As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
A ten year anniversary is traditionally called tin. Most politicians seem to get a tin ear at this point. The Conservatives will not want David Cameron to get that doubtful gift.
Is tin ear a symptom of Downing St Disorder?
"Many people have missed the point of David Cameron’s attempt to bracket opponents of his latest war with ‘terrorist sympathisers’. It is this. Our Prime Minister (earlier than many) is beginning to suffer from Downing Street Disorder. It starts with being unable to believe that anyone can possibly disagree with you, unless they are mad or wicked. It ends with being so cut off from the world that you are unable to make a phone call or use public transport. The only cure is to be turned out of office, but many victims never fully recover."
A ten year anniversary is traditionally called tin. Most politicians seem to get a tin ear at this point. The Conservatives will not want David Cameron to get that doubtful gift.
Is tin ear a symptom of Downing St Disorder?
"Many people have missed the point of David Cameron’s attempt to bracket opponents of his latest war with ‘terrorist sympathisers’. It is this. Our Prime Minister (earlier than many) is beginning to suffer from Downing Street Disorder. It starts with being unable to believe that anyone can possibly disagree with you, unless they are mad or wicked. It ends with being so cut off from the world that you are unable to make a phone call or use public transport. The only cure is to be turned out of office, but many victims never fully recover."
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
What do they do in France, have a run off between the top two in each place ?
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
In Pas de Calais and other regions the FN would win in a 3 way race.
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
The two rounds are rather like a drawn out version of AV. (Thread please TSE ;-))
Perhaps the biggest change in the 10 years is the decline in the Lib Dems from a party of 20% to a party of 5%?
Typical anti-Lib Dem trolling from you. The LDs were at 7.5% in 1970 and barely at 4% in 1990 so it's merely our 20-year existential crisis delayed by five years.
It is 15 years since the Lib Dems gained a seat from the Conservatives at a by election.
PB rarely discusses the positive reasons why they're Tories and usually focusses on bashing other parties instead. It's interesting.
I think your lack of self-awareness in that post is very uninteresting and entirely predictable. Would you like some lemon with your sour grapes?
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
Locally the socialists will not want to withdraw, because if they do they will be excluded from local representation for 6 years, but nationally they will want to get out, it will be a frantic mess of negotiations.
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
What do they do in France, have a run off between the top two in each place ?
It depends on exactly the election, but broadly yes.
It's on a constituency by constituency basis, and - in some of the locals - I believe it's top 3.
Nevertheless, the impact of which is to screw the FN over.
A ten year anniversary is traditionally called tin. Most politicians seem to get a tin ear at this point. The Conservatives will not want David Cameron to get that doubtful gift.
Is tin ear a symptom of Downing St Disorder?
"Many people have missed the point of David Cameron’s attempt to bracket opponents of his latest war with ‘terrorist sympathisers’. It is this. Our Prime Minister (earlier than many) is beginning to suffer from Downing Street Disorder. It starts with being unable to believe that anyone can possibly disagree with you, unless they are mad or wicked. It ends with being so cut off from the world that you are unable to make a phone call or use public transport. The only cure is to be turned out of office, but many victims never fully recover."
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
What do they do in France, have a run off between the top two in each place ?
It depends on exactly the election, but broadly yes.
It's on a constituency by constituency basis, and - in some of the locals - I believe it's top 3.
Nevertheless, the impact of which is to screw the FN over.
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
Yes that is the reason, it is also seen in Germany and Austria. That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Doesn't that rather depend on turnout.
PS voters will turn out to stop FN, but LR voters are a bit less bothered,
If you could effect one major policy change in the governing of your country, what would it be? > The dismantling of the prevailing segregationist multi-cultural model, combined with a thoroughgoing assault on the moral and cultural relativism underpinning it.
What do you consider to be the main threat to the future peace and security of the world? > Religious fanaticism and its hand-maidens, sectarian hatred, woman hatred and Jew hatred. A combination of these things is already tearing a number of countries to pieces before our eyes. Nuclear proliferation comes a close second.
I couldn't agree more. Like DavidL on a previous thread I have no problem at all with putting our cultural paradigm first.
On topic, I hope whoever succeeds Cameron is not a numpty. If Corbyn or someone of his ilk gets in, we're stuffed.
Last night's sad attack in Leytonstone seems to be remarkably similar to some of the attacks that have been going on in Israel for the past few months: knife attacks, particularly on public transport.
Sadly, I've heard and read some people suggest that the Israeli victims *deserved* it. Because, well, you know, they're Israeli.
I wonder if they'll have the same view if such attacks become anywhere near frequent in this country.
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
Round 2 is a 3 way race, not a 2 way race unless the 3rd party withdraws, but if they withdraw they are locked out of local representation for 6 years. Sarkozi has announced his party will not withdraw from anywhere, the socialists are in a divide.
That is the status of round 2.
For instance the opinion polls for Pas de Calais Round 1 were:
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
Is this because the French traditional right and left would rather back each other than the FN? Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
Round 2 is a 3 way race, not a 2 way race unless the 3rd party withdraws, but if they withdraw they are locked out of local representation for 6 years. Sarkozi has announced his party will not withdraw from anywhere, the socialists are in a divide.
