Why the Tories Won

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

I don't believe there is any system to stop people voting twice

but it is legal to choose where to vote : this obviously is useful in University towns.......

You did at one time get two votes if you went to university in another town. Also if you owned a business away from your home town. They had to pass a law to limit it to one person one vote.

robin61

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

I am just happy that the Conservatives won, that way the country can carry on with the recovery.

Labour said that perhaps they did not manage to appeal to small businesses. I can tell you now, as part of a small business, they terrified them.

Had labour got in they would have wrecked the country, we would have been totally subsumed into Europe and would no longer have any chance on the world markets. Observe how the markets rose after the relief of the tory victory.

As to who helped? Minibrand was a massive asset for the tories, he was a weak leader. Also Sturgeon helped, no-one believed that Minibrand would be able to resist her, especially after Salmond said he had Minibrand in his pocket.

I find it rather ironic that Sturgeon put many voters off voting labour, as she was determined to join with labour to keep the tories out. We should now give her full fiscal autonomy and let her choke on it.

Now, if Sturgeon had been the leader of the labour party I believe the result would have been very different.

Absolutely agree with you. We have just had a very lucky escape.
Now we've got the right result I would like to see:

Tighter control over and lower public spending and a bonfire of some pointless quangos.
Keeping more of the money I earn.
A say over Europe - I am undecided on Europe but whichever way it goes there will be a mandate from the whole country.
An environment which encourages business, creates jobs..
Self reliance rather than a culture of entitlement.
English votes for English laws and the Scots able to enjoy higher spending at their own expense.
Fewer MPs and an end to Labour's unfair advantage

Will we get all of this ? Maybe and maybe not but it is going to be an interesting 5 years.

antrobus

zagubov wrote: »

You did at one time get two votes if you went to university in another town. Also if you owned a business away from your home town. They had to pass a law to limit it to one person one vote.

It was in ROPA 1948.

Abolished the university constituencies with effect from 1950. Interesting enough, STV was used in university constituencies.

Also abolished the business vote for parliamentary elections.

antrobus

robin61 wrote: »

...Fewer MPs and an end to Labour's unfair advantage....

I have good news for you.:)

Labour's advantage has already gone.

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

You did at one time get two votes if you went to university in another town. Also if you owned a business away from your home town. They had to pass a law to limit it to one person one vote.

I believe the situation is as I previously stated

mes. Can I register to vote at both addresses?
I have two homes. Can I register to vote at both addresses?

A person’s name may appear on the electoral register only if they reside at an address within the electoral area. Residence is not defined in law, but it has been held by the courts to entail a ‘considerable degree of permanence’. Based on this criteria, it is possible for a person to be registered to vote in two different electoral areas. A person with two homes who spends about the same amount of time in each can be lawfully registered at both addresses.

However, it is unlikely that ownership of a second home that is used only for recreational purposes would meet the residency qualification. Ownership of a second home that a voter pays council tax on but is not resident in does not qualify them to be registered to vote in that area. It is for the local Electoral Registration Officer to decide in the light of an individual voter's circumstances whether they may be said to be resident at an address, and therefore eligible for registration. Electoral Registration Officers are required to consider each case on its own merits.

If an elector is registered to vote in two different electoral areas, they are eligible to vote in local elections for the two different local councils. However, it is an offence to vote twice in the same type of election e.g. voting twice in a general election. Such an offence could result in a fine of up to £5,000.

Further details about registering to vote at a second address can be found in Section 4, Part B of Guidance for Electoral Registration Officers (PDF).
FAQs

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/faq/voting-and-registration/i-have-two-homes.-can-i-register-to-vote-at-both-addresses

wotsthat

onlyroz wrote: »

But if they lied in the first poll why did they tell the truth in the exit poll?

Jamie Oliver provided loads of evidence that people really wanted to buy free range chicken and supermarkets were under-ranged. Tesco, although sceptical, increased the offering of free range chicken. A few weeks later the offering was back to normal because all the people that 'wanted' to buy free range chicken didn't.

It's a statement of what they'd like to do rather than a firm commitment of what they will do - it's a lie to themselves really because it's easier to lie to ourselves than anyone else. Maybe they're a bit embarrassed about giving the 'wrong' answer too.

If someone asks the question outside a supermarket 'did you buy free range chicken' people will be more honest because we don't lie to other people as much as ourselves when faced with direct factual questions.

I've lost count of the market research I've seen where there's a direct mismatch between peoples stared intentions and their actions.

gadgetmind

antrobus wrote: »

socialism is indeed the answer to all our problems

Only if you also throw a large enough helping of capitalism into the mix to let us afford a sensible degree of socialism.

I have a relative living in Venezuela, and it's a great example of how popular socialism can be, but how bad it is at putting food on the shelves. Greece is also giving it a crack, so let's see how that works for them.

Linton

gadgetmind wrote: »

Only if you also throw a large enough helping of capitalism into the mix to let us afford a sensible degree of socialism.

I have a relative living in Venezuela, and it's a great example of how popular socialism can be, but how bad it is at putting food on the shelves. Greece is also giving it a crack, so let's see how that works for them.

I agree to some extent in that the socialist objectives should not pre-determine the means by which these are achieved. So I see no problem with using the market as a tool, indeed there are many advantages. However the smooth operation of the market should not become the primary objective in its own right.

gadgetmind

I'm certainly not advocating capitalism naked in tooth and claw, and some things such as the NHS and the military can only really run on socialist grounds (though even they need systems in place to prevent the recognised flaws in the socialist model from crippling them.)

However, you need to foster innovation and both encourage and reward hard work, and capitalism is *very* good at this.

Jon_B_2

Regarding the polls. Simplistically, is it wrong to assume that the reason the polls were consistently so tight is that typical left-leaner voters are more proactive within politics and more likely to attract the pollsters as opposed to those who keep their thoughts to themselves and vote for conservatism (small "c" intended) at the ballot box?