Talk:2005 United Kingdom general election/Archive 2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The British National Party needs to be added to the table!! They may be scum but they're still a part of the election. 11:51, 2005 May 05
- Agreed. Unfortunately in the interests of balance and all that...
Widely varying numbers
Totalling up the number of candidates from each party and the independents gives 3062, while the Candidates by Party source says there are 3,376 people standing for MP. The figures on the page for some parties (notably the three main parties) are also about 30 less than on this page. I know some are coalitions (e.g. Labour, Lab+Coop), but it still doesn't appear to add up. Am I just getting confused over the numbers here? Talrias (t | e | c) 20:05, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The problem is that there's no authoritative list of candidates. The Press Association has a list but it has many omissions. I wouldn't get hung up about it just yet - it will sort itself out when the results are declared. Dbiv 21:31, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Public targets
The Liberal Democrats have made a point of publicly targeting the top brass of the Toty party (and also, but to a lesser extent, the Labour party) in a so-called "decapitation" strategy. The article makes no mention of this, though. — miguel
- I rather thought they were still denying it publicly as in this Scotsman report. Do you have an offical LD source? --Cavrdg 11:40, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
- (love the tyop btw) but the decapitation of the "Toty" party isn't an official target, just a "very nice if it happens" concept. --Vamp:Willow 11:55, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
- You're both right (also from The Scotsman), I guess it is hard to tell from media reports what is official policy, what is unofficial policy, and what is "very nice if it happened".
- In any case, has "decapitation" been attempted before, or is it supposed to be "unsportmanlike" or something like that? — Miguel 18:51, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
- I don't see how it's unsportsmanlike. All parties have limited campaign resources. If the lib dems decide it's good strategy to aim for more visible targets, then it's their right. I doubt they use the word 'decapitation' themselves, though.--Fangz 19:53, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
- I agree there's nothing wrong with "decapitation", but sometimes politics is considered "a gentlemen's game" or nonsense like that, and there may be unwritten rules about what is and is not appropriate. I am just asking whether that is the case in Britain. — Miguel 20:15, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
Operation Christian Vote
The results table doesn't include an entry for Operation Christian Vote. I understand that they're fielding several hundred candidates (enough to get a party-political broadcast, and certainly more than Vanitas). I doubt they'll get a huge vote, but it would be nice to have them, if only for the historical record. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 14:49, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
- You understand wrongly. Operation Christian Vote is fielding 10 candidates only, all of them in Scotland. This puts them over the threshold for a party election broadcast in Scotland only. Dbiv 15:57, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
- See List of parties contesting the UK general election, 2005. I'd suggest adding the Socialist Labour Party (UK) as well and perhaps the Socialist Green Unity Coalition.
Why is Labour purple?
and not red? 66.92.237.111 00:38, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- Looks red to me UKIO is purple, --SqueakBox 00:42, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
Political Parties
I have a few questions. One, how can you find a list of every party that ran in this election. Though there are many, many obscure parties that ran in this election, I think they deserve some type of mention.
Two, and this is more of a political question, how can you even form a political party over there? Is it very easier than setting up a party in the US? Thanks. Zscout370 (talk) 01:57, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
I doubt whether you could find out about small parties except through trawling through the press. how difficult is setting up a party in the States. To stand in UK you have to get a certain small number of signatures and pay your deposit, --SqueakBox 02:05, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
- Well, this process seems a lot easier, though it will be close to impossible to get on the ballot in the States if your not with either the Democrats or Republicans. Plus, only 951 USD. Man, if you do some subtle fundraisers and saving, I can get on the ballot! Though, I do need Commonwealth citizenship (I am an American) and I am only 18. But thanks for telling me, Squeak. Zscout370 (talk) 02:27, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- Anyone can get on the ballot, because you can stand as an independent without the support of a political party, and many people do just that. The nomination process is not very difficult. I don't think you need too many people to support you. The only real hurdle is the deposit, and that isn't a huge amount of money either. Nearly all the high-profile politicians have either single-issue campaigners or frivolous comedy parties standing against them. Of course this is all for a single constituency. To put up a candidate in every seat in the country you'll need hundreds of thousands of pounds for all the deposits, and that's before you've even got round to doing any proper campaigning. — Trilobite (Talk) 04:11, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- It's not that hard to get on the ballot in the U.S. A handful of states have tough signature requirements, but most are pretty lax. When I voted last year, there were about 10 presidential candidates on the ballot. The tougher thing is getting the public to actually pay attention to your platform. Funnyhat 00:02, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- You need the signature of 10 electors registered in the constituency, plus the £500 deposit. Registration can be as late as 2 weeks before polling day. [1] See also my recent addition to Elections in the United Kingdom. Rd232 11:27, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- AFAIK, it isn't that hard to get on the ballot in the US, either. But as in the UK, if you're not a candidate for a major party, you need special circumstances to stand a chance of winning. And getting to be a candidate for a major party is hard, because there's a very limited number of winnable seats for each party, and (cynicism) lots of people desperate to get on TV. Rd232 11:30, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
NORTHERN IRELAND
Why are the Northern Ireland results not in while the rest of the results are in? I'm interested in how Sinn Fein did. Votail Sinn Fein!!
- The Northern Ireland results aren't announced until the afternoon/evening on the day following the election. Mallocks 11:12, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- The count doesn't begin until the start of the following morning. See this BBC News story for instance. There are recent precedents - in 1992 if I remember correctly the four Belfast seats and North Down counted on the night, as did the by-elections in North Down (1995) and South Antrim (2000). There may be pressure for this to change. Timrollpickering 11:20, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
Why aren't the UUP and the SDLP listed? john k 17:44, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
sugestion for colours...
The party colour-space can get a bit crowded, and most partys have more than one colour associated with them.
I think the tables would be easier to read, and nicer if we did something like this:
| ID | Constituency | Winner | Second place | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aberavon | Labour (-3.0%) | Liberal Democrat (+4.0%) | |
| 9 | Alyn and Deeside | Labour (-3.5%) | Conservative (-1.1%) | |
| 70 | Blaenau Gwent | Independent (+58.2%) | Labour (-39.7%) | |
| 88 | Brecon and Radnorshire | Liberal Democrat (+8.0%) | Conservative (-0.2%) |
Note that this also makes the Conservative vote easy to read; black-on-blue is not a good contrast.
If there is support for this, I can write a Perl program to put in the colors automatically without too many problems.
WikianJim 11:45, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm moving this discussion to wikinews:Talk:Results_of_2005_United_Kingdom_General_Election - I'll reproduce the comment there.
This looks good. john k 17:52, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Time of last seat?
Excluding Staffordshire South, I know the last seat to be declared was Mid Ulster (Martin MCGuinness, Sinn Fein). However, what time was it declared? The latest possible is Saturday, 7 May, 2005, 16:14 UK (dateline of a BBC story mentioning this). tompw 16:17, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- Harlow was the last seat, declared on Saturday due to another recount and tired counters. However I'm not sure what time it was. Timrollpickering 16:27, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- About 11am, I think; haven't found an exact time, but 11-11.30 looks likely. (BBC results updated 11.31). Shimgray 16:35, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- Harlow declared at 11:30 exactly. Dbiv 17:38, 7 May 2005 (UTC)