UK General Discussion Thread: mayy lmao (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 21, 2024, 01:04:22 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  UK General Discussion Thread: mayy lmao (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: UK General Discussion Thread: mayy lmao  (Read 143884 times)
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,638
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

« on: May 10, 2015, 05:13:58 PM »

I have question for the forum Brits.

It is harder to win government for the Tories than it is for Labour. e.g. Labour got a larger majority on a smaller vote share in 2005 than the Tories did in 2015. This difference is usually attributed to two reasons.

1) Labour vote collapses to virtually nil in many Tory safe seats, while the Tories still get half decent results in many Labour safe seats, resulting in many more wasted votes for the Tories.

2) The constituency map doesn't reflect actual populations. The Tories hold many overpopulated suburban seats while Labour holds declining rust belt areas.

I understand the first argument but not the second. Didn't the UK have a redistribution a few years ago? Wouldn't that have fixed the discrepancy? If not, how come?
I think a lot of it comes down to turnout as well, rural seats get higher turnout than urban seats IIRC.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,638
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2015, 01:31:50 AM »

WTF. Wasn't old either. RIP.
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 0.024 seconds with 10 queries.