Support NeoGAF

[jas0nuk]

Also note:
CON + LIB have a clear majority of (306 + 57 - 325)*2 = 76.
LAB + LIB only have 315 seats, so Brown would also need to do some dodgy under-the-table deals with the nationalist parties to scrap to 326. The whole thing would be a trainwreck.

 

[defel]

If he helps Labour the Conservative press (which right now is almost all of them) will ravage him for supporting an unelected party

And what about the electorate? Do you think they will be happy that the Lib Dems help put Labour back into power? Remember that 64% of the electorate voted against the Tories, but 71% voted against Labour.

 

[scotcheggz]

Pretty much.

- Clegg makes speech saying Conservatives have the most votes and seats, should be the first to 'prove they can govern in the national interest'.
- Brown makes speech saying he'll keep doing his duty, is open to talks from any party leader, and would give a referendum on PR.
- Cameron makes speech saying he would work with the lib dems and make (very minor) concessions - no change on europe, immigration or trident, but would work with them on pupil premiums, a 'cross-party electoral reform committee', abolishing the ID cards and a few other small issues.

Lib Dem sources say they see the proposal is a step forward and they'll be meeting on it over the weekend, with Cameron and Clegg to discuss it by phone later tonight.

I gotcha, thanks very much!

v thanks also!

 

[phisheep]

Ufff I just woke up. Can someone give me a quick rundown of whats happened since 9:30 this morning please? It all looks well messy. From what I gather, Clegg is the kingmaker and both lab and torys are both begging him for his support? Is that about the sum of it?

I don't really understand how Clegg can be considering Cameron, but there you go.

Swingometers totally failed to be useful, as results were all over the place. Tories took seats they had no chance of, lost those they should have taken, Labour won three by accident (except one was Blaenau Gwent which doesn't count because they won it from themselves). Attempted half-assed tactical voting backfired rather a lot leaving LibDems with far less than they expected.

End result near-as-dammit same as the exit poll.

Cameron announces Labour lost.

Brown goes for progressive Alliance.

Clegg turns up to make little speech, sticking to his word, to say first stab at government should go to Tories and it's up to Cameron to make a move.

Cameron announces he will speak at 2:30

News leaks from under Downing Street door that Labour have a really good deal to put to Libdems including referendum on PR, plus Labour have constitutional right to move first.

Civil servants in number 10 strangle the leaker and force Brown to make statesmanlike appearance recognising Cameron & Cleggs right to negotiate, then spoils it by getting party political.

Alec Salmond (now speaking for Scots AND Welsh) accepts Browns offer to talk (too late).

Cameron makes broad but not very specific offer to Libdems to join Tories in Government on unspecific terms - with only Europe, defence, immigration off the table and starting offer of all-party committee on electoral reform.

Clegg to talk to his party Saturday.

I think that's it so far, except for huge amounts of meltdown everywhere.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

You need to see a proportional view:

I'm annoyed, my first time voting and i'm finding out the guys i voted for got a massive slice of the vote yet ended up with fuck all, and brown the fucking cyclops still talking out of his arse acting like he's the king of of the britons.

 

[scotcheggz]

I'm annoyed, my first time voting and i'm finding out the guys i voted for got a massive slice of the vote yet ended up with fuck all, and brown the fucking cyclops still talking out of his arse acting like he's the king of of the britons.

Welcome to politics in the UK.

 

[Gary Whitta]

I would cling to power until they were baying for my blood. And I would totally use the military. Clegg and Cameron? Nothing the boys in the SAS couldn't take care of in an afternoon. One call to Credenhill from the batphone on my PM's desk and it's sorted. Then if the public starts getting shirty I've always got Trident, I'd get on the BBC and tell everyone in a Tory constituency that there's a warhead with their name on it. That's how you run a country.

 

[phisheep]

I would cling to power until they were baying for my blood. And I would totally use the military. Clegg and Cameron? Nothing the boys in the SAS couldn't take care of in an afternoon. One call to Credenhill from the batphone on my PM's desk and it's sorted. Then if the public starts getting shirty I've always got Trident, I'd get on the BBC and tell everyone in a Tory constituency that there's a warhead with their name on it. That's how you run a country.

