Poll: *** 2010 General Election Result & Discussion ***

Who did you vote for?

  • Labour

    Votes: 137 13.9%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 378 38.4%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 304 30.9%

  • UK Independence Party

    Votes: 27 2.7%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • Scottish National Party

    Votes: 10 1.0%

  • British National Party

    Votes: 20 2.0%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • DUP

    Votes: 4 0.4%

  • UUP

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • SDLP

    Votes: 3 0.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 16 1.6%

  • Abstain

    Votes: 80 8.1%
  • Total voters
    985
  • Poll closed .
Funny really. The party that came last by a landslide in the election, is the party controlling who becomes prime minister. :p
 
RDM said:
So the Conservatives did the worst out of all of them in this election? Really? Honestly? I am struggling to see how even the most dyed in the wool labour supporter can really suggest that the Conservatives did the worst. They certainly didn't do as well as they needed, but to say they did "the worst" is basically ignoring reality.
Click to expand...

I don't mean the worst in terms of votes and seats; I mean the worst relative to the context of the election. Labour despite presiding over the financial crisis, despite the recession, despite the taint of 13 years of errors, despite 3 of their MPs being charged over the "expenses" affair, despite having a tool like Gordon Brown as their leader, and so on, actually did better on the night than expected; they didn't implode. The Libs got a bigger share of the vote than last time out, if a few less seats from it. But if the Tories can't get sufficient support from the electorate now, after all that's happened, then that is a really worrying result for them. That's why I say this result was worse for them than the others.
 
George Pascoe-Watson, the respected former political editor of the Sun, reports that the Lib Dems have six cabinet posts and Nick Clegg will become deputy prime minister. If so, the outsiders have won far more ground than anyone imagined possible and the landscape of British politics has changed - perhaps forever.
Click to expand...
That is far too much. I'm disgusted. There are only two 'good' (i.e. notable) LibDemers (Clegg + Cable).
 
drunkenmaster said:
Errm, they DON'T.

IF Lib Dem join with no one, whose installed? yes, the winner of the election, the Torys.

I wish people KNEW what they were talking about.

Torys WON the election, however its a constitutional right that the encumbant PM can TRY to form a coalition that would provide a majority count of seats in the house.

That has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ELECTION.

If Labour and Lib dem get together, they have the PM and the majority in the house, TORYS STILL WON THE ELECTION.

They are simply not the same thing, the election has been, and gone, Torys won, what happens after is part of well, how our government is run, it is not the election, they are two separate things.

If no coalition is formed at all between anyone, Torys take the seat, Tories can form the government with THEIR CURRENT NUMBER OF SEATS if Lib Dem and Labour don't form a coalition government. The only reason they are actively courting Lib dem, is to prevent them joining with Labour. If Clegg just came out and said theres no way in hell he'll join Labour, Torys would be in No 10 tonight. However its not in Clegg's interest to make it clear he won't join Labour, because while the question is still unanswered he'll be offered everything but the shirt off Cameron/Browns back to NOT join with the other side.
Click to expand...

However it would be a minority government and that would be a complete waste of time.
Every single bill put forward would fail because if everyone decided to "vote against" the bill it wouldn't go through.
If the Torys could easily govern with the seats they did win then they wouldn't be going through the hassle of trying to form a coalition.

Anyway, our constitution actually states that in the case of a hung parliment the outgoing PM has the rights to attempt to form a govenment.
Might not seem right but you can't go changing the constitution every time it doesn't suit somebody.
 
I was hoping to go back into Opposition after Clegg's actions yesterday. I now believe further than ever we shouldn't be going into government. The right wing of the party will likely go up in arms over the concessions and I see a second election not too far down the road that will likely end in our defeat due to Labour regeneration, our spending cuts, potential voting reform and Liberal Democrat backlash which will see them going back to Labour.
 
FoxEye said:
Exactly the same attitude a tory MP had on the BBC news 5 minutes ago.

Tory: "I personally would campaign for FPTP. PR is too complicated and would only confuse voters."
BBC: "But it worked in Scotland?"
Tory: "No no. Scottish voters were terribly confused by the whole thing."

Presumably, they were so confused by PR that they voted LibDem and Labour, when they were all trying to vote Tory? :D
Click to expand...

Alternatively he was talking about something like this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6637387.stm

The more complex the ballot system then the more spoilt ballots you are likely to get.
 
stoofa said:
If the Torys could easily govern with the seats they did win then they wouldn't be going through the hassle of trying to form a coalition.
Click to expand...
That's simply not true. Cameron said it was in the nation's interest to form a coalition in such shakey times.

There is no way Lib and Lab would vote against everything - it isn't in their interests, especially as they can't afford an election right now.

Parties would vote as they please. E.g. Scrap ID cards - ConLib, Renew Trident - ConLab.

Why is this so hard to understand? ConLib coalition (which we don't 100% know what we'll get yet) is just stabler.

bam0 said:
They might be the only ones you know about, but there are other 'good' LibDem MPs, Chris Huhne and Simon Hughes off the top of my head.
Click to expand...
That was kind of my point, though! I did forget Huhne to be fair, but I can't *stand* Simon Hughes or Edward Davey.
 
Last edited:
Mr Jack said:
I don't mean the worst in terms of votes and seats; I mean the worst relative to the context of the election.
Click to expand...

Not really, the Conservatives always had a massive mountain to climb. They would need one of the largest overall swings in history to get in to power. In the context of the election I would actually say that the Lib Dems have done the worst especially if you figure in how vocal the Cleggmania people have been over the last few weeks. They went backwards on seats and hardly moved on vote %.
 
Greebo said:
I must admit, I saw a conservative MP been interviewed post election and i felt the same. He stated it was Cameron's fault that they hadn't won a majority as i quote "Cameron went into too much detail leading up to the election. The voting public cannot handle that much detail and it went over the voters head and they didn't understand him and he should have kept things simple with the voters"
Click to expand...

Is that any worse than a scottish MP saying scottish people are too thick to understand how to use the alternative vote ballot papers anyway?

Really?
Is it?
 
Cameron, then Labour - I think it's the LibDems that need 75% support isn't it? :p

Seems like the prospective deal (details to be announced ofc) will make Tory and LibDem supporters equally unhappy so it's probably a pretty good deal all round :D
 
FoxEye said:
Exactly the same attitude a tory MP had on the BBC news 5 minutes ago.

Tory: "I personally would campaign for FPTP. PR is too complicated and would only confuse voters."
BBC: "But it worked in Scotland?"
Tory: "No no. Scottish voters were terribly confused by the whole thing."

Presumably, they were so confused by PR that they voted LibDem and Labour, when they were all trying to vote Tory? :D
Click to expand...

Are you ignoring the Labour MP who was stood next to the Tory who was speaking some claptrap about voters crying on polling day because they couldn't understand the ballot paper in Scotland? Or doesn't he count because he wasn't a "tory toff"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom