Speedy Germany basically has the Holyrood system, ie constituency vote then list vote, Japan is probably the same, I have no problem with that and maintaining the constituency link, as long as there is a list element that better reflects voteshare in seats
Sunil The US has primaries, India has PR for the upper house
HYUFD India's Upper House isn't elected by popular vote, just an electoral college of MPs and State assembly members.
A terrorist uses terror. I doubt anyone was ever terrified of either man.
I thought that de Valeras faction of the IRA waged the Irish Civil War sortly arfter independence and murdered Michael Collins amongst others.
For all his faults Salmond is a better man.
And I thought that Dev more or less kept out of the fighting. Wasn't he regarded as a liability at the Easter Rising?
He is a surprisingly forgotten figure in Ireland today.
There are two schools of thought about Dev's contribution to Easter 1916. Then there were two sides in the later Civil War. Seeing as Dev was elected leader of the independence movement after 1916 I think it's more likely he was an effective leader of the troops in Boland's Mills (but I'm no historian).
Dev is most certainly not forgotten today. He must be the most controversial figure in the history of the Free State / Republic.
Baltimore - the State's Attorney who brought the charges against the 6 cops is married to a city councilman, who represents the ward that was torched. The defense attorney is one of the biggest contributors to her election campaign.
The mayor has her own problems, from Monday: she ordered the police to stand down and not to engage the protesters, also ordered they not wear their riot gear - which resulted in over 100 getting hurt mainly from thrown rocks, several seriously. She also said "Let them riot - it's only property".
She also waited way to long to request a state of emergency from the governor, who publicly wondered why she wasn't asking for one.
She is the third most important person on the Democratic National Committee, which may be why she has yet to answer any questions about this, even to the extent of having Al Sharpton protect her from the press last night. She clearly has much more ambition than being mayor of Baltimore, so will try to maintain silence in the hope that folks forget.
Just for a bit of fun, YG and non-YG in the monthly ELBOW:
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 4m4 minutes ago Monthly "Super-ELBOW" Labour % leads split into @YouGov-polls only and non-YG polls only: Labour lead with April YG
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
But...but...but wasn't it a once in a generation shot?
The AV referendum is a good example of why referenda are a bad form of decision making. The question was not well drafted (I would have supported STV or even a Holyrood type system, but not AV). The campaign rapidly evolved into two camps who were attempting to turn it into a stick for short term advantage. The Yes campaign was basically "you will never have another Con government" and the No campaign was "punish the LibDems for their treachery".
There was little of the intelligent discussion that we sometimes get in parliament. A Brexit referendum will be the same. More heat than light and voting would depend more on the midterm popularity of Cameron than the merits or otherwise of the EU.
I agree with you about the AV referendum, particularly the utterly depressing quality of the respective campaigns. I also reckon that binary decision making in general is rarely the best way forward and this is a serious flaw of referendums in general.
I suspect that an EU referendum would actually have more "on topic" political discussion than the AV one did, though. (Not a hard achievement.) But even there the in/out thing seems a bit silly. As the only large West European country that is clearly not fated, in the medium term, to participate in the most "eurofederal" arrangements such as the single currency, and the current member state that is likely to have the largest population and largest economy later in this century, it would surprise me if Britain can't reach a kind of sui generis arrangement with the rest of the EU. If we were to leave the EU then I am sure we still participate in very many aspects of European integration. If we were to stay in, then I am sure there would still be many aspects of European integration that we will not participate in. The relationship with the EU is bound to be semi-detached and we will at some point have to reach a settlement that recognises this fact. The "in/out" decision is not actually such a big deal - it may determine whether or not we continue to have British MEPs voting in the European parliament, but it's not going to transport us across the Atlantic or catapult us into the Euro.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
But...but...but wasn't it a once in a generation shot?