That is the status of round 2.
For instance the opinion polls for Pas de Calais Round 1 were:
Le Pen 42 Bertrand 24 Socialists 17
For Round 2:
Le Pen 44 Bertrand 30 PS 26
Le Pen wins easily, unless some one withdraws.
The run offs happen at a constituency level, not a regional level.
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
Round 2 is a 3 way race, not a 2 way race unless the 3rd party withdraws, but if they withdraw they are locked out of local representation for 6 years. Sarkozi has announced his party will not withdraw from anywhere, the socialists are in a divide.
That is the status of round 2.
For instance the opinion polls for Pas de Calais Round 1 were:
Le Pen 42 Bertrand 24 Socialists 17
For Round 2:
Le Pen 44 Bertrand 30 PS 26
Le Pen wins easily, unless some one withdraws.
The run offs happen at a constituency level, not a regional level.
Its a joke (the Santa-Claude is a hint). Not a very good one but a joke never the less. Unfortunately TSE has a complete sense of humour failure when it comes to the EU.
Yes and Osborne attacks tax avoidance while Cameron's step father in law's company which owns most of Jura is Bahamian registered!
This "story" is going precisely no-where. As it happens I think the decision to suspend the Thomson lady was daft. There is a Labour MP facing a criminal assault charge who is not suspended and Thomson is not even being investigated by the police the last I heard.
The other SNP one I don't know enough about except that Dugdale's constituency party is being investigated for something similar so I suspect that Labour won't want to talk about it too much!
In any event this Mail on Sunday "scoop" is complete rubbish!
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
.
Actually, the electoral system in France is unlike anywhere else in Europe that I can think of. Everywhere else has some form of PR.
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats. Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
Round 2 is a 3 way race, not a 2 way race unless the 3rd party withdraws, but if they withdraw they are locked out of local representation for 6 years. Sarkozi has announced his party will not withdraw from anywhere, the socialists are in a divide.
That is the status of round 2.
For instance the opinion polls for Pas de Calais Round 1 were:
Le Pen 42 Bertrand 24 Socialists 17
For Round 2:
Le Pen 44 Bertrand 30 PS 26
Le Pen wins easily, unless some one withdraws.
The run offs happen at a constituency level, not a regional level.
This IS a regional election.
Sigh
Calais is a constituency in the Pas De Calais Nord Region
Yes and Osborne attacks tax avoidance while Cameron's step father in law's company which owns most of Jura is Bahamian registered!
This "story" is going precisely no-where. As it happens I think the decision to suspend the Thomson lady was daft. There is a Labour MP facing a criminal assault charge who is not suspended and Thomson is not even being investigated by the police the last I heard.
The other SNP one I don't know enough about except that Dugdale's constituency party is being investigated for something similar so I suspect that Labour won't want to talk about it too much!
In any event this Mail on Sunday "scoop" is complete rubbish!
As an aside, Pas-De-Calais in March had the FN in the lead after the first round with 41% of the vote.
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
TO add: the FN got 36% in round 1, and 41% in round 2 in Pas de Calais.
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
.
0% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
I got news for you, bad ones regarding your bets on the french local elections. In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
Happy to bet you on the results of Alsace, if you like?
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
Round 2 is a 3 way race, not a 2 way race unless the 3rd party withdraws, but if they withdraw they are locked out of local representation for 6 years. Sarkozi has announced his party will not withdraw from anywhere, the socialists are in a divide.
That is the status of round 2.
For instance the opinion polls for Pas de Calais Round 1 were:
Le Pen 42 Bertrand 24 Socialists 17
For Round 2:
Le Pen 44 Bertrand 30 PS 26
Le Pen wins easily, unless some one withdraws.
The run offs happen at a constituency level, not a regional level.
This IS a regional election.
Sigh
Calais is a constituency in the Pas De Calais Nord Region
You see? It's a different electoral system, this is an election for local regions not constituencies, in this case it's an election for regional presidents. That is why there is so much talk about withdrawals in round 2, because in this instance round 2 the top 3 participate, not the top 2.
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
I can sympathize, having been subjected to Old Lang Syne (twice) and a poor knock-off of Here it is Merry Christmas, among others, while doing my shopping this afternoon
Toryism is about maintaining the status quo and is inherently linked to ensuring the inherited wealth and social inequality is maintained.
Ah, one of those who thinks Margaret Thatcher wasn't a Conservative.
Well, it's a view, I suppose. If you choose a nonsensical definition, and say that anyone who doesn't meet it is not a 'Conservative', then you are going to be hard to argue with!
I don't think Conservatism is about preserving the status quo in aspic. It's more that things have to change if they're to stay the same.
But, protecting inherited wealth is surely a core part of Conservatism?
Not in the sense of protecting individual families. At its core what matters is protecting the inherited wealth of the nation as a whole, in the economic, cultural and historical spheres. Conservatism is about preventing decline rather than inhibiting progress, whereas progressivism does not admit that decline is possible or relevant.
Both classical liberalism and toryism seek to grow the overall pie and accept inequality. To this extent they are quite similar although their methodology varies quite a bit.
But in terms of how they view inequality they are vastly different. Liberals TOLERATE inequality and are quite happy for the wealthy cohort to be in constant turmoil at the hands of the market. If the entire wealthy elite changes in a single generation this is perfectly fine.
Tories want to maintain the existing elite. So they are vehemently against inheritance tax (which a liberal would view as one of the best taxes to levy as it has no impact on the Market) and will always seek to maintain privilege.
But liberalism can also be used by the elite to enhance its position, if it is imposed by the strong and more advanced against the weak and less so. Take British free trade relating to India and China and the Opium wars. And now what America is doing to the ROW with its free trade deals. Precisely the same thing, the strong dominating the weak in the name of free trade.
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year. (rcs1000 is referring to those elections)
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year.
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
I think I may have just discovered the limit of my interest in political and electoral geekology, but I appreciate it being laid out like that all the same.
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year. (rcs1000 is referring to those elections)
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year.
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
Thanks for all that. But my question is much simpler:
What is happening in today's election?
Who is being elected in today's election (or more accurately Round 2 next weekend).
People representing constituencies? If so, how many people and how many constituencies?
Or people representing regions? If so, how many people and how many regions?
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year.
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
I think I may have just discovered the limit of my interest in political and electoral geekology, but I appreciate it being laid out like that all the same.
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year.
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
I think I may have just discovered the limit of my interest in political and electoral geekology, but I appreciate it being laid out like that all the same.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
The football gods continue to smile on Leicester and mock Chelsea. I think this has someway to run yet. Therefore expect ManU, Man C and Arsenal to slip up next week.
Leicester are still underpriced. The table does not lie. We have lost only two matches in the Prem League since March. That is not a run of luck, it is seriously good form. Liverpool messed up today, but Leicester beat Newcastle 3 nil away a fortnight ago with them not having a proper goal on target.
Our Thai owners are willing to back us with money, stating £160 million which has hardly been touched. It is still possible to back LCFC at 33/1 to win the title, and Mahrez at 25/1 as top goal scorer. I am on at better odds but still some value there particularly each way.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
The football gods continue to smile on Leicester and mock Chelsea. I think this has someway to run yet. Therefore expect ManU, Man C and Arsenal to slip up next week.
Leicester are still underpriced. The table does not lie. We have lost only two matches in the Prem League since March. That is not a run of luck, it is seriously good form. Liverpool messed up today, but Leicester beat Newcastle 3 nil away a fortnight ago with them not having a proper goal on target.
Our Thai owners are willing to back us with money, stating £160 million which has hardly been touched. It is still possible to back LCFC at 33/1 to win the title, and Mahrez at 25/1 as top goal scorer. I am on at better odds but still some value there particularly each way.
I know nothing of the Leicester squad so don't know what happens when injuries and suspensions kick in, but like everybody else if you'd told me they'd be top now at the start of the season I'd have laughed.
This weekend confirms my point yesterday that the standards in the prem are compressing, so I'm not going to disagree with your assertion.
My lot, Spurs, are unbeaten since the opening day, there's no reason to think they're going to have a bad run, especially now they're almost finished with Thursday nights for a good while.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
First weekend I've actually done it rather than think about it, couldn't have gone better. Don't suppose every weekend will be like this and can't help but think I've missed the boat with Chelsea and this bet.
My buy of Newcastle team bookings at 25 made up at 30, this market definitely has potential for me.
Can anyone write a brief summary of how these French elections actually work?
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Well they have many different types of elections. There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year.
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
Thanks for all that. But my question is much simpler:
What is happening in today's election?
Who is being elected in today's election (or more accurately Round 2 next weekend).
People representing constituencies? If so, how many people and how many constituencies?
Or people representing regions? If so, how many people and how many regions?
Or both of the above?
Today Regional Elections Round 1, in each region they vote for a Party list for the Regional Assembly, 3/4 of the list is elected by PR, 1/4 of the list is elected by the one that gets a majority of the votes, if not in Round 1 then the lists that got more than 10% go to round 2.
The Regional Assembly then elects the Regional President, the Regions have powers of taxation, education, transport infrastructure and aid to businesses (a bit like devolved Scotland).
Le Pen has already 1/3 rd of the seats in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie even before Round 2, because 3/4 of the list is elected by PR in Round 1.
Sarkozi is basically blackmailing the Socialists to withdraw and vote for him or have an FN victory, we will see if the socialists will withdraw and where, before we know if the FN will win in round 2.
What utter tosh.
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
If the FN start locking up the Jungle campers instead of doing what the Socialists and Republicans tacitly support - letting them become the UK's problem, then she will gain huge additional support. She now has that power.
If I were a Syrian or Afghan in the Jungle tonight, I would be very, very worried. And I doubt they have ever been worried at all until now.
She also might have the chance to order immediate action THIS WEEK before the run off even occurs. That could push the FN over the edge in terms of winning and deliver her victory next year.
Tyson Fury has invited his critics to suck his balls. That's taking his wish to dispel accusations of homophobia to unnecessary lengths.
LOL...
What I don't like about this petition to get him removed from SPOTY list, it is that Dapper Laughs thing all over again. It is twitter mob rules. If you don't like Tyson Fury, vote for somebody else for SPOTY, if you don't like Dapper Laughs, don't watch any of his content or go to his gigs.
Its a joke (the Santa-Claude is a hint). Not a very good one but a joke never the less. Unfortunately TSE has a complete sense of humour failure when it comes to the EU.
Tyson Fury has invited his critics to suck his balls. That's taking his wish to dispel accusations of homophobia to unnecessary lengths.
LOL...
What I don't like about this petition to get him removed from SPOTY list, it is that Dapper Laughs thing all over again. It is twitter mob rules. If you don't like Tyson Fury, vote for somebody else for SPOTY, if you don't like Dapper Laughs, don't watch any of his content or go to his gigs.
Indeed, everyone should vote for Jessica Ennis-Hill.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
First weekend I've actually done it rather than think about it, couldn't have gone better. Don't suppose every weekend will be like this and can't help but think I've missed the boat with Chelsea and this bet.
My buy of Newcastle team bookings at 25 made up at 30, this market definitely has potential for me.
Looking at next weekend I think Utd will be a shade of odds on, Arsenal definitely will be at Villa. I'm very happy to lay both of them if so.
Its a joke (the Santa-Claude is a hint). Not a very good one but a joke never the less. Unfortunately TSE has a complete sense of humour failure when it comes to the EU.
Today Regional Elections Round 1, in each region they vote for a Party list for the Regional Assembly, 3/4 of the list is elected by PR, 1/4 of the list is elected by the one that gets a majority of the votes, if not in Round 1 then the lists that got more than 10% go to round 2.
The Regional Assembly then elects the Regional President, the Regions have powers of taxation, education, transport infrastructure and aid to businesses (a bit like devolved Scotland).
Le Pen has already 1/3 rd of the seats in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie even before Round 2, because 3/4 of the list is elected by PR in Round 1.
OK, thanks a lot.
So I take it that everyone voting today is voting at a regional level.
ie Everyone, wherever they are located in a region, gets the same ballot paper.
So in today's election constituencies are totally irrelevant.
Just as, in the UK, for example, Westminster parliamentary constituencies are irrelevant when electing, say, the London Mayor - ie everyone in London gets the same ballot paper.
Tyson Fury has invited his critics to suck his balls. That's taking his wish to dispel accusations of homophobia to unnecessary lengths.
LOL...
What I don't like about this petition to get him removed from SPOTY list, it is that Dapper Laughs thing all over again. It is twitter mob rules. If you don't like Tyson Fury, vote for somebody else for SPOTY, if you don't like Dapper Laughs, don't watch any of his content or go to his gigs.
Indeed, everyone should vote for Jessica Ennis-Hill.
Just a note as well...Phil "The Power" Taylor has been up for SPOTY a number of times, and his "record" is far worse than Fury. I don't remember the petitions when he was on the list.
Tyson Fury has invited his critics to suck his balls. That's taking his wish to dispel accusations of homophobia to unnecessary lengths.
LOL...
What I don't like about this petition to get him removed from SPOTY list, it is that Dapper Laughs thing all over again. It is twitter mob rules. If you don't like Tyson Fury, vote for somebody else for SPOTY, if you don't like Dapper Laughs, don't watch any of his content or go to his gigs.
Indeed, everyone should vote for Jessica Ennis-Hill.
Is that because see looks pretty fit in a dress? ;-)
Today Regional Elections Round 1, in each region they vote for a Party list for the Regional Assembly, 3/4 of the list is elected by PR, 1/4 of the list is elected by the one that gets a majority of the votes, if not in Round 1 then the lists that got more than 10% go to round 2.
The Regional Assembly then elects the Regional President, the Regions have powers of taxation, education, transport infrastructure and aid to businesses (a bit like devolved Scotland).
Le Pen has already 1/3 rd of the seats in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie even before Round 2, because 3/4 of the list is elected by PR in Round 1.
OK, thanks a lot.
So I take it that everyone voting today is voting at a regional level.
ie Everyone, wherever they are located in a region, gets the same ballot paper.
So in today's election constituencies are totally irrelevant.
Just as, in the UK, for example, Westminster parliamentary constituencies are irrelevant when electing, say, the London Mayor - ie everyone in London gets the same ballot paper.
Damnit, I was hoping he would appoint 600 new Tory peers (hint, hint Dave)
David Cameron has been secretly drawing up a plan to bypass an increasingly hostile anti-Tory majority in the House of Lords, which is threatening to wreak havoc with his legislative plans.
The UK prime minister will use the recent bust-up with the Lords on tax-credit reform as a chance to neuter the powers of the upper house.
Lord Strathclyde, the Tory grandee charged by Mr Cameron with reviewing the role of peers, is set to propose this month that the Lords should lose its veto over delegated or “secondary” legislation, such as the measure implementing tax-credit cuts.
Once that veto is removed, Mr Cameron is expected to step up his government’s increasing use of delegated legislation — also known as statutory instruments — to ram contentious measures through the upper house.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
The football gods continue to smile on Leicester and mock Chelsea. I think this has someway to run yet. Therefore expect ManU, Man C and Arsenal to slip up next week.
Leicester are still underpriced. The table does not lie. We have lost only two matches in the Prem League since March. That is not a run of luck, it is seriously good form. Liverpool messed up today, but Leicester beat Newcastle 3 nil away a fortnight ago with them not having a proper goal on target.
