Brown Out Cameron In

[Daggers]

Clearly after the political pipsqueak Kay Burley disgraced herself

"Sky News Is Shit!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSlt-vedyL8

[Webbo]

Well, as far as the public mood goes you could argue that the Conservatives in power is what 36.1% of people want, Lib Dems/Labour/SNP/PC/Greens in power is what 55.3% of people want.

Or you could argue that 59% wanted a Con/Lib govt.

It's also hard to believe that the people who voted SNP did so to keep Labour in office.

[FoxyPV]

If it's AV rather than a pure PR it probably wont as I wrote earlier, I Believe I have remembered it more less correctly the Aussies have had that for 80+ years and the Conservatives have won their election 50+ times

This is based on the assumption that Lib votes will transfer to Lab and vice versa (with obvious movement to Lib - Con etc). More people voted against the Tories than for them so it would make it harder for the tories to form Govt.

So we all imagined each party campaigning with a leader did we? Don't take it so literally, we do understand the system, we just don't think you can have a mandate to govern if you change your leader immediately after an election.

I daresay the Tories have done the same - Major if my memory serves me right, but it's just so fooking irritating. I understand it is a political stick with which to beat Brown but it makes it seem like DC and NC were elected as leaders DIRECTLY by the electorate.

You vote for the party or a particular MP in elections not the leader so it doesn't matter how many times you change the leader as you are not doing anything unconstitutional.

[dandannieldanok]

"Sky News Is Shit!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSlt-vedyL8

[Matt]

Or you could argue that 59% wanted a Con/Lib govt.

It's also hard to believe that the people who voted SNP did so to keep Labour in office.

Or you could argue people voted Conservatives/Lib Dems to get him out, and now he's gone.

If he'd done the right thing and resigned a few months ago before the election I think he'd have done the Labour party a favour and more votes would have gone to Labour.

[Webbo]

You vote for the party or a particular MP in elections not the leader so it doesn't matter how many times you change the leader as you are not doing anything unconstitutional.

Hypothetically speaking, lets assume that the liberal(with a small l) conservative David Cameron had won a majority and then a week after the election he is replaced by a hardline right wing conservative you would think that was perfectly fair and wouldn't complain?

[Shrenchel]

Or you could argue that 59% wanted a Con/Lib govt.

It's also hard to believe that the people who voted SNP did so to keep Labour in office.

I agree the Lib Dem/Tory mandate is stronger and ideally should be the coalition but I also think the Lib Dems are well within their rights to demand a change to an inherently unfair system which has marginalised them for decades as part of that. So if the options are a Tory minority government or a Lib Dem/Labour etc pact, I don't see how anyone can say a Tory minority government is more representative of what the people of Britain want.

[Webbo]

I don't see how it is more fair that the 3rd party can keep the 1st party out of power or alternatively that the 3rd party has more power than the 2nd.

All voting systems are unfair, just in different ways.

[Shrenchel]

Under the First-Past-the-Post system, it has taken:

34,949 votes to elect a Conservative MP;

33,250 votes to elect a Labour MP;

119,788 votes to elect a Liberal Democrat MP;

21,027 votes to elect a Democratic Unionist MP;

80,470 votes to elect a Scottish National MP;

37,659 votes to elect a Sinn Fein MP;

55,131 votes to elect a Social Democratic & Labour MP;

268,024 votes to elect a Green MP; and

42,325 votes to elect an Alliance MP.

Laughable excuse for democracy.

[Daggers]

I passionately want to see PR but I don't care what happens next - as long as it really pisses the Tories off.

Which it seems to be doing

[Guest]

Even John Reid's not looking on a lib lab coalition fondly judging by his views on BBC News now

[orangecity23]

So a new Labour leader could become Prime Minister? Well, with all the power sharing and coalitions going on, whoever takes power will probably have to be adept at doing deals behind closed doors, there might be some backhanders ....

Oh no....

[FoxyPV]

Hypothetically speaking, lets assume that the liberal(with a small l) conservative David Cameron had won a majority and then a week after the election he is replaced by a hardline right wing conservative you would think that was perfectly fair and wouldn't complain?

Is this not Cameron

Of course I'd complain but merely because the Tories had got into power.

There is always a chance that a coup will happen in party politics and force a change of direction but the majority of the country will have voted for the party and what they stand for.

[Webbo]

Even John Reid's not looking on a lib lab coalition fondly judging by his views on BBC News now

He's on the BBC now talking a lot of sense.

[dandannieldanok]

David Miliband to go for the leadership with Ed Balls likely to be the main opposition.

[Craig]

Ed Balls would actually be a backwards step. Can't stand the guy.

Miliband would be fantastic though.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Do you not think this is Clegg trying to play the two parties off each other? Mean he's already got the Torries shitting themselves, coming up with a Alternative Vote offer. Let them squirm for a few more days and he'l get a PR referendum I reckon - I can't imagine the Conservative Party or David Cameron could stand not being in power for the few days after 'winning' let alone the 13 years there in opposition.