Yeah. There's a reason the armed forces swear loyalty to the Queen rather than to a politician. This is it.

Plus - you mean they're not baying for his blood already?

 

[D4Danger]

Yeah. There's a reason the armed forces swear loyalty to the Queen rather than to a politician. This is it.

ACTIVATE THE QUEEN!

 

[Jex]

I see nothing has improved while I went to University, great. Let the meltdowns continue.

 

[phisheep]

QUEEN ... ACTIVATED!


SAH!!

 

[APZonerunner]

And what about the electorate? Do you think they will be happy that the Lib Dems help put Labour back into power? Remember that 64% of the electorate voted against the Tories, but 71% voted against Labour.

Well, the thing is I think that the Liberal supporters would be more happy with a Lib/Lab coalition as they share a great many views, unlike the Conservatives. Not to mention Brown is offering a better deal for Liberal voters than Camerson is. The Labour supporters would also take that deal, of course, as it's saving their bacon.

Seats aside, add those two together and it's a large percentage of the vote; it's just skewed because of the Lib Dem's many second place placements.

 

[scotcheggz]

I would cling to power until they were baying for my blood. And I would totally use the military. Clegg and Cameron? Nothing the boys in the SAS couldn't take care of in an afternoon. One call to Credenhill from the batphone on my PM's desk and it's sorted. Then if the public starts getting shirty I've always got Trident, I'd get on the BBC and tell everyone in a Tory constituency that there's a warhead with their name on it. That's how you run a country.

:lol

Just prey mecha-queen doesn't get activated.

 

[Veidt]

C'mon Clegg.
Just throw aside your pride this time and work with Labour.

 

[Gary Whitta]

Yeah. There's a reason the armed forces swear loyalty to the Queen rather than to a politician. This is it.

I would have cultivated a close relationship with the Queen to ensure her cooperation in such an eventuality. Get her onside early through subtle Machiavellian manipulation, perhaps blackmail as you just KNOW there's a ton of shit going on in that palace that she doesn't want anyone to know about. Remember the security services work for me so I'd have plenty of dirt on the royals.

 

[Gary Whitta]

C'mon Clegg.
Just throw aside your pride this time and work with Labour.

But then you've got a situation where even the coalition is a minority and the party with the single largest number of votes and seats is frozen out entirely. I don't like the Tories but that's just not right.

I don't suppose there's any possibility of a three-way coalition being worked out?

 

[CruxisMana]

ACTIVATE THE QUEEN!

QUEEN ... ACTIVATED!

Just prey mecha-queen doesn't get activated.

:lol

 

[phisheep]

I would have cultivated a close relationship with the Queen to ensure her cooperation in such an eventuality. Get her onside early through subtle Machiavellian manipulation, perhaps blackmail as you just KNOW there's a ton of shit going on in that palace that she doesn't want anyone to know about. Remember the security services work for me so I'd have plenty of dirt on the royals.

Pretty sure that would amount to treason. Can't remember precisely what the penalty for that but I fancy it is something nasty, perhaps with boiling oil.

 

[Veidt]

But then you've got a situation where even the coalition is a minority and the party with the single largest number of votes and seats is frozen out entirely. I don't like the Tories but that's just not right.

I don't suppose there's any possibility of a three-way coalition being worked out?

That's indeed true.
But something tells me the Tories would probably be doing the same had they been in this sort of predicament themselves.

 

[Dark Machine]

Well, the thing is I think that the Liberal supporters would be more happy with a Lib/Lab coalition as they share a great many views, unlike the Conservatives. Not to mention Brown is offering a better deal for Liberal voters than Camerson is. The Labour supporters would also take that deal, of course, as it's saving their bacon.

Seats aside, add those two together and it's a large percentage of the vote; it's just skewed because of the Lib Dem's many second place placements.