Our Thai owners are willing to back us with money, stating £160 million which has hardly been touched. It is still possible to back LCFC at 33/1 to win the title, and Mahrez at 25/1 as top goal scorer. I am on at better odds but still some value there particularly each way.
I know nothing of the Leicester squad so don't know what happens when injuries and suspensions kick in, but like everybody else if you'd told me they'd be top now at the start of the season I'd have laughed.
This weekend confirms my point yesterday that the standards in the prem are compressing, so I'm not going to disagree with your assertion.
My lot, Spurs, are unbeaten since the opening day, there's no reason to think they're going to have a bad run, especially now they're almost finished with Thursday nights for a good while.
Fascinating at both ends, I'm enjoying it.
Still think City will win it, they have Kompany, Yaya and Aguerro to come back.
Would love Leicester to make the CL, meantime you are witnessing the short term demise of my lot. We will be back in four or five years when the new stadium is built, with a team of young guns that will conquer Europe led by Paul Clement
Tyson Fury has invited his critics to suck his balls. That's taking his wish to dispel accusations of homophobia to unnecessary lengths.
LOL...
What I don't like about this petition to get him removed from SPOTY list, it is that Dapper Laughs thing all over again. It is twitter mob rules. If you don't like Tyson Fury, vote for somebody else for SPOTY, if you don't like Dapper Laughs, don't watch any of his content or go to his gigs.
Indeed, everyone should vote for Jessica Ennis-Hill.
Is that because see looks pretty fit in a dress? ;-)
Because she's from Sheffield, and Sheffielders are awesome.
It's a party-list system, with the following Gallic twist:
In the first round of voting, the party that receives an absolute majority of votes automatically gets a quarter of the available seats. The remaining seats are allocated proportionally among the parties that received at least 5% of the vote.
If no party receives an absolute majority in the first round, a second round of voting occurs; only the parties that garnered at least 10% of the vote in the first round are allowed to participate in the second. Moreover, the candidates for each party can change in the period between voting rounds. For example, two parties that both received at least 5% in the first-round vote can join forces to create a new candidate list for the second round. Allocating seats after the second round of voting is done according to the same rules as the first round if an absolute majority is not obtained.
Not an easy one to model, but I think that, if no-one withdraws between the two rounds and the vote-shares don't change much, that's going to give a very roughly proportional result.
Damnit, I was hoping he would appoint 600 new Tory peers (hint, hint Dave)
David Cameron has been secretly drawing up a plan to bypass an increasingly hostile anti-Tory majority in the House of Lords, which is threatening to wreak havoc with his legislative plans.
The UK prime minister will use the recent bust-up with the Lords on tax-credit reform as a chance to neuter the powers of the upper house.
Lord Strathclyde, the Tory grandee charged by Mr Cameron with reviewing the role of peers, is set to propose this month that the Lords should lose its veto over delegated or “secondary” legislation, such as the measure implementing tax-credit cuts.
Once that veto is removed, Mr Cameron is expected to step up his government’s increasing use of delegated legislation — also known as statutory instruments — to ram contentious measures through the upper house.
What's the point of having a second house then if it can't veto even a single statutory instrument? If he wants to abolish the House of Lords why hide it?
But a lot of severely unpopular legislation seems to be on his mind, what can even more unpopular than tax credits could he be up too?
Today Regional Elections Round 1, in each region they vote for a Party list for the Regional Assembly, 3/4 of the list is elected by PR, 1/4 of the list is elected by the one that gets a majority of the votes, if not in Round 1 then the lists that got more than 10% go to round 2.
The Regional Assembly then elects the Regional President, the Regions have powers of taxation, education, transport infrastructure and aid to businesses (a bit like devolved Scotland).
Le Pen has already 1/3 rd of the seats in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie even before Round 2, because 3/4 of the list is elected by PR in Round 1.
OK, thanks a lot.
So I take it that everyone voting today is voting at a regional level.
ie Everyone, wherever they are located in a region, gets the same ballot paper.
So in today's election constituencies are totally irrelevant.
Just as, in the UK, for example, Westminster parliamentary constituencies are irrelevant when electing, say, the London Mayor - ie everyone in London gets the same ballot paper.
David Cameron famously forgot how many homes he owned — and now his stepfather-in-law can’t decide whether he owns a massive country estate on the Scottish island of Jura.
What’s more, the Astor family — whose hereditary peerage still allows Samantha Cameron’s stepfather William Astor to sit in the House of Lords — have their 18,736-acre Tarbert Estate owned via a company registered in a, errrr, Caribbean tax haven. The holidaying Cameron family enjoyed the charms of the island first hand as recently as 2013.
The code of conduct for peers clearly states that land or property holdings must be listed in the Register of Lords’ interests — but Astor only lists a partnership in a tenant of the island, ostensibly concerned with sporting pursuits:
As I said the Mail on Sunday story is complete rubbish.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
The football gods continue to smile on Leicester and mock Chelsea. I think this has someway to run yet. Therefore expect ManU, Man C and Arsenal to slip up next week.
