Who did you vote for.

First topic message reminder :

or who are you going to vote for.

Looks like the Krankies won't be forming a coalition.

Super

Who did you vote for?

Lib Dem, lack of choice in the end really, but better than not voting. SNP would be a vote for Labour and vice versa.

If exit polls are correct, I'm even more ashamed than normal to be Scottish and have 58/59 seats run by those bigots.

Its the 300+ seats the real bigots could get that worries me.

Well, I didn't think the SNP would get so many seats. Good news is that fewer people voted for the SNP than voted Yes in the referendum. So, a vote for the SNP didn't mean that there's been a sea change in Independence.

Mac, I think people simply weren't convinced by Ed Milliband.

How utterly fkin depressing. How can so many vote tory. I don't understand the ins and outs of the Scottish votes but it seems vote snp get tory. All these snp mps with no actual power. Will the tories allow another referendum.

beninho wrote:How utterly fkin depressing. How can so many vote tory. I don't understand the ins and outs of the Scottish votes but it seems vote snp get tory. All these snp mps with no actual power. Will the tories allow another referendum.

Independence wasn't on the manifesto, so no, not in this term at least, probably not in the next either.
The SNP isn't in this case a vote for Independence and interestingly fewer voted for SNP than voted Yes in the referendum, so there is nothing to say that views have changed in that regard.

So SNP was just the left wing choice for the usual labour voter?

ben

The SNP have got just under a year to decide whether or not they will get away with putting a referendum into their 2016 Scottish Parliament manifesto.


As you say, why are people voting Tory? What part of "they don't give a f*** about you" are people drawn to?

Well it looks like the sweatys in the north are the only ones with any balls. Mind you the choice being no change or no chance doesn't really create much competition...

McLaren wrote:ben

The SNP have got just under a year to decide whether or not they will get away with putting a referendum into their 2016 Scottish Parliament manifesto.


As you say, why are people voting Tory?  What part of "they don't give a f*** about you" are people drawn to?

It's funny when people always use the same tired old arguments, yet you could apply exactly the same criticism to every party, yet no one ever does. Did labour give an **** about you when they introduced tuition fees?


As for the SNP, I doubt another referendum is on the cards any time soon. As much as I despise them, they are doubtless aware that fewer people voted for them in this election, than voted yes in the referendum. Another defeat so close to the last one would just make them look stupid and desperate and confirm that they are nothing more than a single issue party.

In terms of their long term interests and "credibility" they'd be better concentrating on working at Westminster, than trying most likely in vain to break away.

I find this hard to reconcile (no emotion or bias - it's pure numbers) - due to fairly arbitrary boundaries, constituencies of vastly varying sizes and localisation we get effects like this:


Conservatives polled 21% more votes than Labour but got 42% more seats

UKIP polled more than 2.5 times the number of votes as the SNP, but ended up with only a seventh of the number of seats

The Lib Dems and the DUP have the same number of seats and yet the Lib Dems got 13 times the number of votes.

The difference in the votes for DUP and Sinn Fein is 8,000 (or 2.2% of the people who voted for them combined), yet the DUP have double the seats of Sinn Fein.

It's one man, one vote.  But some votes are worth a lot more than others.

This is the argument for proportional representation.

Bob_the_Job wrote:due to fairly arbitrary boundaries, constituencies of vastly varying sizes

I agree that the boundaries are arbitrary, but aren't they supposed to be the same size in terms of electorate?

I'm never wrong wrote:

Bob_the_Job wrote:due to fairly arbitrary boundaries, constituencies of vastly varying sizes

I agree that the boundaries are arbitrary, but aren't they supposed to be the same size in terms of electorate?

Roughly.  Very roughly: But it still ranges from say Orkney and Shetland (33k electorate) to say Manchester Central (90k electorate) - so a vote in Orkney is "worth" 3 times that in Manchester Central. However like I said, it's a combination of factors, but you're right - boundaries seem to be the biggest influence.

And the tories wanted to redraw them last parliament but were stopped by Lib Dems!

Bob_the_Job wrote:
UKIP polled more than 2.5 times the number of votes as the SNP, but ended up with only a seventh of the number of seats

Er, try 1/56th...

Why I can't reconcile is how everyone is talking about the decline in popularity of golf, but UKIP polled the best part of 4 million.

raycastleunited wrote:Why I can't reconcile is how everyone is talking about the decline in popularity of golf, but UKIP polled the best part of 4 million.

I believe that's what's known as a false syllogism - all golfers are bigots, but not all bigots are golfers!