Clegg to be appointed Deputy PM ?

A._Badger

Really2 wrote: »

Maybe, but only with their seats can a stable government be formed.

As someone who voted Con I have no problem him being deputy, we needed them for stability.

Well, let's see what that stability translates to, shall we? It looks, to me, like a pretty ill-assorted mix and I doubt it will last beyond a few months.

Cat695

silvercar wrote: »

Then you would only put a first preference. Should this first preference be eliminated for having the lowest number of votes, your vote is discarded as you haven't chosen a second preference for it to pass to.

Thank you

So if everyone just choose's one person...we're back to square one...oh no wait the person with the most votes wins?

strange that.

Cat695

A._Badger wrote: »

Well, let's see what that stability translates to, shall we? It looks, to me, like a pretty ill-assorted mix and I doubt it will last beyond a few months.

I see it going two ways



The lib dems force another election in a few months where they will lose horribly....again...and this time have NO say in what happens

Or

Realise if they shut up and leg DC get his way they stay, but step their feet every now and then...they get more power than they would have ever of got.

Thrugelmir

Hague - Foreign Secretary
Osborne - Chancellor

A._Badger

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

Rejected by receiving nearly a million more votes in 2010 than in 2005?

Come off it, Rochdale. He has fewer seats than his party had before and - despite the unprecedented backing of the Guardian, Indy (and the BBC come to that) - the Lib-Dems still managed to win fewer votes than the SDP-Liberals did in 1983.

Talk about the Peter Principle!

marklv

Cat695 wrote: »

So what happens if you don't want to choose any of the 2nd or 3rd candidates??

Then your only vote goes to your first choice, and that's it. If, after all first choices are counted, there is no candidate with more than 50% of the vote, then second choices are totted up and distributed. If there is still no single candidate to have breached the 50% mark, then third choices are totted up, and so on, until eventually there is a candidate with at least 50% of the votes.

silvercar

marklv wrote: »

Then your only vote goes to your first choice, and that's it. If, after all first choices are counted, there is no candidate with more than 50% of the vote, then second choices are totted up and distributed. If there is still no single candidate to have breached the 50% mark, then third choices are totted up, and so on, until eventually there is a candidate with at least 50% of the votes.

That's not right.

If, after all first choices are counted, there is no candidate with more than 50% of the vote, the candidate with the lowest number of first preferences is eliminated and his votes are distributed according to the 2nd preferences shown on the papers that had this eliminated candidate as first preference.

If that still doesn't give someone 50% of the vote, the next lowest candidate is eliminated and the procedure repeated.

marklv

silvercar wrote: »

That's not right.

If, after all first choices are counted, there is no candidate with more than 50% of the vote, the candidate with the lowest number of first preferences is eliminated and his votes are distributed according to the 2nd preferences shown on the papers that had this eliminated candidate as first preference.

If that still doesn't give someone 50% of the vote, the next lowest candidate is eliminated and the procedure repeated.

Thank you for your clarification. I wasn't far off, though.

wageslave

We, the electorate, wanted a hung parliament.

If I have faith in anything (and god knows I have no faith left in politicians) I believe in the democratic process.

We, you and me, have lost trust in the labour party but we can't quite bring ourselves to believe in the tories.

We live in a country in economic and moral tatters. We are mired in an illegal war and we are tuppence away from bankruptcy.

We were offered power hungry pygmies at the election and we did the best we could to force them to work together and limit the damage they could do as individuals.

It may not work. TBH it likely wont. But the thought of any of them with a free hand for the next few years makes my blood run cold

A._Badger

Cat695 wrote: »

I see it going two ways



The lib dems force another election in a few months where they will lose horribly....again...and this time have NO say in what happens

Or

Realise if they shut up and leg DC get his way they stay, but step their feet every now and then...they get more power than they would have ever of got.

I think you are probably right. There are two wild cards - the Europhobe Right of the Conservative Party and the Europhile Left of the Lib-Dems.

Either could turn Taleban and self-detonate at any point, which makes it a highly unstable mix.