The AV referendum is a good example of why referenda are a bad form of decision making. The question was not well drafted (I would have supported STV or even a Holyrood type system, but not AV). The campaign rapidly evolved into two camps who were attempting to turn it into a stick for short term advantage. The Yes campaign was basically "you will never have another Con government" and the No campaign was "punish the LibDems for their treachery".
There was little of the intelligent discussion that we sometimes get in parliament. A Brexit referendum will be the same. More heat than light and voting would depend more on the midterm popularity of Cameron than the merits or otherwise of the EU.
We could have a referendum, without specifying a system, asking the electorate the following questions
A. Do you want a system which produces a majority
i) always, however few votes the leading party has ii) sometimes, if a party has a clear lead and significant support iii) rarely, unless a party managed to get 50% of the votes
B. Do you want a system in which
i) you have a choice of candidate both within and between parties ii) you have to vote for the one candidate your party nominates (or a fixed list of candidates)
maybe a couple more questions.
Then the psephologists could go away and design a system...
That's not entirely helpful - producing a list that have multiple outcomes and then asking people to come up with a solution that might violate the options you present.
She clearly has much more ambition than being mayor of Baltimore
Sadly, as my man Martin O'Malley is finding out, being Mayor of Baltimore might be a good stepping stone to Governor of Maryland but perhaps not for higher office.
I thought the State's Attorney for Baltimore city swatted away the conflict of interest questions most effectively.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
But...but...but wasn't it a once in a generation shot?
The AV referendum is a good example of why referenda are a bad form of decision making. The question was not well drafted (I would have supported STV or even a Holyrood type system, but not AV). The campaign rapidly evolved into two camps who were attempting to turn it into a stick for short term advantage. The Yes campaign was basically "you will never have another Con government" and the No campaign was "punish the LibDems for their treachery".
There was little of the intelligent discussion that we sometimes get in parliament. A Brexit referendum will be the same. More heat than light and voting would depend more on the midterm popularity of Cameron than the merits or otherwise of the EU.
I agree with you about the AV referendum, particularly the utterly depressing quality of the respective campaigns. I also reckon that binary decision making in general is rarely the best way forward and this is a serious flaw of referendums in general.
I suspect that an EU referendum would actually have more "on topic" political discussion than the AV one did, though. (Not a hard achievement.) But even there the in/out thing seems a bit silly. As the only large West European country that is clearly not fated, in the medium term, to participate in the most "eurofederal" arrangements such as the single currency, and the current member state that is likely to have the largest population and largest economy later in this century, it would surprise me if Britain can't reach a kind of sui generis arrangement with the rest of the EU. If we were to leave the EU then I am sure we still participate in very many aspects of European integration. If we were to stay in, then I am sure there would still be many aspects of European integration that we will not participate in. The relationship with the EU is bound to be semi-detached and we will at some point have to reach a settlement that recognises this fact. The "in/out" decision is not actually such a big deal - it may determine whether or not we continue to have British MEPs voting in the European parliament, but it's not going to transport us across the Atlantic or catapult us into the Euro.
Dair Indeed, and New Zealand is probably the closest political system to our own with a Cameron like PM, a Labour Party opposition, a populist UKIP-like New Zealand First Party and a Green Party and a free market ACT party. For the nats read the Maori parties
We could have a referendum, without specifying a system, asking the electorate the following questions
A. Do you want a system which produces a majority
i) always, however few votes the leading party has ii) sometimes, if a party has a clear lead and significant support iii) rarely, unless a party managed to get 50% of the votes
B. Do you want a system in which
i) you have a choice of candidate both within and between parties ii) you have to vote for the one candidate your party nominates (or a fixed list of candidates)
maybe a couple more questions.
Then the psephologists could go away and design a system...
That's a biased question system.
Better would be : -
What level of support do you believe a party should need to form a Majority Government : -
A - less than 35% B - over 36% C - over 41% D - over 46% E - over 51%
Should the candidates a party offers be decided by : -
A - Voters B - Parties C - No Preference
Should geographic areas have a representative : -
A - Yes B - No C - No Preference
Maybe some others but you get the gist. Avoid bias in leading questions.
