Criminal if true. Merkel got around that at the last Bundestag election and people on here were taking that as a disaster and that Merkel had lost. Now, it would be enough to govern the UK when a right wing, or Labour party is polling similar figures. We need PR to respect at least some of the 66%‘s wishes in such cases.
The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (24 Viewers)
- Thread starter jimmyhillsfanclub
- Start date
Criminal if true. Merkel got around that at the last Bundestag election and people on here were taking that as a disaster and that Merkel had lost. Now, it would be enough to govern the UK when a right wing, or Labour party is polling similar figures. We need PR to respect at least some of the 66%‘s wishes in such cases.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
In a general election?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Parties have had very comfortable majorities with a 35% of the vote in recent times - the last election was unique as the smaller parties votes collapsed
Labour would have 317 seats with 27% based on the latest polls
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
35% gave Labour a reasonably comfortable majority in 2005.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Exactly 356 seats
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
It is, tbf, the failing of FPTP - it also set Labour up for almost inevitable defeat the next election, much as the massive majority in 2001 meant they'd have had to go some to lose in 2005.
But then... we've seen with the current charade, how 'coalition' gives dispraportionate weight to certain views over others too, so not sure PR solves the problem.
It certainly does as it gives options of coalition partners. Germany could have had Lib, Green and CDU/CSU at the general election. The CDU wouldn’t give the FDP what they wanted, so they declined the coalition. CDU/CSU had the Option of SPD or a minority government. They took SPD and SPD voters got at least some parts of the manifesto through. Next time will probably be CDU/CSU and Greens as the Greens are growing throughout Germany. The Greens here are super pro EU. More chance of achieving their climate and environmental aims by working through the EU.
The CDU couldn’t have got their policies through with only around 32% of the vote. With the SPD more than 50% of voters „won“.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Or 0% won, as nobody got what they voted for.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Mysoginists, homophobes, empirists, facists, racists you can vote for them all in the brexit party whippey doo
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You find all those catagories in labour members if you want - some who are in the inner circle
They all got some part of their manifesto through ( governing parties). Much better than 0%. It is not black or white.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
Heidi going out to bat then? Out first ball to a yorker I reckon.
dutchman
Well-Known Member
What percentage of the electorate voted for this city council?
dutchman
Well-Known Member
When was the last time a government won a majority of the entire electorate?
dutchman
Well-Known Member
I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I'm merely pointing out it has never been necessary to win a majority of the electorate in order to form a government.
Last edited:
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Ferage has declined the opportunity. Seems he wants election on rhetoric not substance.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You said every election in history. That clearly isn’t the case.
dutchman
Well-Known Member
In which general election was it a requirement to win a majority of the electorate?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It is - no party would ever have to command 50% to win a majority
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Again. That’s not what you said. You claimed what the brexit Party is polling at would have won them every election in history. Clearly not the case.
UK Election Statistics: 1918-2018 - 100 years of elections - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
lol "who is she?"
Bit dissapointing of Ferage that - after his bouts in the EU chamber, that would be light sparring session. I guess when you're the heavyweight, the contender has to prove themselves before getting in the ring.
dutchman
Well-Known Member
It's neither what I said not what I was suggesting. I was actually refering to the referendum result which remainers claim was not a 'majority' of the electorate.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I never said they would. I’m disputing that 29-34% of votes would have won you a majority in every election in history. As per Dutchman’s claim. Two examples being 2010 & 17, something you confirmed yourself when you corrected one of my figures. When you look at the link I’ve just posted of electoral history of the last 100 years they aren’t even isolated cases.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You said and I quote you in full “According to every General Election result in history, it is.” in response to me saying that 29-34% isn’t a majority.
It’s pretty clear what you said.
bezzer
Well-Known Member
My son received a leaflet from them yesterday. He's just turned 17 so can't even vote.
dutchman
Well-Known Member
And again my point was that it has never been necessary to win a majority of the electorate in order to form a government.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You can’t count 100 years - the party make up now only started to happen in the 70’s
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
That’s your point now, it isn’t what you said initially. You’re changing your tune which is fine but don’t pretend that you didn’t say what you clearly said. Again “According to every General Election result in history, it is.”
dutchman
Well-Known Member
I'm not changing anything, there has never been a general election where it was necessary to win a majority of the electorate.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
In modern times there’s hardly been any occasions where the leading party in the polls hasn’t been then the official government
If this was a general election the split of votes would make the leading party the winner in the commons by some distance as the voting is suggesting all parties will have very split votes
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Of course..... but this does not get exposed because the only noise is 'affront to democracy'
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
There’s not a single election from 1970 until now (13 GE’s in total) where 34% would have won you an election. The nearest would have been 2005 but he still would have needed at least another 1.2% and for his vote not to be concentrated to avoid a situation like 1974 where the Tories had the largest share of the votes but labour won the most seats.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Labour would have with 34% and the point still stands the party with that vote would be the government - given you seemed confused about this election being first past the post then it’s a bit rich to try and point score
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Again again. That’s not what you said. You said “According to every General Election result in history, it is.” it wouldn’t have won him any of the last 13 for starters.
