A hung parliament: what is it?

[ZemmamasBarnet]

I don't understand politics.

I don't understand this "hung" notion either.

How can a party (in this case, Conservative) get more votes than any other party but they don't win?

To me, it's like Hibs winning 3-1 and not getting the three points because they didn't win 6-1.

Is it because it's not a simple two horse race (although, it is really)?

What does the majority need to be and why is getting more votes than anyone else not enough?

 

[Dub]

I don't understand politics.

I don't understand this "hung" notion either.

How can a party (in this case, Conservative) get more votes than any other party but they don't win?

To me, it's like Hibs winning 3-1 and not getting the three points because they didn't win 6-1.
Is it because it's not a simple two horse race (although, it is really)?

What does the majority need to be and why is getting more votes than anyone else not enough?

I like the analogy although strictly speaking its not correct. If we went into the game knowing we had to win 6-1 to get the 3 points it would be more apt but in footie you only need to win to get the points.

In westminster elections you need to get to a required number of seats [326] to have the majority and take your place in government. Any less than that and the incumbent PM gets first dibs on making a pact with another party to remain in number 10. In this case then Brown could make a pact with the libdems and that would give him enough MPs to form a "stable" government. If he cannot do that then the actual election winners get their go and Brown would resign in favour of Cameron.

It does seem odd though that you can 'win' and 'lose' all in the same election and I understand the tories are whining about the fact their man isnt automatically the PM. However, they did the same in '74 I think it was when [and this is where I get foggy] Ted Heath kept Harold Wilson out of number 10 by the same [legitimate] tactic.

Any clearer?


Thought not

 

[Smurf]

There are 650 members of Parliament. You need more than half at 326 to have an overall majority. The number of seats held by any respective party is never proportianal to the percentage of votes got. The system is wholly undemocratic.
(Posted fae ma mobile fone)

 

[ZemmamasBarnet]

There are 650 members of Parliament. You need more than half at 326 to have an overall majority. The number of seats held by any respective party is never proportianal to the percentage of votes got. The system is wholly undemocratic.
(Posted fae ma mobile fone)

Ahhhhhhhhh, it's like the wools been pulled from my eyes.

Politics is (or is it politics are?) still a pile of shite though.

 

[CFCabbage]

In this case then Brown could make a pact with the libdems and that would give him enough MPs to form a "stable" government. How exactly are those MPs delivered to the incumbent govt do they sign to promise to vote with the govt?
(Posted fae ma mobile fone)

 

[Smurf]

Ahhhhhhhhh, it's like the wools been pulled from my eyes.

Politics is (or is it politics are?) still a pile of shite though.

Party politics yes but IMO saying that about politics is silly!
(Posted fae ma mobile fone)

 

[Hampden_Hibby]

Tennis is equally as stupid.

I could beat you 0-6 0-6 7-6 7-6 6-4

I won 20 games.

You won 28 games.

It's not the games you win - it's the winning margin in each set that makes a mockery of things.

Same with parliamentary seats. A small winning margin is equally rewarded with just one MP as is a big winning margin.

 

[egb_hibs]

In this case then Brown could make a pact with the libdems and that would give him enough MPs to form a "stable" government. How exactly are those MPs delivered to the incumbent govt do they sign to promise to vote with the govt?
(Posted fae ma mobile fone)

No he could not; labour seats plus libdem seats do not total up to a majority.