British Election: peaceful revolution

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

UKIP gained a seat from what I heard, watch out EU, the nationalists are coming for you!

Nope - they came second, it was a Labour hold.

[Beskar]

I wouldn't mind UKIP stealing conservative seats. Then we will probably end up with a multi-party system which means STV might end up actually being implemented instead of the broken FPTP system.

[rvg]

The Left has triumphed over the Radical Left. I suppose it's the best possible outcome given the circumstances.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Nope - they came second, it was a Labour hold.

What a joke.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I wouldn't mind UKIP stealing conservative seats. Then we will probably end up with a multi-party system which means STV might end up actually being implemented instead of the broken FPTP system.

Because the most important thing is to oust David Cameron and install Ed Milliband in No.10 backed by Alistair Salmond, yes?

UKIP stealing Conservative seats will mean nothing, if you had the SNP stealing Conservative seats or UKIP stealing a lot of Labour seats people might start to ask question but all that's happening here is UKIP is picking up the protest vote in England and the SNP are picking it up in Scotland.

I think you'll find that this election will reflect the public mood, the Conservatives will come out on top but short of a majority because people don't really trust them, but they trust Red Ed and even less.

The Left has triumphed over the Radical Left. I suppose it's the best possible outcome given the circumstances.

Quite the opposite, the SNP (the closest thing we have to a Radical Left, far Left of Labour) has taken fifty of the fifty-three seats declared in Scotland, with five left to go. Oddly, the Conservatives managed to hold their one Scottish MP.

Edit: the SNP have taken 55 seats with one left to declare - it's hard to see this as good for Scotland as virtually the whole country is now represented by one partythat hold no seats in the wider UK. About the only thing this Bloc can achieve at Westminster is to bring down a government and trigger a new election as they've already said they will have no truck with the Conservatives.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I hope they trigger a new election soonjust so we can avoid talking about the upcoming US election.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I hope they trigger a new election soonjust so we can avoid talking about the upcoming US election.

Sorry to dissapoint but it looks like, in the end, people were more afraid of the SNP than the Tories. Thus far the Cons have made a net gain of 20 seats, having lost 10, if the Conservatives win 27 of the remaining 44 seats they will have a majority, Labour will be lucky to hit 250 MPs, actually doing worse than last election under Gordon Brown.

[I of the Storm]

Could somebody please explain to me in lay terms why UKIP got only 2 seats when they achieved 12%?
I'm very much unfamiliar with the british election system, and I'd like to know how this works.
Thank you.

Also: quite the prediction fail this time, it seems.

[Sir Moody]

so it looks like the opinion polls were HORRIBLE off...

The Conservatives have already said they will now bring back the Communications bill giving the security serviced leave to spy on everyone - the boundary bill which effectively gives them another 20 seats for the next election - and a EU referendum...

The liberals are utterly destroyed, Labour is weakened and the SNP are now strong but unable to make that matter... and no chance for a Voting reform now either...

not looking forward to the next 5 years

[Fragony]

I am if Camaron keeps his word on a referandum about the EU, that thing has got to die.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

so it looks like the opinion polls were HORRIBLE off...

The Conservatives have already said they will now bring back the Communications bill giving the security serviced leave to spy on everyone - the boundary bill which effectively gives them another 20 seats for the next election - and a EU referendum...

The liberals are utterly destroyed, Labour is weakened and the SNP are now strong but unable to make that matter... and no chance for a Voting reform now either...

not looking forward to the next 5 years

Well, a referendum is a good thing, it should put the question to bed - boundary changes are needed because currently Labour seats contain on average several thousand fewer voters - meaning that labour areas - like Scotland - are awarded an unfair number of seats based on population.

As to the communications bill - we'll see, passing that one won't be easy, a lot of Cons will vote against it, so currently passing it will be impossible.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Could somebody please explain to me in lay terms why UKIP got only 2 seats when they achieved 12%?
I'm very much unfamiliar with the british election system, and I'd like to know how this works.
Thank you.

Also: quite the prediction fail this time, it seems.

