UK General Election 2010

[Dunenewt]

Good point, lots of people who would have voted UKIP probably voted Tory to keep Labour/Lib Dems out.

[Dante]

I'm comparing the parts of the UK where the SNP actually fielded candidates. UKIP got more votes, yes, but not when competing against the SNP. Savvy?

[Dunenewt]

Under PR, UKIP would have had 20 MPs, so we'll see if the Lib Dems force some electoral reform through.

[Dragoon Knight]

Good point, lots of people who would have voted UKIP probably voted Tory to keep Labour/Lib Dems out.

Oh I did hope you'd go for that little honey pot. :P

A minority in each constituency would have chosen to change their votes.  In places, it might be enough to sway the vote from Labour to Conservative or vice versa.  It would detract from each of the other parties equally.  This means that, if the votes had been properly assigned, Labour and Conservatives would have come out worse, but the proportions in the other parties would remain more or less unchanged.  Sure, the numbers would be higher, but proportionally, very little difference.

So, considering that UKIP was shown to be so horrendously unpopular everywhere in the UK, behind the BNP in some areas, I don't think it would have made any difference.  Whereas for the SNP or Lib Dems, and other parties like them, it would have been a much closer call.

[Dunenewt]

So you're a big fan of the same old failed parties ad infinitum... *yawn*.

[Dante]

Better than being in favour of idiots.

[Dunenewt]

Like the Scottish Numpty Party?  Makes sense.

[Dante]

Sure, because the SNP are in favour of hitting children and reinventing the wheel.

Oh wait.

[Dunenewt]

No, they're just in favour of spending English taxpayers money and voting on English matters.

[Dante]

You mean like the one-seat conservatives get to vote on Scottish matters?

[Dunenewt]

I think you'll find it was a UK wide election for the UK House of Commons.

[Dante]

I think you'll find that people who don't represent us have no right to be telling us what to do. Representation is rather vital to democracy, y'see.

[Dunenewt]

Quite rightly so.

http://www.clickonwales.org/05/hung-parliament-will-provoke-english-crisis/

[Dante]

So the English don't want to be bossed about, so what? That just puts them in the same camp as the Scots who don't want to be bossed about by England. If anything that just strengthens the case to get rid of the first past the post system. Even the tories up here, who are not well liked, are further to the left than those south of the border.

Westminster is an outdated institution. It's mired in conflict, built on an "us and them" mentality, deliberately structured to encourage overruling the competition.

Witness Holyrood, by contrast. The Scottish Parliament was designed with cooperation in mind, and has been led by collaboration for years now.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/03/david-cameron-snp-coalition-goverment

You could stand to learn a few things from us.

[Dunenewt]

I agree with everything but the last point.  Blair and Brown are two Scots who've created this whole mess! 

If I had my way, I'd have a federal United Kingdom with the House of Lords converted into a 'Senate' representing the whole of the UK, the House of Commons converted into an English Parliament, which has the same devolved powers as the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments (as opposed to the current Welsh Assembly).  I'd also support a Cornish Parliament, just to stop the moaning all the time (they at least deserve their own MEP - due to the Lisbon Treaty I think we regain an MEP at the next Euro elections).

[Dante]

Blair made a lot of messes, true, but devolution was not one of them. From your own article:

Political imbalances between the make-up of UK governments and their representation across the nations have long been the source of tension in UK politics, especially in the post-war period, where they have grown sharply.  Wales and Scotland have regularly been ruled by Tory governments in Westminster which lacked clear mandates in those nations. It was precisely these situations which provoked calls for devolution in the first place.

Historically, Scotland never really got over that whole clearances thing. More recently, the tory administration of the 80's is the primary reason why they still do so badly now. The older generation, by and large, hate conservatives. The 1980's are mentioned as a grim time, Thatcher reviled by mothers to their children. New Labour, while messed up in many serious ways, did not create the problem of a largely tory England vs mostly left wing Scotland and Wales. It merely tried to solve it.

[Dunenewt]

Where as the times of Thatcher are looked back upon as better times in my area, and they all talk about these as being the worst times in living memory for them.

Regardless, what do you think about a Federal UK?  Personally, I'd like to see the whole of Ireland in it, but that's amazingly controversial, although I do think it would be the only way to solve the current predicament, but that's a whole new topic.

[Dante]

I don't care what it is or what it's called, so long as it works. Meaning that each region is governed by people who actually represent them and act in their best interests.

Even the SNP don't advocate getting rid of the Queen as head of state.

[Dunenewt]

From BBC:

Labour dismisses Alex Salmond's suggestion of a "progressive alliance", saying the possibility of the nationalists and Labour working together was "a desperate attempt by Alex Salmond to make himself look relevant after a terrible general election result"

[Dante]

That's nothing new, Labour always rubbishes the SNP.

[vota dc]

If you compare the last two general elections you have something like this:

Tory 36% = 306 seats / 32% = 198 seats

Labour 29% = 258 seats / 35% = 356 seats

Libdem 23 = 57 seats / 22% = 62 seats

It is a strange electoral law, by the way Italy has an even worse one: you need 4% votes to win a seat if you aren't allied, else you need 2% only.

[Dragoon Knight]

Well now here's a new development.

Gordon Brown to step down as Labour leader.  That's a game changer and no two ways about it.

With the Lib Dems having a problem not necessarily with Labour, but with Brown himself, this gives me new hope that a Lib-Lab deal might come to fruition. :)

[Kiyouta]

Argh. Poor Gordon :(

[Dante]

Poor Gordon indeed. I do approve, though. If the country can be best served by one man's sacrifice and he is man enough to make that sacrifice, it bodes well for the future. One hopes that Nick Clegg appreciates that.

[Kiyouta]

Right! A true man of integrity. Who knows what substance of leader we'll have next...