UKIP thread. I understand they won 12% of the total vote in 2015 but can some Bonglander explain to me exactly how they only have 1 seat in Parliament?
And why are they perceived as "radical-right" or "far-right extremists"? Aren't most of the supporters typically old white men who believe in traditional values? How "radical" or "extreme" can these people be?
>>70892516
Come on you faggots here's an actual politics thread and not a meme thread.
>>70892516
Wtf, it's like really early in the morning in the UK
They have one seat because you have to win the seats.
They aren't proportional based on popular vote.
Because our general election is essentially hundreds of separate local contests
National vote share is irrelevant in determining who wins seats
This video explains it better than I could:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I
>>70894466
That's retarded. Doesn't this essentially undermine the will of the people especially since they got third place with how much votes they had?
Like how did the SNP with so many seats with just 5% of the vote? Just because they do so well in Scotland pretty much?
>>70894681
Thank you Anon.
>>70892516
>can some Bonglander explain to me exactly how they only have 1 seat in Parliament?
I'll try. It's complicated.
We have constituencies - basically bits of land divided into an area, represented by a member of parliament - an MP. There are about 350 MPs ( I think). Also factor in the Scottish and Welsh and it gets even more confusing. (I'm Scottish living in England because gf and kids). I couldn't vote in the Scottish referendum, because I live in England.
We also have local councilors who administer local government, and members of the European Parliament. Also elections for police commissioners.
The voting system is called "first past the post", it means that whoever gets the most votes wins. It's not a good system, because some politician can get only 30% of the vote and win, because the vote will be split between other parties.
There are two main political parties - conservative and labour. UKIP is gaining popularity - I vote for them usually, but I voted green in a local election, because I like the candidate. She is very good for my area, even though I don't like the green party.
Most other European countries have proportional representation.
Conservatives and labour are cunts. I want UKIP to win, but it will be difficult.
I fucking don't understand it either. I just go and vote. To vote, you must be on the electoral register and have an address.
I hope I've helped. It's fucking complicated.
>>70894887
It's fucking ridiculous, mate. I live in Scotland which is extremely pro-SNP (which is a scummy party btw) so the votes of anyone that doesn't vote SNP don't matter as they wiped out by pro-SNP voters in the Scottish constituencies.
>>70894899
650 MPs, mate.
>>70894887
SNP were only standing in about 60 of the 650 constituencies so they won a very large share of all the possible votes they could have got whereas UKIP were standing in all 650 constituencies and got only slightly more votes
>>70893886
Yeah. It's just after 5am. But I suffer from insomnia.
Maybe Australians are awake.
I posted a reply to OP. I forgot to mention a few things. It's here:
>>70894899
>>70894899
So, essentially, who ever gets past a certain amount first wins? This is the "first past the post" meaning?
>>70895469
Ah, I see. So the SNP doesn't even bother with places outside of Scotland then? Whereas UKIP was on the ballot everywhere?
>>70895147
Yeah. I'm tired. I'll try not to mistype next time I post. Apologies. I fucked up.
>>70892516
Google first past the post elections.
It's retarded
>>70895939
> who ever gets past a certain amount first wins? This is the "first past the post" meaning?
Yes, just like in elections in the United States.
>>70895939
>So, essentially, who ever gets past a certain amount first wins? This is the "first past the post" meaning?
It's just whoever gets the most votes wins
>Ah, I see. So the SNP doesn't even bother with places outside of Scotland then? Whereas UKIP was on the ballot everywhere?
correct
>>70895939
3 areas
A B C
1 2 1
1 2 2
3 3 3
1=3 votes
2=3 votes
3=3 votes
But 1 wins area A
2 wins area B
And C is a draw
So 3 wins 0 seats despite having the same amount of votes
>>70896600
In the unlikely event of a draw I think they flip a coin
>>70895939
>who ever gets past a certain amount first wins?
Not quite. But basically true.
There is no set amount. It's whoever gets the most votes in an election.
Numbers of voters is irrelevant.
A win is gained if a political candidate gets just one vote more than another candidate.
For example, I could get 3,000 votes
you could get 2,999 votes
Mrs.Smith or Mr. Jones from round the corner could get 3,001 votes each, so he or she wins.
It's simple.
>>70896781
Well no shit retard, I was trying to show simply how amount of votes can still mean zero wins.
Did you notice that we don't have any constituency's named A B or C either faggot?
>>70892516
In the western world, any person or political party that wants to reduce immigration by at least 1 person is considered "far right" or "extreme right" by the Jewish media. Doesn't matter if that group is a far-left green party, that's just the way it is.
>>70896948
why so hostile?
anyway, UKIP proved themselves incapable of winning a majority in more than one constituency, that's a total failure, deal with it
Here's a quick run down, but >>70896600 pretty much nails it
We have 650 Constituencies in the UK. Each Constituency as 1 "Member of Parliament", or MP, as it's "governor".
Each time we have an election, we're actually voting for which MP we want to govern our constituency. The party with the most Constituencies, win the election, and their chosen candidate becomes the Priminister of our country. But here's the catch;
Only the MPs of the winning constituencies win and have a seat in Parliament. So if you have an Area, 37% Party A, 36% Party B, the winner of that area is Party A, their MP now "wins" that constituency, and thus, now has a seat in parliament.
In that example, despite UKIP getting 12% of the total vote, they only one 1 constituency, thus, they only have 1 MP or seat in Parliament. It's retarded as hell.
This system, or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting , is also why the Tories managed to win the election, despite having only 37% of the total UK vote. It's because they won more constituencies by a very slim margin.
>>70897187
Is there more of a movement towards UKIP in the UK now because of the recent attacks like Paris and Belgium?
>>70897670
Not massively and even if there was it wouldn't really matter since the election's not till 2020
The main issue and indication will be the referendum in June
I'd follow Brit/pol/ during 2014
fun times, the euro elections were hype
2015, not so much
England expects that every man will do his duty
>>70895939
This is literally how our elections work too dumbass
>>70900591
>>70900605
>>70900626
>>70900649
>>70899526
>tfw you woke up at 4 in the morning to find out Nigel Farage didn't win South Thanet
At least we have Trump now
>>70894681
Yep, with proportional represention we would have had a conservative/ukip/dup coalition. although if people had known their votes would have been proportionally counted the results may have been very different (i.e. more for smaller parties like UKIP and Greens). Still most likely a Conservative/UKIP coalition.
>>70897670
Not necessarily towards UKIP but towards leaving the EU. In recent weeks, as the campaigns for both leaving and remaining in the EU have begun, the polls are have shown LEAVE is even with REMAIN, whereas earlier in the year and in previous years REMAIN was leading quite easily.
Many major newspapers here are starting to pretty much campaign to leave and they tend to reflect results in elections.
>>70901045
>yfw trump's meme magic has a domino effect on elections in the UK
>UKIP win several seats in parliament and makes the UK great again
once the MOVEMENT starts, it can't stop
>>70894887
What annoys me more is that in the aftermath of the election David Cameron responded to calls for proportional representation by stating we already had a referendum on it and that the british public had voted no. He was referring to the referendum for AV (Alternative Vote) system in 2011, which is a rubbish voting system and nothing like PR.
>>70892516
We have the same FPtP system as you.
>>70900738
:^)
>>70900591
APRIL 19
>>70892516
It's because they don't have proportional representation and therefore hate democracy, much like you lot.