She clearly has much more ambition than being mayor of Baltimore
Sadly, as my man Martin O'Malley is finding out, being Mayor of Baltimore might be a good stepping stone to Governor of Maryland but perhaps not for higher office.
I thought the State's Attorney for Baltimore city swatted away the conflict of interest questions most effectively.
Even stranger than the Tories' sudden dip in to 8.2 is why "Any Other Party Majority" is as low as 380. I simply cannot conceive of circumstances that bring around for majority for anyone that isn't the Tories of Labour, it should be many thousands to one.
Even stranger than the Tories' sudden dip in to 8.2 is why "Any Other Party Majority" is as low as 380. I simply cannot conceive of circumstances that bring around for majority for anyone that isn't the Tories of Labour, it should be many thousands to one.
It's 8.4 now and 9 on the next govt mkt although for pennies
I actually don't think Miliband will do deals with the SNP.
Think how closely the media will be looking at him. They'll jump on anytime they even see Lab speaking to the SNP.
If Lab introduces a policy in line with SNP rather than Lab manifesto, media will go beserk. Not just the Murdoch papers - all media, including TV.
So I think Miliband will just play it very, very straight. He'll follow the Lab manifesto precisely and dare the SNP to vote against. Which they won't.
No, the SNP will amend legislation to make it more "progressive" (and more favourable to Scotland) and then when Labour refuse, they'll vote it down.
So Miliband will be forced to reach an accommodation, or, if you like, a "deal".
Why would Con support the SNP amendment?
OK, they might try and cause a bit of trouble but I suspect the result will be that only straightforward stuff goes through.
Remember even if a Bill is lost, the Government won't fall.
One example - Trident.
SNP amendment calls for the new boats to be built on the Clyde and Devonport. Tory and SNP support passes amendment. Labour now have a Trident bill which will kill them in Barrow.
Ive heard Barrow has turned very interesting.... The SNP / Trident thing is making some bums very squeaky.
Even stranger than the Tories' sudden dip in to 8.2 is why "Any Other Party Majority" is as low as 380. I simply cannot conceive of circumstances that bring around for majority for anyone that isn't the Tories of Labour, it should be many thousands to one.
Just a consequence of liquidity and positions already in the market. No-one is going to tie up funds from a standing start laying that, so the business done is between people who have inadvertently built up green or red on that by laying or backing (repsectively) the main options.
I actually don't think Miliband will do deals with the SNP.
Think how closely the media will be looking at him. They'll jump on anytime they even see Lab speaking to the SNP.
If Lab introduces a policy in line with SNP rather than Lab manifesto, media will go beserk. Not just the Murdoch papers - all media, including TV.
So I think Miliband will just play it very, very straight. He'll follow the Lab manifesto precisely and dare the SNP to vote against. Which they won't.
No, the SNP will amend legislation to make it more "progressive" (and more favourable to Scotland) and then when Labour refuse, they'll vote it down.
So Miliband will be forced to reach an accommodation, or, if you like, a "deal".
Why would Con support the SNP amendment?
OK, they might try and cause a bit of trouble but I suspect the result will be that only straightforward stuff goes through.
Remember even if a Bill is lost, the Government won't fall.
One example - Trident.
SNP amendment calls for the new boats to be built on the Clyde and Devonport. Tory and SNP support passes amendment. Labour now have a Trident bill which will kill them in Barrow.
Ive heard Barrow has turned very interesting.... The SNP / Trident thing is making some bums very squeaky.
And that's without a vote being cast, just think how "fun" it gets for Labour after the election. Ed would be better cutting a deal with the SNP now, announcing 2 boats will be built in Barrow guaranteed with the other 2 on the Clyde.
