Today, a lot more people did want Cameron and the Conservatives. Labours massive drop in popularity serves this fact. No. A lot more people want Tory over Labour. But if you count up the amount that DIDN'T want Tory, it comes to a far higher number than the ones who did. So you cannot use the phrase "a lot more people did want Cameron". The numbers do not lie.
The fact is, nobody won. And I'm now tired of hearing Tory supporters bitching that the system is broken because they got the most votes and didn't win. This is the same system they wanted to keep, to keep the Lib Dems out of contention. So how about they man the f**k up, and deal with it.
But Brown has not yet been voted for nor won, hence the unjust reasoning if he got to serve further and treated as a 'winner'. And it'd be justified putting Cameron in charge, a man who has also won no election? Brown has the legal right to govern until a coalition is formed or failing that a re-election is called, and a re-election can only be called if the 3 main parties are unable to find a solution. If the solution they find ends up with Lab/Lib, with Labour the dominant party then that is a legal and fair result, and Brown has the legal right to be Prime Minister until he or the party decides he should no longer be, and he has already said when the party has decided on a replacement, he will leave.
In a revoked voting system, I think the results will reflect this. Actually it woudn't. The First Past the Post system actually benefits the Tories the most out of the 3 possible systems which can be chosen. They got the most support from the papers, the most donations, had Brown on his knees ready to surrender, a system which benefited them, and they were still unable to pull off a victory.
First Past The Post
Tory: 307
Labour: 258
Lib: 57
Other: 28
Alternative Vote
Tory: 281
Labour: 262
Lib Dem: 79
Other: 28
Single Transferable Vote
Tory: 246
Labour: 207
Lib Dem: 162
Others: 35
The Tories offer was also far weaker than the Labour offer for the Lib Dems. The Tories offered a referendum on changing the voting system, which could fail quite badly, and probably will fail quite badly because the Tories would never actually vote through a system which equalised the playing field. However Labour offered to push that through Parliament (and it would have very little resistance in a Lib/Lab coalition because groups like the SNP and Lib Dem, who struggle for power want/need a new system) without sitting discussing it for months and ending up not doing it.
And Labour recognised that Brown was not popular with the population, the Lib Dems and the SNP and he has since offered his resignation.
What is utterly hilarious though is due to Nick Clegg being pretty damn good at what he does, David Cameron being pretty damn terrible at what he does, Gordon Brown being a bumbling buffoon, and a broken system, the Lib Dems have stumbled into an amazing position of power that could only happen in a fluke situation like this. And now the Tories are complaining it isn't fair. In any form of coalition the only people who will come out happy are Liberal Democrat supporters. Isn't it amazing how things go from fair to unfair the second the balance of power moves?
How many parties are there across european nations that work well with hung parliaments? Are they as diverse as here? I have no idea. What about numbers of main parties?Countries rattled off on Twitter which exist with a coalition government are as follows - Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Poland, Canada, Australia, Germany, Brazil, Portugal, New Zeland, Netherelands, Finland and some argue Belgium, but that is a unique situation apparently. I don't know much about these countries governments, but given how many of them there are and how they haven't yet collapsed into ruin, I'm going to think this coalition idea isn't as bad as The Sun makes it out to be. The rest of the world must be looking at us thinking, "What's all the fuss about? Get on with it!".
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.netSportsCarArchives.com