This. Nothing can be decided today anyway, Clegg HAS to go back to his party and negotiate the 3-lock system for their support to do any deal, and I firmly believe that the Party prefers a Progressive Alliance to the Conservative line. The SNP would also be delighted by the promise of reform, it benefits them too. Cameron has been very clear about his party's electoral reform denial. I just can't see his party allowing him to make that kind of concession to the Lib Dems.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I think this may have been a good result for the entire country PROVIDED we respond to it in the right way.

- we need to seize the day and call for electoral reform

Here's something you can tweet that is the perfect length for tweets:

LibDems 23% of the vote = 57 seats. Labour's 29% of the vote = 258 seats. Cons 36% of the vote = 306 seats. REFORM NOW! http://bit.ly/czqjX2

The link takes people to http://www.takebackparliament.com

One for facebook:

Lib Dems get 23% of the vote, get 57 seats. Labour get 29% of the vote, get 258 seats. Conservatives get 36% of the vote, get 306 seats. First past the post isn't working for anyone, WHETHER A DEAL IS DONE OR NOT - WE NEED ELECTORAL REFORM. Sign this and attend a local protest if you can - http://www.takebackparliament.com

Its not too late to send a message about this.

FPTP hasn't worked for anyone in this election. Its not just that it doesn't represent the proper shares of the vote -- as I believe it should in a general election -- but that for the next few days we are paralysed while they come up with a deal. The result will be three parties, none of which have a mandate, compromising on what they offered in the first place. None of them have the mandate needed to back up the tough choices in the days ahead. There will be another election before we know it. The Tories can't seem to make headway in Scotland or parts of Wales, or parts of Northern England, the liberal parties can't make headway in well off rural England. People are voting out of fear to try and keep Labour or the Conservatives out in their own constituency rather than voting based on what they believe and want for the future of this country. Its not only the future of our country we're playing with here, it's the very fabric of the Union that is at stake. Calls for its complete break up have been emboldened.

Its time we had a democratic say on alternative voting systems.

 

[Jex]

A three way coalition would be the most complex method, and arguably the fairest method, but I doubt it will boil down to that.

 

[Veidt]

This. Nothing can be decided today anyway, Clegg HAS to go back to his party and negotiate the 3-lock system for their support to do any deal, and I firmly believe that the Party prefers a Progressive Alliance to the Conservative line. The SNP would also be delighted by the promise of reform, it benefits them too. Cameron has been very clear about his party's electoral reform denial. I just can't see his party allowing him to make that kind of concession to the Lib Dems.

Yep. And there's also this.
Way too many people are involved for Clegg to honour his word. And ignore Labour.

 

[defel]

Suppose the Conservatives offer the position of chancellor and Home Secretary to the Lib Dems. Is that a tempting offer? I imagine that the Tories would have to offer a little more, but I could see the Tories agreeing to this.

 

[Gary Whitta]

A three way coalition would be the most complex method, and arguably the fairest method, but I doubt it will boil down to that.

Definitely the fairest method even though it seems unlikely from a practical standpoint. But if it must be a coalition I don't like the idea that LDs might get seats on the cabinet simply because they've got a handful of seats the Tories need and are willing to deal while the party that came second gets no representation.

 

[painey]

all BNP lost in barking and dagenham :lol still don't have our local results here

 

[Gary Whitta]

This. Nothing can be decided today anyway, Clegg HAS to go back to his party and negotiate the 3-lock system for their support to do any deal, and I firmly believe that the Party prefers a Progressive Alliance to the Conservative line. The SNP would also be delighted by the promise of reform, it benefits them too. Cameron has been very clear about his party's electoral reform denial. I just can't see his party allowing him to make that kind of concession to the Lib Dems.

Cameron made it sound today like electoral reform is on the table but I think that's just talk.

 

[Mr. Sam]

If Clegg offering the Conservatives first bite has shown anything, it's that he's a man of principle. I doubt he or his party will be bribed by the offer of senior cabinet posts.

 

[phisheep]

I firmly believe that the Party prefers a Progressive Alliance to the Conservative line.

In theory, yes. In the best of all possible worlds - or even most of all possible worlds, or even this world 13 years ago.