Leicester are still underpriced. The table does not lie. We have lost only two matches in the Prem League since March. That is not a run of luck, it is seriously good form. Liverpool messed up today, but Leicester beat Newcastle 3 nil away a fortnight ago with them not having a proper goal on target.
Our Thai owners are willing to back us with money, stating £160 million which has hardly been touched. It is still possible to back LCFC at 33/1 to win the title, and Mahrez at 25/1 as top goal scorer. I am on at better odds but still some value there particularly each way.
I know nothing of the Leicester squad so don't know what happens when injuries and suspensions kick in, but like everybody else if you'd told me they'd be top now at the start of the season I'd have laughed.
This weekend confirms my point yesterday that the standards in the prem are compressing, so I'm not going to disagree with your assertion.
My lot, Spurs, are unbeaten since the opening day, there's no reason to think they're going to have a bad run, especially now they're almost finished with Thursday nights for a good while.
Fascinating at both ends, I'm enjoying it.
I though Spurs were the second best side to play Leicester at the Walkers this season, though we are a better team than in August, a lot tighter at the back. We have some pretty good players as back up in the squad, but could do with another striker and back up goalie. Over the last couple of years (apart from Matty James) we have had very few major injuries. One thing the club has heavily invested in is in sports medicine. It keeps up the fitness levels for our pacy game too.
I thought we could be top half, but top 4 looks very realistic, either that or I am having a strange and vivid dream.
Tyson Fury has invited his critics to suck his balls. That's taking his wish to dispel accusations of homophobia to unnecessary lengths.
Do "Irish Travellers" count as BMEs and are therefore exempt from claims of any ~ism by the Left's usual standards?
Personally, I think they are an organised crime syndicate which somehow goes without investigation. Presumably they must have some support for this somewhere.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
The football gods continue to smile on Leicester and mock Chelsea. I think this has someway to run yet. Therefore expect ManU, Man C and Arsenal to slip up next week.
Leicester are still underpriced. The table does not lie. We have lost only two matches in the Prem League since March. That is not a run of luck, it is seriously good form. Liverpool messed up today, but Leicester beat Newcastle 3 nil away a fortnight ago with them not having a proper goal on target.
Our Thai owners are willing to back us with money, stating £160 million which has hardly been touched. It is still possible to back LCFC at 33/1 to win the title, and Mahrez at 25/1 as top goal scorer. I am on at better odds but still some value there particularly each way.
I know nothing of the Leicester squad so don't know what happens when injuries and suspensions kick in, but like everybody else if you'd told me they'd be top now at the start of the season I'd have laughed.
This weekend confirms my point yesterday that the standards in the prem are compressing, so I'm not going to disagree with your assertion.
My lot, Spurs, are unbeaten since the opening day, there's no reason to think they're going to have a bad run, especially now they're almost finished with Thursday nights for a good while.
Fascinating at both ends, I'm enjoying it.
Still think City will win it, they have Kompany, Yaya and Aguerro to come back.
Would love Leicester to make the CL, meantime you are witnessing the short term demise of my lot. We will be back in four or five years when the new stadium is built, with a team of young guns that will conquer Europe led by Paul Clement
Couldn't pick a winner tbh, Arsenal usually find a way to mess up, Utd might just sneak it almost by default.
Can't think of anybody not enjoying Mourinho's demise at the moment, some of the players seem to have jacked it in. Clements doing well at Derby but managing one of the big clubs is a different matter, I think Chelsea could do worse than Pardew.
There has to be a substantial chance that one of the Champions League teams will come in with the kind of money that will unsettle Mahrez and Vardy, while teams will adjust their game plans soon or set out to take them out of the game with some hefty treatment.
The Premier League is wide open this year though. There isn't a good team in it, and moderate teams all have a sprinkling of good players. It will all become clearer on 1st February when the transfer window closes.
I've already lost money (probably) backing West Ham to go down, but now fancy Swansea to drop and half believe that this is Arsenal's year.
Damnit, I was hoping he would appoint 600 new Tory peers (hint, hint Dave)
David Cameron has been secretly drawing up a plan to bypass an increasingly hostile anti-Tory majority in the House of Lords, which is threatening to wreak havoc with his legislative plans.
The UK prime minister will use the recent bust-up with the Lords on tax-credit reform as a chance to neuter the powers of the upper house.
Lord Strathclyde, the Tory grandee charged by Mr Cameron with reviewing the role of peers, is set to propose this month that the Lords should lose its veto over delegated or “secondary” legislation, such as the measure implementing tax-credit cuts.
Once that veto is removed, Mr Cameron is expected to step up his government’s increasing use of delegated legislation — also known as statutory instruments — to ram contentious measures through the upper house.
From yesterday evening's discussion three odds on favs lost away from home this weekend, good profits if you were on. Big slip up for Liverpool today.
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
First weekend I've actually done it rather than think about it, couldn't have gone better. Don't suppose every weekend will be like this and can't help but think I've missed the boat with Chelsea and this bet.
My buy of Newcastle team bookings at 25 made up at 30, this market definitely has potential for me.
Looking at next weekend I think Utd will be a shade of odds on, Arsenal definitely will be at Villa. I'm very happy to lay both of them if so.
