stedee

iTrader: (4)

have you seen the ammount of seats won by each party compared to the ammount of overall votes.

every body is saying how bad the lib dems have done but really they are not far behind labour in total votes,

tory seats 310, labour seats 260 , lib seats 50
tory total 10,000,000, labour 7,000,000, lib 6,000,000

the ratios are a joke between labour seats and lib dem seats compared to total votes, how can it be skewed so much????

GC8

Because people are voting for their local representative in Westminster, not voting for the prime minister.

dunx

iTrader: (3)

Because the two main parties have arranged the slicing of the cake to suit themselves.....

dunx

GC8

Gerrymandering isnt the issue.

rb5_336

because we have a 'first past the post' voting system.

Within this system there is no relationship between number of votes and number of seats.

Now do you realise why the Lib Dems want proportional representation ? where there is a direct relationship between number of votes and number of seats.

Every country in the world has a different voting system, some more fair than others

Sean

Luan Pra bang

Lets give scotland independance and then see what happens, 41 of labours seats are scottish so lets send them on their way. Why have a scottish parliment if those buckie drinking skag heads can still lumber England with a labour government. (no offence to the non skag head Scottish who only get drunk on whisky.)

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

This is what we may have in years to come.....at least if Nick can force the other party leaders' hands:

The D'Hondt method of seat allocation is one of the simplest. Any numerate member of the public, (so quite a few on Scobynet), can work out the winner of an election without a computer, even purely through handwritten calculations.

The total votes cast for each party in the electoral district is divided, first by 1, then by 2, then 3, then 4, then 5, right up to the total number of seats to be allocated for the district/constituency. If the district contains 8 seats, the highest 8 numbers are chosen from all the numbers resulting from the divisions. The parties under which each of these 8 highest numbers were produced get the seat. These highest numbers are sometimes called the 'distribution figure'.

It is clearest when set out like this:

Example: 8 seats to be allocated, so divide each party's total votes by 1 - then by 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8. Each party's divided total votes come to the numbers set out below, called 'distribution figures'. The 8 highest distribution figures are *starred, ranging from *100,000 to *25,000. For each distribution figure belonging to it, the party gets a seat.

Party A: *100,000 - *50,000 - *33,333 - *25,000 - 20,000 - 16,666 - 14,286 - 12,500 > Four **** = 4 seats won

Party B: *80,000 - *40,000 - *26,666 - 20,000 - 16,000 - 13,333 - 11,428 - 10,000 > Three *** = 3 seats won

Party C: *30,000 - 15,000 - 10,000 - 7,500 - 6,000 - 5,000 - 4,286 - 3,750 > One * = 1 seat won

Party D: 20,000 - 10,000 - 6,666 - 5,000 - 4,000 - 3,333 - 2,857 - 2,500 > No * = no seats won

Nicked from Wikipedia, but it's the same as what was used for the European Parliament elections last year.

Leslie

That is the original system of course and I think it is the best one all round.

Les