There's a bit of movement on the next PM market, Ed has drifted out to 1.91. I'm not entirely sure why, I don't see any basis in published polling.
I wonder if we're starting to see some profit taking in the market?
There is so little liquidity on these markets at the minute so a few squiggles one way or t'other can have a dramatic effect. For instance I moved 300 greenies out of Ed PM and into the Tory Minority today and shifted the odds a tad.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 1m1 minute ago #Labour ELBOW leads split into YouGov polls and non-YG, since August. YG recently more favourable to Labour - 1st May
My guess is someone with a fairly large position used the cash out button and it triggered some fairly dramatic moves. There's so little liquidity to provide resistance now it doesn't take much to move these Betfair markets. SPIN hasn't moved at all. Other Betfair markets haven't moved.
I think Con majority will be back in the 9.6-9.8 range by tomorrow afternoon. I hope I'm wrong though and there's some other reason why the price is moving.
My guess is someone with a fairly large position used the cash out button and it triggered some fairly dramatic moves. There's so little liquidity to provide resistance now it doesn't take much to move these Betfair markets. SPIN hasn't moved at all. Other Betfair markets haven't moved.
I think Con majority will be back in the 9.6-9.8 range by tomorrow afternoon. I hope I'm wrong though and there's some other reason why the price is moving.
No, it moved in stages. And there's £1200 waiting at 9.2 too. The cash out button does get you matched at some fantastic prices on multi-way markets though.
Basic rule - don't use the cash-out button. An exception would be a 2-way market with liquidity if you genuinely want to square off.
There's a bit of movement on the next PM market, Ed has drifted out to 1.91. I'm not entirely sure why, I don't see any basis in published polling.
I wonder if we're starting to see some profit taking in the market?
The next PM market is being driven by assessment of negotiating positions more than by likely result. Cameron came in somewhat as people watched the non-debate, and drifted back out as the instapoll showed the public considered it more of a score draw than the betting fraternity.
Ed is drifting because his increasingly vehement disavowal of any formal deal with the SNP has persuaded a critical mass of punters that he means it. In that context his path to the PMship would be for Cameron to lose in the Commons, rather than resign because of the result. I think if that happens the terms of the Betfair market mean Cameron was the 'next PM', albeit only for a few days.
No, it moved in stages. And there's £1200 waiting at 9.2 too. The cash out button does get you matched at some fantastic prices on multi-way markets though.
I still think it's more likely to be cash out driven for the reasons you give. Maybe one large cash out caused someone else to panic and do something similar and then a few more quid followed from speculators/momentum traders thinking they were witnessing some inside money driving the price down. I think it hit 8.2 and now it's gradually moving back up again. I hope I'm wrong. But at this time of night on a Friday I'm skeptical anyone has suddenly become privy to stunning information that may mean a shock majority outcome next Thursday.
And if Jim Murphy is coming through,then it is likely Douglas Alexander is likely to survive as his seat is a lot less marginal than Murphy and he is a more popular local MP than Murphy.
"A lot less marginal"? Murphy actually had a slightly bigger majority over the SNP in 2010 than Alexander.
And if Jim Murphy is coming through,then it is likely Douglas Alexander is likely to survive as his seat is a lot less marginal than Murphy and he is a more popular local MP than Murphy.
"A lot less marginal"? Murphy actually had a slightly bigger majority over the SNP in 2010 than Alexander.
Also the two seats are very different in character. Paisley South is mostly working-class whereas East Renfrewshire is one of the wealthiest seats in Scotland.
And if Jim Murphy is coming through,then it is likely Douglas Alexander is likely to survive as his seat is a lot less marginal than Murphy and he is a more popular local MP than Murphy.
"A lot less marginal"? Murphy actually had a slightly bigger majority over the SNP in 2010 than Alexander.
Also the two seats are very different in character. Paisley South is mostly working-class whereas East Renfrewshire is one of the wealthiest seats in Scotland.