I think Labour should make a transfer bid for Obama - people wouldn't moan with him as PM!

[sdb]

Miliband would be great

feel for Brown, did a decent job but the right wing press hammered him and people can't seem to make up their own minds these days. Didn't have the personable attributes though that's for sure

[BoneDog]

I love it how normal working class people are arguing about the big 3 political parties. None of the top lads in either party give a shit about us but we defend 'our' party to the hilt ! The fact is that us workers run the country and keep things ticking over, the 'rulers' just take billions of pounds from us every month and put a percentage of it back into the running of the country, while taking the rest of it for their own schemes. That's about all they do, take money and give some of it back.

Also, why do people keep saying that no party won? The conservatives won, they got more votes than any of the others so that's a win in my opinion. If we had a vote on player of the season and Jack Hobbs beat Chris Weale by 2 votes and beat Waghorn by 4 votes Hobbs is still the winner of the vote.

Whichever system we use it is a joke democracy and I can't understand why people still support these fools.

[davieG]

I love it how normal working class people are arguing about the big 3 political parties. None of the top lads in either party give a shit about us but we defend 'our' party to the hilt ! The fact is that us workers run the country and keep things ticking over, the 'rulers' just take billions of pounds from us every month and put a percentage of it back into the running of the country, while taking the rest of it for their own schemes. That's about all they do, take money and give some of it back.

Also, why do people keep saying that no party won? The conservatives won, they got more votes than any of the others so that's a win in my opinion. If we had a vote on player of the season and Jack Hobbs beat Chris Weale by 2 votes and beat Waghorn by 4 votes Hobbs is still the winner of the vote.

Whichever system we use it is a joke democracy and I can't understand why people still support these fools.

Nobody 'won' because our parliamentary system requires one party to have majority in order to take sole control, no one got that. It's aparty political structure where people on the whole vote for the party whether they agree with what's being proposed or not therefore you need a majority to govern.

You're not voting for a single individual like MOM or a President and people generally don't vote on their conscience.

[Guest Bilo]

Ed Balls as Labour leader = Tory landslide.

Horrible Blairite who's more pro-privatisation than most Tories judging by his record in education.

[ozleicester]

I think I read/heard that Australia have had the Alternative vote method for 80+ years and the Conservative have got in 50+ times. With the AV you still tend to get an outright winner but it takes into account 2nd and 3rd etc choices, in fact as I understand it there's less chance of minority parties making an impact - this is the system Labour want.

The Oz system is a preferencial voting system. we are still dominated by 2 parties Labor (yes spelt that way) and Liberal (conservative.. go figure?). we then have smaller parties Democrats, Greens, then even smaller like... Christians, Socialists and assorted racist groups.

We vote in our own area in the same way you do in UK, however we have to place a preferential vote for every party in the area, eg.

1st choice.....Green

2nd choice.... Labor

3rd .............. Socialist

4th .............. Democrats

5th .............. Liberals

6th.............. Christians

7th ..............Assorted Racists

The count seperates the top 2 vote winners (usually Lab/Lib) and if you did not vote for them first, your vote is sent to your next preference.

If we assume the Labor party and the Liberal (tory) party were the 2 largest vote getters as is usually the case.

Then the vote placed above would have the "Greens" vote crossed out and the vote would go to the 2nd Preference, the labor party.

If we assume that there are 100 votes in an area (obviously not the case.. its usually 30,000+, but makes it easy to explain)

30 vote labor

31 vote liberal

23 vote green

16 vote Christian

On first past the post.. the Libs would get in, however with preferential voting, it depends where the preferences are directed.

30 vote labor

31 vote liberal

23 vote green >>>>>>>>>>>>>Preferences to Labor

16 vote Christian >>>>>>>>>>> Preferences to Liberal

Outcome

Labor 53 votes

Liberal 47 Votes

Labor win the seat, the party which wins the majority seats across the country.. forms governent.

so, at first it seems that Libs are the prefferred choice.. infact more people didnt want Lib as shown by the preferences.

Im sorry if ive bored you all cheers

[Wycombe Fox]

Ed Balls as Labour leader = Tory landslide. Headline-writer's utopia

What a Balls' up!

By the Balls!

You do the rest...

[FoxyPV]

Miliband would be great

feel for Brown, did a decent job but the right wing press hammered him and people can't seem to make up their own minds these days. Didn't have the personable attributes though that's for sure

This. (have suspicion that there was a large amount of anti -scottish sentiment behind this)

Not Dave but Ed.

On Ed Balls - this Leader has no (picture of him)

[Webbo]

feel for Brown, did a decent job but the right wing press hammered him and people can't seem to make up their own minds these days. Didn't have the personable attributes though that's for sure

Yes that's it ,all those ungrateful bastards out of work, all those people whose taxes are going up to pay for Brown's cock ups. If it wasn't for the right wing press we'd all realise what a brilliant job he's done.