But in this world, now, this comes with certain unavoidable baggage, namely - Balls, Smith, Brown, any number of other liabilities, unsustainable campaign promises, requirement for protection rackets with nationalists, lost seats, lost vote share ... just, well, losers.

AND you'd have to fix the entire economy while all the time pretending nothing had gone wrong these last 13 years, during which time you had been complaining about from the Opposition benches.

It just can't be done with a straight face.

 

[Gary Whitta]

Pretty sure that would amount to treason. Can't remember precisely what the penalty for that but I fancy it is something nasty, perhaps with boiling oil.

You're not listening, are you? I would have spent my years in government cultivating a powerful network of under-the-table connections with all the senior figures in law enforcement, military and espionage services. I would have ensured that only my secret allies occupied those positions, so when the dominoes start falling they all fall my way and it's my enemies who end up against the wall. After blackmailing the queen into giving me a blank slate for military control of the public I would fit up my political enemies with bogus charges of treason and have them summarily executed.

Then we could get down to the real business of the nation, like the economy, education, etc.

 

[APZonerunner]

Cameron made it sound today like electoral reform is on the table but I think that's just talk.

What they're most likely to do is hold a refferendum but campaign heavily, heavily against it. Best of both worlds; simultaneously give the Lib Dems what they want but cockblock it (or try to).

 

[Mr. Sam]

Cameron made it sound today like electoral reform is on the table but I think that's just talk.

Blair also launched an investigation into electoral reform. It came back. His response? "That's nice - we'll keep that on the shelf for safekeeping."

 

[scotcheggz]

Cameron made it sound today like electoral reform is on the table but I think that's just talk.

Yeh, his electoral reform is essentially FPTP with new borders to benefit the conservatives. If they got a majority, they would be doing this regardless so it doesn't seem like an overly tempting offer to me.

 

[Azih]

But then you've got a situation where even the coalition is a minority and the party with the single largest number of votes and seats is frozen out entirely. I don't like the Tories but that's just not right.

Meh. Plurality should mean nothing. Support of more than 50% of the electorate should be the guiding principal.

I don't suppose there's any possibility of a three-way coalition being worked out?

No point. Con/Lab would do the trick without the need of the Libs. Germany had a grand coalition of the two largest parties for a good long while.

 

[Frank the Great]

You people are no help! The question is not a trick, it clearly asks what one would say if they wanted to start a conversation. How would remaining silent start a conversation? :lol And I remember the professor talking about this in class, I just don't remember what conversation starter he said to use.

I'm pretty sure he said weather, so I'm just gonna go with that. Thanks guys.

 

[phisheep]

You're not listening, are you? I would have spent my years in government cultivating a powerful network of under-the-table connections with all the senior figures in law enforcement, military and espionage services. I would have ensured that only my secret allies occupied those positions, so when the dominoes start falling they all fall my way and it's my enemies who end up against the wall. After blackmailing the queen into giving me a blank slate for military control of the public I would fit up my political enemies with bogus charges of treason and have them summarily executed.

Then we could get down to the real business of the nation, like the economy, education, etc.

You are not Gary Whitta, you are Harriet Harman.

 

[Empty]

Is Whitta outlining the plot of his next film in this thread?

 

[Furret]

I think this may have been a good result for the entire country PROVIDED we respond to it in the right way.

- we need to seize the day and call for electoral reform

Here's something you can tweet that is the perfect length for tweets:

LibDems 23% of the vote = 57 seats. Labour's 29% of the vote = 258 seats. Cons 36% of the vote = 306 seats.

REFORM NOW! http://bit.ly/czqjX2

The percentage of the vote is completely irrelevant. You're not voting for a party or a prime minister. You're voting for a member of parliament.

First past the post is far more open and honest than some fudge compromise that would come about from proportional representation.

One man, one vote is as complicated as it ever needs to get.

 

[Dark Machine]

The percentage of the vote is completely irrelevant. You're not voting for a party or a prime minister. You're voting for a member of parliament.

First past the post is far more open and honest than some fudge compromise that would come about from proportional representation.

One man, one vote is as complicated as it ever needs to get.