Eastwood is the real wealthy part of East Renfrew. McIntosh has Eastwood at Holyrood. It was why Murphy wanted to swap with McIntosh or so I hear but McIntosh wasn't having any of it. Safer seat
For some reason the non-Coalition Tory Leader isn't stated.
But the five other parties are ALL represented by non-English constituencies. 4 of the 5 were non-English and the 5th was a Yorkshireman in a Scottish constituency. 105 of the 670 or so seats were in Ireland which seems bizarre on population share, I would guess Scotland was massively over-represented too.
The other day I was polled by phone Populus in the Croydon Central poll. I think I was also polled a few months ago for an earlier constituency-specific poll. It makes me wonder about phone polls generally: How do they get a balanced sample frame? How do they know that the phone number they are dialling is in the right constituency? How do they know that the sample of people they are phoning and polling is a balanced representative sample of the electorate as a whole?
The other day I was polled by phone Populus in the Croydon Central poll. I think I was also polled a few months ago for an earlier constituency-specific poll. It makes me wonder about phone polls generally: How do they get a balanced sample frame? How do they know that the phone number they are dialling is in the right constituency? How do they know that the sample of people they are phoning and polling is a balanced representative sample of the electorate as a whole?
For the question about knowing whether or not it is in the correct constituency - they probably use a phone book
With the frenzied interest in deals, no deals, and non deals, before we even reach polling day, can I request that AndyJS put up the video of Dennis Skinner's post-mortem on the 1992 campaign?
With the frenzied interest in deals, no deals, and non deals, before we even reach polling day, can I request that AndyJS put up the video of Dennis Skinner's post-mortem on the 1992 campaign?
Always good for a laugh...
Speaking of AndyJS' videos.. I hope the BBC revert back to their old election theme music ...
With the frenzied interest in deals, no deals, and non deals, before we even reach polling day, can I request that AndyJS put up the video of Dennis Skinner's post-mortem on the 1992 campaign?
With the frenzied interest in deals, no deals, and non deals, before we even reach polling day, can I request that AndyJS put up the video of Dennis Skinner's post-mortem on the 1992 campaign?
Always good for a laugh...
I think it is on YouTube albeit with horribly out of sync audio.
I'm pleased with the Croydon Central poll putting the Tories ahead because I've been predicting a narrow Con hold there for a while and this is the first evidence that it might happen.
All in all the coalition is doing quite well when you consider the fact that ElectionForecast is currently predicting they'll take 46% and 306 seats, and that's despite being wildly unpopular in Scotland.
With the frenzied interest in deals, no deals, and non deals, before we even reach polling day, can I request that AndyJS put up the video of Dennis Skinner's post-mortem on the 1992 campaign?
With the frenzied interest in deals, no deals, and non deals, before we even reach polling day, can I request that AndyJS put up the video of Dennis Skinner's post-mortem on the 1992 campaign?
Comments
News to me.
Night all.
Dev is most certainly not forgotten today. He must be the most controversial figure in the history of the Free State / Republic.
The mayor has her own problems, from Monday: she ordered the police to stand down and not to engage the protesters, also ordered they not wear their riot gear - which resulted in over 100 getting hurt mainly from thrown rocks, several seriously. She also said "Let them riot - it's only property".
She also waited way to long to request a state of emergency from the governor, who publicly wondered why she wasn't asking for one.
She is the third most important person on the Democratic National Committee, which may be why she has yet to answer any questions about this, even to the extent of having Al Sharpton protect her from the press last night. She clearly has much more ambition than being mayor of Baltimore, so will try to maintain silence in the hope that folks forget.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 4m4 minutes ago
Monthly "Super-ELBOW" Labour % leads split into @YouGov-polls only and non-YG polls only: Labour lead with April YG
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594269928120786944
Why does one move but not the other?
