UKC

Is there something wrong with our election system when we have the local results as shown below yet, were governed by the Conservatives?

Labour 802
Cons 482
Lib Dem 177
Ukip 28

Nice to see it wasn't the disaster predicted / hoped for, for JC

In reply to krikoman:

These are local election results, they have no bearing on who we are "governed by "?

In reply to Big Ger:
Why were we being told it was such a big deal for JC before the votes, if it's nowt to do with who governs us? Seems to me you can't have it both ways.

Doesn't it show peoples preferences?

I'm f*cked either way, where I live is so Conservative they'd vote for a squirrel with a hat on, as long as they thought is was a Conservative squirrel.

I feel impotent, and it not the first time I've felt this way.

In reply to krikoman:



Viagra????

In reply to Big Ger:

Can we change Governed by to -- the people we have 'chosen' to run our affairs for us

In reply to krikoman:

Well it depends how you look at it, Labour have lost seats and the conservatives have gained them, I wouldn't really call that progress for JC half way through a 2nd term of conservative rule after many many years of cuts with doctors and all the rest of it striking.

It wasn't as bad as it could have been for Labour and that seems to count as good news for them these days. But in reality given the circumstances anything less than significant Labour gains should been seen as a failure for Corbyn.

In reply to Gone for good:


I can't get then in; the holes too small.

In reply to Name Changed 34:


I didn't choose them though, so how does that fit? Surely I'm governed by what other people chose for me. Which is one of the points I'm making, where I live means I have no effect. So I'm effectively disenfranchised from from the whole process.

In reply to krikoman:

I didn't choose them though

You were part of the process that chose them. It's called Democracy...

In reply to Lord_ash2000:



But BigGer seems to think this "These are local election results, they have no bearing on who we are "governed by "?" Is he wrong?

So why should it matter?

And if what you're saying is correct, which I tend to agree with, then why is there such a massive difference in councillor numbers nearly 2:1 for Labour.

And before someone's says, "yes but they are local elections" I understand the subtly of it, but it's not very likely that you'll get a Conservative voter (nationality election) voting for a Labour council. I realise that this might and does happen to an extent but is it enough to account for a 2:1 difference?

In reply to FactorXXX:



Was I, or did I just not bother, because what's the point?

Or did it make any difference what I did?

How do you account for the difference between number of counsellors between parties is this not more democratic, than the national elections?

In reply to krikoman:

Seems these election results are pretty neutral really, in the sense that they could be spun in multiple different ways depending on who you're asking for an opinion.

Glad it wasn't the predicted disaster for Labour

In reply to krikoman:

More concerning is the First Pass the Post system.....for example see below from 2015 elections:

Time we moved to proportional representation rather than the joke which is the current system - acknowledging that this could have some downsides....Conservative/UKIP coalition for example, but people might actually vote more sensible/less as a protest if they thought it might count.

Seats

Conservative (331) = 53%
Labour (232) = 37%
UKIP (1) 0%
Liberal Democrat (8) 1%
Scottish National Party (56) 9%
Green Party (1) 0%

Votes Cast

Conservative (11,334,576) 38%
Labour (9,347,304 ) 32%
UKIP (3,881,099) 13%
Liberal Democrat (2,415,862) 8%
Scottish National Party (1,454,436) 5%
Green Party (1,157,613) 4%

In reply to Trevers:
Predicted disaster by.. the newspapers? I am relieved that they are consistent in their accurate and factual reporting across the board Had they been right I may have had to start believing them when they wrote about stuff I know

Cheers

Toby

In reply to krikoman:

Looks to me, without looking too closely, Conservatives may have lost out to UKIP and Labour to LibDem.

Impact? People don't have faith in either of the big two parties. Maybe when it comes to the general election less people vote UKIP.

In reply to krikoman:



It shows preferences in those areas where there were elections, but because local elections are held on a rolling basis around England, it's well-nigh impossible to make any useful extrapolations for national general election results.

It's also the case that local results are often quite different to national results - people are voting for different things.

In reply to krikoman:

Generally speaking, in my opinion, the reality is that the differences between the parties who we vote for is marginal as none of them really have the power (mechanisms) or bravery to be significantly different or make any fundamental changes to anything whilst we are slaves to the economic growth model.

In reply to krikoman:

see http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=640920

(why start a 2nd thread on the same subject ?)

In reply to krikoman:

No for all the reasons above but mainly because a disproportionate number of Labour seats were contested, so there will be a disproportionate number of Labour wins, even the do badly overall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_Un...

In reply to krikoman:



The way I see it is that currently;
- Local elections most voters prefer a more caring party and can vote without paying too much attention to tax (i.e having to pay for things)
- National elections most voters become concerned about how much they might be taxed (i.e. I don't want to pay less).

In reply to MG:



Ah! that makes more sense then I thought it was country wide, shows how much I know.

Nice one.

In reply to Doug:


Because I didn't see it and by the time I started this one 3 hours after the last comment on the other thread it wasn't on my list.

Thanks for your contribution though.

Why didn't you tell me 3:30 hours ago?

In reply to DancingOnRock:


I'd have put that the other way, Labour lost to UKIP, Tories to Lib Dem.

In reply to krikoman:



This confused the hell out of me too!

In reply to krikoman:


Be patient , things can change.
In Scotland they USED to say you could put a red coat on a ( Labour) donkey and they would vote for it.
Now Labour are all but wiped out in Scotland, they used to say the Tories were an endangered species up here, now it's Labour.

Having said that , the Tories have been honest enough to to accept that many of those that just voted for them, are not real Tories, but disenchanted Labour supporters who just wanted anyone, but the SNP .

In reply to Trevers:


Glad I'm not the only one.