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

So what of the %60 of the people in my constituency who's wishes are IGNORED? Their vote is worthless as was mine, it didn't change a damn thing. That's not democracy, that's the old boys Jobs for Life club.

 

[gofreak]

You know what's annoying?

Sky classifying hours-old news as 'breaking news'.

Every time I see it flash I expect something actually new. But it's not.

 

[scotcheggz]

Is Whitta outlining the plot of his next film in this thread?

I'd watch it :lol

Mecha-Godzilla-Queen stomping around London, the big finale could be the PM standing on top of a carriage on the London eye, huge sweeping shot as th ePM realises all his failures, just as Mecha-Godzilla-Queen comes into shot, picks him up and impales him on top of Big Ben, just as the clock strikes the hour and the bells ring.

Pan out to a destroyed London skyline, sillhouette of Mecha-Godzilla-Queen. The bells ringing faintly.

BLOCKBUSTER

 

[Empty]

The percentage of the vote is completely irrelevant. You're not voting for a party or a prime minister. You're voting for a member of parliament.

First past the post is far more open and honest than some fudge compromise that would come about from proportional representation.

One man, one vote is as complicated as it ever needs to get.

what's honest about millions voting tactically against their wishes to keep another party out because that's the only option they have? it entrenches dishonesty in our political system.

 

[Furret]

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

So what of the %60 of the people in my constituency who's wishes are IGNORED? Their vote is worthless as was mine, it didn't change a damn thing. That's not democracy, that's the old boys Jobs for Life club.

How were their wishes ignored?

You're voting for a single MP. The majority of votes decides who that MP is.

Whining afterwards that you didn't win and trying to fix the results is not democracy.

 

[radioheadrule83]

The percentage of the vote is completely irrelevant. You're not voting for a party or a prime minister. You're voting for a member of parliament.

First past the post is far more open and honest than some fudge compromise that would come about from proportional representation.

One man, one vote is as complicated as it ever needs to get.

The boundaries drawn up under FPTP and the weighting they're given makes the entire thing a stitch up for the parties in Red & Blue.

On raw votes its clear to see that the public has shown overwhelmingly, in the face of two unpopular wars, a recession and scandals across parliament - that they don't want that system to produce a winner today. They want change. Not the false promise of it, but real and lasting change to our SHIT political system, which is a system that ensures jobs for life and no recourse to punish parties that have routinely failed us and not reflected our wishes for the last 65 years.

 

[Xavien]

How were their wishes ignored?

You're voting for a single MP. The majority of votes decides who that MP is.

Whining afterwards that you didn't win and trying to fix the results is not democracy.

No, most of the time its less than 50% of the vote who goes to that MP, if your MP has less than 50% of the vote how the fuck can you claim its a democracy if the MP didn't get 50% or more of the vote?

 

[Mr. Sam]

The majority of votes decides who that MP is.

This is where you went wrong.

 

[Empty]

it's a preposterous argument anyway, because we don't have 650 little self-governing island seats which set their own social policies, taxes, regulations, services and run themselves, we have a very central national government that rules from that centre. given the huge importance of that westminster force and the party machines, we should have a fair way of choosing it's direction.

 

[Furret]

No, often its less than 50% of the vote who goes to that MP, if your MP has less than 50% of the vote how the fuck can you claim its a democracy of the MP didn't get 50% or more of the vote?

What does 50% have to do with it?

A majority is all that matters and the only result that can be obtained without fiddling with the results and trying to reward the losers like some cry baby toddler that came in last in the egg and spoon race.

And tactical voting by the public is clearly their own stupid fault. Don't do it and you won't have to try and pretend someone else tricked you into it.

 

[Frank the Great]

No, most of the time its less than 50% of the vote who goes to that MP, if your MP has less than 50% of the vote how the fuck can you claim its a democracy if the MP didn't get 50% or more of the vote?

Run-off elections would fix this, no?

Is it possible for Cameron to offer run-off elections to the LDs? Is that an acceptable compromise or will things still suck?

 

[Frank the Great]

What does 50% have to do with it?

Well, you see, in a democracy-

A majority is all that matters

Oh.