I suspect that an EU referendum would actually have more "on topic" political discussion than the AV one did, though. (Not a hard achievement.) But even there the in/out thing seems a bit silly. As the only large West European country that is clearly not fated, in the medium term, to participate in the most "eurofederal" arrangements such as the single currency, and the current member state that is likely to have the largest population and largest economy later in this century, it would surprise me if Britain can't reach a kind of sui generis arrangement with the rest of the EU. If we were to leave the EU then I am sure we still participate in very many aspects of European integration. If we were to stay in, then I am sure there would still be many aspects of European integration that we will not participate in. The relationship with the EU is bound to be semi-detached and we will at some point have to reach a settlement that recognises this fact. The "in/out" decision is not actually such a big deal - it may determine whether or not we continue to have British MEPs voting in the European parliament, but it's not going to transport us across the Atlantic or catapult us into the Euro.
I thought the State's Attorney for Baltimore city swatted away the conflict of interest questions most effectively.
Better would be : -
What level of support do you believe a party should need to form a Majority Government : -
A - less than 35%
B - over 36%
C - over 41%
D - over 46%
E - over 51%
Should the candidates a party offers be decided by : -
A - Voters
B - Parties
C - No Preference
Should geographic areas have a representative : -
A - Yes
B - No
C - No Preference
Maybe some others but you get the gist. Avoid bias in leading questions.
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/business/business-news/catherine-shuttleworth-the-businesswomen-who-tore-into-red-ed-inundated-with-messages-of-support-1-7240797
BBC bias now totally clear.
Even Toby Young thinks so.
It was a first attempt. The building blocks of electoral systems are quite well known, and there aren't that many incompatible blocks.
ELBOW week-ending 1st May: Con 33.9 (+0.8), Lab 33.9 (+0.3), UKIP 12.9 (-0.9), LD 8.6 (+0.4), Grn 4.8 (-0.5).
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 12m12 minutes ago
@Sunil_P2 NB, this is the "traditional" ELBOW, inc. YouGov and non-YouGov, and Phone and Internet
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594276237624942592
I wonder if we're starting to see some profit taking in the market?
#Labour ELBOW leads split into YouGov polls and non-YG, since August. YG recently more favourable to Labour - 1st May
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594281021631246336
'Because he is a f**king communist,' [Noel] Gallagher replied.
That will be a Definitely Maybe, erh NOT then...
I think Con majority will be back in the 9.6-9.8 range by tomorrow afternoon. I hope I'm wrong though and there's some other reason why the price is moving.
Basic rule - don't use the cash-out button. An exception would be a 2-way market with liquidity if you genuinely want to square off.
Con 280, Lab 269, SNP 50, LD 26, DUP 9, PC 4, SDLP 2, UKIP 1, Green 1.
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594287322776080385
Ed is drifting because his increasingly vehement disavowal of any formal deal with the SNP has persuaded a critical mass of punters that he means it. In that context his path to the PMship would be for Cameron to lose in the Commons, rather than resign because of the result. I think if that happens the terms of the Betfair market mean Cameron was the 'next PM', albeit only for a few days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_general_election,_1918#/media/File:Irish_UK_election_1918.png
1918
Votes 46.9%
Seats 69.5%
Even more remarkable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
For some reason the non-Coalition Tory Leader isn't stated.
But the five other parties are ALL represented by non-English constituencies. 4 of the 5 were non-English and the 5th was a Yorkshireman in a Scottish constituency. 105 of the 670 or so seats were in Ireland which seems bizarre on population share, I would guess Scotland was massively over-represented too.
The latter, the largest group, was led by
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Carson
elected from Belfast Duncairn.
I agree though, 1918 was the most interesting election we've ever had.
Always good for a laugh...
youtu.be/sf3NxCCSz3Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ogt6njXU9Cg
I'm pleased with the Croydon Central poll putting the Tories ahead because I've been predicting a narrow Con hold there for a while and this is the first evidence that it might happen.