SouthEast UK (EXC. LONDON) Tories control 92/102 seats why no majority? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 07:42:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  SouthEast UK (EXC. LONDON) Tories control 92/102 seats why no majority? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SouthEast UK (EXC. LONDON) Tories control 92/102 seats why no majority?  (Read 1629 times)
Iannis
Rookie
**
Posts: 222
Italy


« on: March 10, 2011, 03:31:33 AM »

Perhaps these seat reductions which come at the expense of mainly non-Tory areas will readdress that - that's what they're hoping, anyway.

Not as much as they'd hope. Someone's clearly not explained 'differential turnout' to the government. No boundary change will make voters in Liverpool Riverside get to the polling station at the same rate as voters in Tatton or Witney meaning that it will always take, on average, fewer voters to elect a Labour MP under a single-member constituency system like FPTP or AV.

Another reason why FPTP system is sooo stupid
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.