It helps if you stop thinking about the parties and think about the people. Basically UKIP has a broad low level of support across the UK but they their individual candidates don't actually perform well, either because they aren't very good or because there's such strong feeling against them that all the other voters in the constituency band together and vote for one candidate to keep them out.

[InsaneApache]

You know, if you replace "Jenny Lee" with "Nigel Farage", turning up with his city banker background at the 'local pub to drink a pint with the working class', and replacing "Scousers" with "UKIP Supporters", you have the year 2015 equivalent.

Not the same at all and you know it. One pretends to be down with the people, the other one is down with the people. I'll give you a clue. The latter doesn't have an effin' great big black Rolls Royce.

[Rhyfelwyr]

The heads are rolling. Looks like Miliband, Clegg and Farage will all be quitting. This result has been a shock given the polls beforehand.

[Gilrandir]

I hope they trigger a new election soonjust so we can avoid talking about the upcoming US election.

Nah! Better one more referendum.

[InsaneApache]

I think the tory tactic of scaring voters vis-a-vis a Labour/SNP coalition did the trick. Disappointing for UKIP in a way but they came second in a lot of northern seats and are now the main opposition in the rotten boroughs.

Talking of the north, I see Ed Balls was castrated in Morley, which BTW I can see Morley Church from my attic. So every cloud.....

[Kadagar_AV]

1. Could someone please summarize what the result will mean for Britain?

2. Can someone explain how 12+% of votes gives so few seats? In Sweden it would have, proportionally, given around 80....




I really don't get British politics... But it doesnt' seem very democratic from my point of view...

[Husar]

I assume/IIRC it's a FPTP per district and the winner gets all the seats for that district. So the UKIP can get 12% of the votes overall, yet lose in all but one or two districts and will then get only one or two seats instead of 12% of the seats while the winners of even the districts where UKIP got 30% or so will get all the seats for that district.

[Crandar]

1. Could someone please summarize what the result will mean for Britain?

2. Can someone explain how 12+% of votes gives so few seats? In Sweden it would have, proportionally, given around 80....




I really don't get British politics... But it doesnt' seem very democratic from my point of view...

If I got it right, the number of seats is decided by how well each party did in every electoral department, not by your percentage in the entire United Kingdom.

Consequently, the UKIP won only one seat in East Anglia, while the SNP, present only in Scotland, managed to elect deputies in almost all the Scottish electoral departments, despite getting the one third of UKIP's votes.

It's a rather horrible system, with incredibly undemocratic tendancies. If we had a similar system, I wouldn't be surprised if only two parties were present in the Parliament, since the fall of Junta.

[Kadagar_AV]

I assume/IIRC it's a FPTP per district and the winner gets all the seats for that district. So the UKIP can get 12% of the votes overall, yet lose in all but one or two districts and will then get only one or two seats instead of 12% of the seats while the winners of even the districts where UKIP got 30% or so will get all the seats for that district.

Seems like a flawed way to handle democracy

[Kadagar_AV]

If I got it right, the number of seats is decided by how well each party did in every electoral department, not by your percentage in the entire United Kingdom.

Consequently, the UKIP won only one seat in East Anglia, while the SNP, present only in Scotland, managed to elect deputies in almost all the Scottish electoral departments, despite getting the one third of UKIP's votes.

It's a rather horrible system, with incredibly undemocratic tendancies. If we had a similar system, I wouldn't be surprised if only two parties were present in the Parliament, since the fall of Junta.

I wanted to thank your post... But that option wasn't available? Anyone know why? *sorry for offtopic*

I can thank any other post...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I assume/IIRC it's a FPTP per district and the winner gets all the seats for that district. So the UKIP can get 12% of the votes overall, yet lose in all but one or two districts and will then get only one or two seats instead of 12% of the seats while the winners of even the districts where UKIP got 30% or so will get all the seats for that district.

If I got it right, the number of seats is decided by how well each party did in every electoral department, not by your percentage in the entire United Kingdom.

Consequently, the UKIP won only one seat in East Anglia, while the SNP, present only in Scotland, managed to elect deputies in almost all the Scottish electoral departments, despite getting the one third of UKIP's votes.