I'm going to do it until the end of the season and keep a record, three points up so far
Comments
France has constituencies with two rounds of voting.
The result is that France has very unrepresentative elections. FN: 26% of the vote in March and 1.5% of the seats.
Unless they are much more transfer friendly this time, they are likely to end up on 29-30% of the vote and 3-5% of the seats.
Hitchens is a real fruitcake and should be ignored.
In round 2 of the local elections the first 3 parties that take more that 10% go to round 2, that means unless Sarkozi or Hollande decide to withdraw from some regions in the second round then the FN will win, and Sarkozy has already said that there will be no withdrawals.
In Pas de Calais and other regions the FN would win in a 3 way race.
Locally the socialists will not want to withdraw, because if they do they will be excluded from local representation for 6 years, but nationally they will want to get out, it will be a frantic mess of negotiations.
It's on a constituency by constituency basis, and - in some of the locals - I believe it's top 3.
Nevertheless, the impact of which is to screw the FN over.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVjD5xQVAAIktOg.jpg:large
The FN is transfer unfriendly at a constituency level and that will screw them. 35% is simply not enough to go first.
Edit to add: the FN could go to 45% across the whole region and would still likely miss out on a majority in Alsace
A more simple message, but their recently appointed media guru is going to have to raise his game.
PS voters will turn out to stop FN, but LR voters are a bit less bothered,
Sense of humour failure, much? Made me chuckle. Perhaps your reaction belies your statement that it is shite.
Sarkozi has announced his party will not withdraw from anywhere, the socialists are in a divide.
That is the status of round 2.
For instance the opinion polls for Pas de Calais Round 1 were:
Le Pen 42
Bertrand 24
Socialists 17
For Round 2:
Le Pen 44
Bertrand 30
PS 26
Le Pen wins easily, unless some one withdraws.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35018849
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/673600595949985793
https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/with_replies
Yes and Osborne attacks tax avoidance while Cameron's step father in law's company which owns most of Jura is Bahamian registered!
This "story" is going precisely no-where. As it happens I think the decision to suspend the Thomson lady was daft. There is a Labour MP facing a criminal assault charge who is not suspended and Thomson is not even being investigated by the police the last I heard.
The other SNP one I don't know enough about except that Dugdale's constituency party is being investigated for something similar so I suspect that Labour won't want to talk about it too much!
In any event this Mail on Sunday "scoop" is complete rubbish!
Calais is a constituency in the Pas De Calais Nord Region
(*) seriously? This is the best you have?
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/threatened-court-playing-christmas-music-10550303#ICID=sharebar_twitter
It's a different electoral system, this is an election for local regions not constituencies, in this case it's an election for regional presidents.
That is why there is so much talk about withdrawals in round 2, because in this instance round 2 the top 3 participate, not the top 2.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/12/ten-years-of-cameron-the-consistent-chameleon.html
I'm puzzled by the fact that comments below suggest there are individual constituencies yet we also have results being reported for regions as a whole.
Can anyone explain the above?
Who is being elected? A representative for each constituency? If so, what relevance do the regions have?
Incidentally fwiw I'd describe myself as a libertarian, the freedom of individuals should be paramount.
There have Presidential, Parliamentary, Municipal, Regional, Departmental, and European elections all with a slightly different system.
Presidential ones are simple, Round 1 all candidates, Round 2 the top 2 and who wins becomes president, 50% is required to win in either round, they happen every 5 years, last one in 2012.
Parliamentary ones have 577 constituencies, the presidential system is used, they also happen every 5 years, last one in 2012
Municipals ones have a complex system of electing Mayors, Councillors and Deputies that are also different depending on the size of the municipality and special arrangements for the big cities, Wikipedia has devoted entire page just for the voting rules:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_elections_in_France
They happen every 6 years, last one in 2014.
Regional ones have a variation of the presidential and municipal election rules, basically Round 2 is the top 3 that scored more than 10%, they happen every 6 years, last one in 2009.
Departmental elections are elections for all the cantons of France that comprise 342 arrondissements and 101 departments to elect members to the regional assembly of each department, that has the standard presidential system, they happen every 4 years, the last one was early this year. (rcs1000 is referring to those elections)
And European elections have PR per region (what the UK has).
What is happening in today's election?
Who is being elected in today's election (or more accurately Round 2 next weekend).
People representing constituencies? If so, how many people and how many constituencies?
Or people representing regions? If so, how many people and how many regions?
Or both of the above?
Leicester are still underpriced. The table does not lie. We have lost only two matches in the Prem League since March. That is not a run of luck, it is seriously good form. Liverpool messed up today, but Leicester beat Newcastle 3 nil away a fortnight ago with them not having a proper goal on target.
Our Thai owners are willing to back us with money, stating £160 million which has hardly been touched. It is still possible to back LCFC at 33/1 to win the title, and Mahrez at 25/1 as top goal scorer. I am on at better odds but still some value there particularly each way.
This weekend confirms my point yesterday that the standards in the prem are compressing, so I'm not going to disagree with your assertion.
My lot, Spurs, are unbeaten since the opening day, there's no reason to think they're going to have a bad run, especially now they're almost finished with Thursday nights for a good while.
