*Times*: 16,000 votes cost torys the election.

tomterm8

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7120733.ece

times wrote:

DAVID CAMERON was deprived of a Commons majority by failing to secure the votes of just 16,000 people, according to an expert analysis of election results.

The findings by Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher reveal that the Tories came tantalisingly close to securing a clean victory at the polls.
“Cameron came so near and yet so far,” write the directors of the elections centre at Plymouth University. “Just 16,000 extra votes for the Tories, distributed in the 19 constituencies in which the party came closest to winning, would have spared us a weekend of negotiation and speculation.”

edit @ 8:30 pm : oops, wrong attribution.

WhiteThierry

tomterm8 wrote: »

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7120733.ece

lies, damn lies and statistics!

DaddyBear

And I wonder how many false Labour postal votes there were :eek:

mbga9pgf

Yep!

PR would kill the Labour Party. It would sort out the power the Jocks hold for a start. I really dont understand why the Cons are against it.

MacsReturns

DaddyBear wrote: »

And I wonder how many false Labour postal votes there were :eek:

You have to wonder, don't you? After all it's only a Conservative election agent who has been arrested for vote fraud this time around. :rotfl:

Gorgeous_George

I'm sure Labour and the Lib dems could do similar analysis and show that a few thousand votes cost them victory.

The truth is that 2 out 3 people who voted (and 3 out of 4 that were eligible to vote) did NOT vote Conservative. Of course, even more didn't vote Labour or Lib Dem.

What is most odd IMHO, is that the Lib Dems - who the public roundly rejected - seem to be in such a strong position and could have MPs in the Cabinet whereas Labour, who did much better, will have none.

We need all three parties to work together to take the country forward.

If the Lib Dems are to choose our next Government, they should ask their voters which party would have been their second choice. This would show the 'single transferable vote' in action.

GG

mbga9pgf

If Brown went, even I, asa true blue tory could accept a three party solution to tackle the deficit. It could be the best way in terms of coping with a crisis and not terminally damaging any parties future.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Oh well ........

treliac

I certainly think a coalition govt could be the best way forward. At least no one party would be condemned for the unpopular decisions that must lie ahead.

As for Lib Dems holding the balance of power, there's a choice about whether or not to play ball with them. Frankly, I think that Clegg and Cameron have a lot more in common than was at first obvious. Their main task is to sell any plan to the rest of their people.

Labour are up the river without a paddle. Brown is finished and Clegg would never do any sort of a deal with him. Labour can't ditch Brown now and bring in a second unelected leader. Though I'm sure he'd rather cut off his right leg, I personally think Brown will be forced to resign... however long he desperately stretches it out. It would be easy to feel sorry for him but he is the author of his own downfall.

drc

Someone posted these interesting statistics on how many votes the UKIP took from the Tories. Looks like the Tories would have got a healthy majority if they'd only offered a referendum on Europe. All those UKIP votes split the 'conservative' vote.

From the comments in The Time article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7120733.ece

Bolton West: Labour 18,329; Conservative 18,235; UKIP 1,901
Derby North: Labour 14,896; Conservative 14,283; UKIP 829
Derbyshire NE: Labour 17,948: Conservative 15,503; UKIP 2,636
Dorset mid & Poole: Labour 21,100; Conservative 20,831; UKIP 2,109
Dudley North: Labour 14,923; Conservative 14,274; UKIP 3,267
Great Grimsby: Labour 10,777: Conservative 10,063: UKIP 2,043
Hampstead & Kilburn: Labour 17,332; Conservative 17,290; UKIP 408
Middlesbrough South: Labour 18,138; Conservative 16,461; UKIP 1,881
Morley (Ed Balls): Labour 18,365; Conservatives 17,264; UKIP 1,506
Newcastle-Under-Lyme: Labour 16,393; Conservatives 14,841; UKIP 3,491
Plymouth Moor View: Labour 15,433; Conservatives 13,845; UKIP 3,188
Solihull: Liberal 23,635; Conservatives 23,460; UKIP 1,200
Somerton & Frome: Liberal 28,793; Conservatives 26,976; UKIP 1,932
Southampton Itchen: Labour 16,326; Conservatives 16,134; UKIP 1,928
St Austell & Newquay: Liberal 20,189; Conservatives 18,877; UKIP 1,757
St Ives: Liberal 19,619; Conservatives 17,900; UKIP 2,560
Telford: Labour 15,977; Conservatives 14,996; UKIP 2,428
Walsall North: Labour 13,385; Conservatives 12,395; UKIP 1,737
Walsall South: Labour 16,211; Conservatives 14,456; UKIP 3,449
Wells: Liberal 24,560; Conservatives 23,760; UKIP 1,711
Wirral South: Labour 16,276; Conservatives 15,745; UKIP 1,274

KimYeovil

So that's even worse than usual.

I thought last time (or several times ago) it was something like only 2,200 votes over 11 constituencies? Close to only 100 votes, never mind 1000.