Jump to content

Featured Replies

  • Replies 484
  • Views 29.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Still think it's unlikely we're going to get a second majority in 12months Tyron?

I'd say at this point it's looking likely, but pride comes before a fall on a system like AMS. The SNP could find themselves in the odd position of sweeping most of the constituencies but doing so so emphatically that they end up getting nothing from the list.

 

What I would say is that it should be (slightly) easier to get a hearing from SNP voters from someone whose public perception isn't especially tied in with the referendum.

I will be among the first to champion the formation of 'The People's Republic of Brighton and Hove'. It'd be a Guardian reader's paradise

 

At least until it drowns amongst all the smelly bin bags piled up around the city caused by the council screwing over the refuse collectors (although hopefully the new Labour-majority council will sort out that mess, both literally and metaphorically).

I'd say at this point it's looking likely, but pride comes before a fall on a system like AMS. The SNP could find themselves in the odd position of sweeping most of the constituencies but doing so so emphatically that they end up getting nothing from the list.

 

What I would say is that it should be (slightly) easier to get a hearing from SNP voters from someone whose public perception isn't especially tied in with the referendum.

In 2011 the SNP took all the the constituency seats in North East Scotland and still took a list seat there so it is possible under AMS but very hard. (They didn't get the Northern Isles but took every other Highlands and Islands seat then took 3 list seats they took all but 1 Lothian constituency but returned no list seats.)

 

AMS is a very odd electoral system :lol:

A system used to prevent a landslide by one party lol that worked well!

It was designed to keep Labour in power and ensure the SNP could never be the party of Government.

 

It worked for 8 years.

One reason for introducing a proportion system was to avoid the allegation that they were setting up an assembly which would have a Labour majority in perpetuity. The Tories, with their proposal for elected mayors in England, but with the boundaries drawn to favour themselves, have no such qualms.
One reason for introducing a proportion system was to avoid the allegation that they were setting up an assembly which would have a Labour majority in perpetuity. The Tories, with their proposal for elected mayors in England, but with the boundaries drawn to favour themselves, have no such qualms.

Which boundaries? Parliamentary consituencies? Because I thought for a second you meant those for mayors. Greater Manchester (22 Labour MPs, 5 Tory) might be slightly more sympathetic than Manchester City Council (95 Labour cllrs, one Independent Labour) but hell will freeze before a Conservative is Mayor of Manchester.

Which boundaries? Parliamentary consituencies? Because I thought for a second you meant those for mayors. Greater Manchester (22 Labour MPs, 5 Tory) might be slightly more sympathetic than Manchester City Council (95 Labour cllrs, one Independent Labour) but hell will freeze before a Conservative is Mayor of Manchester.

They may not win Greater Manchester, but other boundaries are bound to be drawn up in a way that is favourable to the Tories.

 

The revised constituency boundaries will favour the Tories. However, that should be purely a result of population movement rather than gerrymandering.

They may not win Greater Manchester, but other boundaries are bound to be drawn up in a way that is favourable to the Tories.

 

The revised constituency boundaries will favour the Tories. However, that should be purely a result of population movement rather than gerrymandering.

True, although I think constituencies should be devised on the population rather than the number of voters. Given that, the new boundaries will disproportionately favour the Tories more than the current ones favour Labour.

The current ones simply favour labour because labour do well in the larger cities where there are more working class people - and what is wrong with that - more people = more MPs?!
Will the new boundaries necessarily favour the Tories this time? One of the main reasons Labour's vote was so "inefficient" this time was because they piled up countless wasted votes in rapidly-growing city seats (London especially), which should surely be ironed out a bit by the changes.

Edited by Danny

Will the new boundaries necessarily favour the Tories this time? One of the main reasons Labour's vote was so "inefficient" this time was because they piled up countless wasted votes in rapidly-growing city seats (London especially), which should surely be ironed out a bit by the changes.

Surprisingly, they aren't rapidly growing by comparison with the suburbs and green belt seats, so boundary changes would still favour the Conservatives.

 

Which is going to be horrifying.

So what exactly will it mean? I never understood this and no ones explained it properly!
So what exactly will it mean? I never understood this and no ones explained it properly!

The general net population movement is away from the cities and in to more rural areas. Therefore, the electorate in the (generally Labour) city seats goes down, while the electorate in the more rural (generally Tory) seats goes up. As a result, when the boundaries are redrawn, the general trend is for seats to be abolished in Labour-leaning areas and created in Tory-leaning ones.

  • 6 months later...
Bumped because crude oil dropped to $39.87 this afternoon, its lowest level for 7 years and more proof that Scotland's bid for independence was a massive gamble on prices at worst falling to $100.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.