if they were to reform, change a bit, I could be persuaded otherwise.

Some think that Labour can't change - the same issues apply there. The values espoused by most parties have changed over the years, and that is not a bad thing.

I think it is important to have some form of opposition, whether it's by an effectively two party system, or by some form of proportional representation. In the UK it is clear that there are quite strong divisions between regions, even excluding Scotland. For some issues we need policies that will be appropriate for all the regions, while for others policies which are good for one area may not be so good or appropriate for another. Unless the local issues can truly be separated from national ones, then our current "system" does allow exploitation of one area and group of people by another, though perhaps not always in the most obvious ways. We do have north versus south, cities versus rural environments, young versus old as factors in our society.

There are arguments about the south east - which I believe is over populated, and gets too many resources and too much consideration, but others will point to a view that it represents a "powerhouse of wealth creation". [I don't really agree - systems based on banks and financial services get too much attention. I blame a previous Tory government and PM for that.] Scottish voters have clearly felt that they have not been well represented in the UK government in the past, and I have a lot of sympathy with their views, though on the other hand in financial terms I think they do get more support than some other regions. How are issues like that to be sorted out? Does collaborative government, which some might argue could happen under some form of PR really do any better than what we have at the moment? Majority government doesn't have to be bad, if the people in the majority party are in some way reasonable, but if they merely steam roller though crackpot ideas because they can, then what checks are there to prevent that?

I really do think we need a system of recall in the UK for MPs who fail to represent their constituents adequately, whatever that means.

[MrGongGong]

I have not read all of this correspondence so, sorry to butt in - especially if somebody else has already noted this: the new Tory MP for Morley - who defeated Ed Balls - is a state school music teacher, a vegan, anti-hunting and somebody who has taken a great interest in the re-settlement of offenders. Good Tory values? Oh, and female.

Sticking everybody into one box does not work in 2015.

Very sad really
In spite of this she will be in favour of selling arms to dodgy regimes, taking away benefits from disabled people and all the other nasty things that are promised.

I would vote for someone like this IF their role was to represent my locality BUT that's not the system we have.

[jean]

In what way 'mathematically'?

If you mean "arithmetically"...

I think mathematics includes arithmetic, doesn't it?

...the figures (or 'numbers' these days) can be easily sought, found and digested via Google or an alternative search engine of your choice.

But nowhere are votes 'against' counted - and I don't see how they could be.

For example: If there are six candidates in my constituency and I vote for one, which under FPTP is the only option I've got, am I considered to have cast a hypothetical votes against each of the other five candidates, making five 'against' votes in all? Or what?

If you've got something important to say and you want people to understand you, it's no good telling them it's their fault if they don't or that they'd better do all the work themselves, because they'll probably just ignore you and move on.

.

[french frank]

I would vote for someone like this IF their role was to represent my locality BUT that's not the system we have.

It would be interesting to have 650 MPs, all representing their locality, having diametrically opposed views so that government 'policy' whizzed all over the place depending which way our 650 independent-minded MPs jumped on any particular issue.

The point surely is that unless every candidate makes it clear where they stand on every important or semi-important issue, your best bet is to vote for someone with a party label if you have a fair idea what that party stands for?

[Dave2002]

I think mathematics includes arithmetic, doesn't it?

But nowhere are these figures given the significance you wish to endow them with.

If you've got something important to say and you want people to understand you, it's no good telling them it's their fault if they don't or that they'd better do all the work themselves, because they'll probably just ignore you and move on.

1. How can you tell? You have no more insight into our simian friend's mind than the rest of us.

2. How do you know that PG had "something important" to say and wanted people to understand?

3. You could follow your own suggestion - "ignore and move on".

[jean]

1. How can you tell? You have no more insight into our simian friend's mind than the rest of us.

I can't tell, but I may have an inlking - see my edited post.

3. You could follow your own suggestion - "ignore and move on".

I didn't make a suggestion; I told Tippsy what was all too likely to happen if he didn't elucidate further.

If it amuses me to investigate the workings of his mind, please indulge me.

[jean]

...But nowhere are votes 'against' counted - and I don't see how they could be...

Except in the case of a simple Yes/No vote, as in a referendum.

Which reminds me...tomorrow the Irish will decide...

[Dave2002]

I didn't make a suggestion; I told Tippsy what was all too likely to happen if he didn't elucidate further.

If it amuses me to investigate the workings of his mind, please indulge me.

Fair enough. I'm indulging away.

Where is am51 when one needs him?

[Richard Barrett]

Moving on...

"Net migration to Britain surged to 318,000 in 2014, just below its previous peak under the Labour government in 2005. The latest quarterly migration figures from the Office of National Statistics show that net immigration from outside Europe – up 42,000 – is now rising almost as strongly as from within Europe – up 67,000. Net migration from outside Europe is now at its highest level since 2011 and the latest rise brings to an end a recent decline as a result of the last government crackdowns."

So obviously the solution to this "problem" is to leave the EU, right?

[P. G. Tipps]

Dear Oh Dear ...

It is not myself who favours the 'against' case as I've already declared it to be a nonsense as nobody actually votes 'against' but 'for'. What is so difficult to grasp about that?

I've simply pointed out that even applying this so-called 'against' methodology the Tories would still come out as the Party with least votes 'against'.

Instead of pretending a lack of comprehension over simple, publicly-available figures on the internet, and elsewhere, I suggest it might be disgruntled members who need to consider 'moving on' on this subject, or come up with rather more convincing arguments.

Unlike others here I'm not at all concerned with particular political allegiances just the fairness or otherwise of the electoral system itself!

[Richard Barrett]

In spite of this she will be in favour of selling arms to dodgy regimes, taking away benefits from disabled people and all the other nasty things that are promised.

Yes. Who has more influence, voters or party whips? Again, where's the democracy?