Fascinating at both ends, I'm enjoying it.
My buy of Newcastle team bookings at 25 made up at 30, this market definitely has potential for me.
The Regional Assembly then elects the Regional President, the Regions have powers of taxation, education, transport infrastructure and aid to businesses (a bit like devolved Scotland).
Le Pen has already 1/3 rd of the seats in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie even before Round 2, because 3/4 of the list is elected by PR in Round 1.
If I were a Syrian or Afghan in the Jungle tonight, I would be very, very worried. And I doubt they have ever been worried at all until now.
She also might have the chance to order immediate action THIS WEEK before the run off even occurs. That could push the FN over the edge in terms of winning and deliver her victory next year.
What I don't like about this petition to get him removed from SPOTY list, it is that Dapper Laughs thing all over again. It is twitter mob rules. If you don't like Tyson Fury, vote for somebody else for SPOTY, if you don't like Dapper Laughs, don't watch any of his content or go to his gigs.
https://twitter.com/DouglasCarswell/status/673591195986206721?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
So I take it that everyone voting today is voting at a regional level.
ie Everyone, wherever they are located in a region, gets the same ballot paper.
So in today's election constituencies are totally irrelevant.
Just as, in the UK, for example, Westminster parliamentary constituencies are irrelevant when electing, say, the London Mayor - ie everyone in London gets the same ballot paper.
FT - Cameron trying to neuter H of L. I can't read the details.
David Cameron has been secretly drawing up a plan to bypass an increasingly hostile anti-Tory majority in the House of Lords, which is threatening to wreak havoc with his legislative plans.
The UK prime minister will use the recent bust-up with the Lords on tax-credit reform as a chance to neuter the powers of the upper house.
Lord Strathclyde, the Tory grandee charged by Mr Cameron with reviewing the role of peers, is set to propose this month that the Lords should lose its veto over delegated or “secondary” legislation, such as the measure implementing tax-credit cuts.
Once that veto is removed, Mr Cameron is expected to step up his government’s increasing use of delegated legislation — also known as statutory instruments — to ram contentious measures through the upper house.
http://on.ft.com/1NPUeNe
CAMERON STEPFATHER-IN-LAW CAN’T REMEMBER WHETHER HE OWNS 18,736-ACRE SCOTTISH ESTATE (REGISTERED IN TAX HAVEN)
No Lord Astor is a Tory peer and legislates (Lords) over us in the Upper House.
And yes it is of much greater significance than how some SNP MP used to be paid when he worked for an oil company!
The Mail story is total rubbish.
Would love Leicester to make the CL, meantime you are witnessing the short term demise of my lot. We will be back in four or five years when the new stadium is built, with a team of young guns that will conquer Europe led by Paul Clement
http://www.france24.com/en/20151202-guide-french-regional-elections-socialists-republicains-national-front
It's a party-list system, with the following Gallic twist:
In the first round of voting, the party that receives an absolute majority of votes automatically gets a quarter of the available seats. The remaining seats are allocated proportionally among the parties that received at least 5% of the vote.
If no party receives an absolute majority in the first round, a second round of voting occurs; only the parties that garnered at least 10% of the vote in the first round are allowed to participate in the second. Moreover, the candidates for each party can change in the period between voting rounds. For example, two parties that both received at least 5% in the first-round vote can join forces to create a new candidate list for the second round. Allocating seats after the second round of voting is done according to the same rules as the first round if an absolute majority is not obtained.
Not an easy one to model, but I think that, if no-one withdraws between the two rounds and the vote-shares don't change much, that's going to give a very roughly proportional result.
If he wants to abolish the House of Lords why hide it?
But a lot of severely unpopular legislation seems to be on his mind, what can even more unpopular than tax credits could he be up too?
This from Political Scrapbook
David Cameron famously forgot how many homes he owned — and now his stepfather-in-law can’t decide whether he owns a massive country estate on the Scottish island of Jura.
What’s more, the Astor family — whose hereditary peerage still allows Samantha Cameron’s stepfather William Astor to sit in the House of Lords — have their 18,736-acre Tarbert Estate owned via a company registered in a, errrr, Caribbean tax haven. The holidaying Cameron family enjoyed the charms of the island first hand as recently as 2013.
The code of conduct for peers clearly states that land or property holdings must be listed in the Register of Lords’ interests — but Astor only lists a partnership in a tenant of the island, ostensibly concerned with sporting pursuits:
As I said the Mail on Sunday story is complete rubbish.
I thought we could be top half, but top 4 looks very realistic, either that or I am having a strange and vivid dream.
Personally, I think they are an organised crime syndicate which somehow goes without investigation. Presumably they must have some support for this somewhere.
Can't think of anybody not enjoying Mourinho's demise at the moment, some of the players seem to have jacked it in. Clements doing well at Derby but managing one of the big clubs is a different matter, I think Chelsea could do worse than Pardew.
The Premier League is wide open this year though. There isn't a good team in it, and moderate teams all have a sprinkling of good players. It will all become clearer on 1st February when the transfer window closes.
I've already lost money (probably) backing West Ham to go down, but now fancy Swansea to drop and half believe that this is Arsenal's year.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/10/27/so-what-now-for-the-house-of-lords/