It's a rather horrible system, with incredibly undemocratic tendancies. If we had a similar system, I wouldn't be surprised if only two parties were present in the Parliament, since the fall of Junta.

Well, first off it's "Constituency" and "Member of Parliament", I make the distinction because (unlike on the continent) we elect ONE person for ONE constituency. Whether you see this as bad for democracy depends on whether you think parties or individuals are more important. The candidate with the most votes in a Constituency is returned as the MP, in most instances that would have avoided the Lib-Dem wipe-out, they should have held on to the seats of their popular ministers, but didn't, and that says that not only are their own voters punishing them but their own (former) party members are punishing the party leadership.

Conversely, FPTP allowed for Ed Balls (widely reviled) to be scalped by everyone but Labour voting against in, in STV that would almost certainly not happen

Another thing to understand is that sometimes vote in protest, not for the party they want in power but against the party in power.

[Sir Moody]

Seems like a flawed way to handle democracy

many of us in the country agree and were hoping electoral reform would be on the cards if we ended up with a hung parliament - no chance now

[Gilrandir]

If we had a similar system, I wouldn't be surprised if only two parties were present in the Parliament, since the fall of Junta.

Lucky you are, we still have Junta at power.

[Greyblades]

Seems like a flawed way to handle democracy

Backwards though it might seem compared to it's rivals like France and Germany, it has, thus far, had greater overall stability and sucess.

British politics has avoided full insurrection at home for four hundred years, it began an empire that dominated the world for a hundred and twenty four years and when the empire ended the relations between the homeland it's former dominions was unusually mild; The lack of bad blood from the fall of a large empire on such a scale has not been seen since the end of the Roman Empire.

I doubt it is an inherent superiority of the british race, or anything like that, but whether by design or merely blind luck we have been doing something right and I think it deserves some investigation to find out what.

Investigation that I should probably not be doing during the end of an essay deadline. Bad Greyblades

[Crandar]

Backwards though it might seem compared to it's rivals like France and Germany, it has, thus far, had greater overall stability and sucess.

I doubt that the reason for Britain's political stability has anything to do with the way the Parliament seats are distributed.

Well, first off it's "Constituency" and "Member of Parliament", I make the distinction because (unlike on the continent) we elect ONE person for ONE constituency. Whether you see this as bad for democracy depends on whether you think parties or individuals are more important.

Well, I always focused on parties, not individuals, as it's the ideology that matters, not your personal charisma, in my opinion. After all, the party for which I always vote has taken a rather desicive stance on the issue, since, after the elections, the elected deputies resign, in favour of the ones chosen by the Central Committee.

Lucky you are, we still have Junta at power.

I thought you were pro-Poroshenko.

[lars573]

1. Could someone please summarize what the result will mean for Britain?

2. Can someone explain how 12+% of votes gives so few seats? In Sweden it would have, proportionally, given around 80....




I really don't get British politics... But it doesnt' seem very democratic from my point of view...

First past the post voting is a winner take all system. Those percentages are of the total national vote tallies, and almost meaningless in practical terms. To get a seat you've got to get the most number of votes in your riding (aka electoral district). So instead of voting for a party line, you vote as much for the guy who's selling it in your locality. Old school Anglo-Saxon based political systems have a very strong "our man/woman" bent to who gets elected. And small upstart parties like the UKIP and Greens have a HUGE disadvantage vs the big guys like Cons or Labour.

[Graphic]

Congrats, Britain. Your system is even less democratic than America's.

[Greyblades]

I find myself wondering if that is a point to our detriment or benefit. I think both us and the USA are close to a sweet spot, of sorts.

I doubt that the reason for Britain's political stability has anything to do with the way the Parliament seats are distributed.

And I doubt that most minorities are so thin skinned as to want the english language to be completly gutted so anything even remotely carrying a problematic connotation cannot be used even by accident, but there are still people who hold the opinion that doing so will improve society.

Whether FPTP is a net contributor or detriment to britain's success is still unverifiable and thus a matter of opinion, and as I said; I believe this could do with investigation.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Britain's political stability came from close proximity to rivals and a lack of forests leading to early adoption of fossil fuels.