[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I doubt anyone thinks the Tories had over 50% of the vote but national vote share is and always has been irrelevant in our system - this ain't the USA after all. What the Tories did do is win the individual contest in 331 out of 650 seats so it is true to say that over 50% of constituencies wanted to be represented by a Tory MP.

I think you'd probably be surprised, I talked to a lot of people, even vaguely interested people, about the process over the last couple of weeks while taking bets and trying to explain the odds, and then also explaining the result. Many people are simply baffled by a lot of it. Most didn't understand the concept of a "minority" government at all, for example, and certainly couldn't get their heads around the fact that at one point Ed Miliband was favourite to "be the next PM" while the conservatives have been 1/5 (a relative certainty) to "win the most seats" for months, and "win the most votes" has hovered around evens for both.

These aren't "thick" people, just average people who don't have any real interest in the process until the day of the election itself. It's quite worrying, when you think about it. I mean, what even is "democracy" if huge chunks of the people voting don't understand the process?

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think you'd probably be surprised, I talked to a lot of people, even vaguely interested people, about the process over the last couple of weeks while taking bets and trying to explain the odds, and then also explaining the result. Many people are simply baffled by a lot of it. Most didn't understand the concept of a "minority" government at all, for example, and certainly couldn't get their heads around the fact that at one point Ed Miliband was favourite to "be the next PM" while the conservatives have been 1/5 (a relative certainty) to "win the most seats" for months, and "win the most votes" has hovered around evens for both.

These aren't "thick" people, just average people who don't have any real interest in the process until the day of the election itself. It's quite worrying, when you think about it. I mean, what even is "democracy" if huge chunks of the people voting don't understand the process?

then its their responsibility to understand it surely?

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

then its their responsibility to understand it surely?

That's a very easy answer but I'd suggest that it doesn't really matter whose responsibility it is, only that it is the case. People are lazy, mostly disinterested, not politically engaged and have the wrong idea about the system and it ends up acting as "natural propaganda". That is to say... Someone believes a majority means more than half of the country voted that way, we now have a majority Tory government, that person now believes that more than 50% of people voted Tory, and they then think "well they can't be that bad if more than half the country wants it".

The basics should be taught in schools from age 14 upwards. It seems fairly obvious that this basic understanding should be ensured. But the establishment actually benefits from ignorance, so they're happy to let it remain vague and convoluted.

[Livia]

I learned the basics of voting and of government when I was at school. Most people I know have a decent grasp on it. We've had this conversation before TS, but I have faith in the British public, I don't assume they're a bit dim and don't know what they're doing because as far as I can see people generally have a decent grasp on what's going on.

[MTVN]

Like with voting I do think people have a responsibility to engage with politics themselves as well. All very well to say people are disillusioned etc. but they also have more opportunities to engage with politics than ever before, politicians are more accountable now, there's much wider availability of news and opinion, the public get to see more of their workings etc. There's nowhere near the same bubble around Westminster as there used to be

[bitontheslide]

Someone pointed out on QT last night that the 4 million ukip voters had an opportunity along with the lib dems and the greens, to change the voting system when it was put to a public vote. The public said no ... keep it as it is. People can't just engage in politics when they feel like it, it has to be a commitment.

[Cherie]

Most people have a grasp on it. Most know if they are in a safe or marginal seat and if their vote is likely to make a difference, though that was turned on it's head in many areas this time, if we only voted because we knew our candidate was a shoe many would stay at home.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

yes but they spread themselves too thin. Farage may have won if he had spent his money/time in one geographical area

I know what you are saying but I doubt that would have done the party any favours

[Kizzy]

How did Iain duncan smith win his seat back...he's being prosecuted for human rights violations isn't he?

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That's a very easy answer but I'd suggest that it doesn't really matter whose responsibility it is, only that it is the case. People are lazy, mostly disinterested, not politically engaged and have the wrong idea about the system and it ends up acting as "natural propaganda". That is to say... Someone believes a majority means more than half of the country voted that way, we now have a majority Tory government, that person now believes that more than 50% of people voted Tory, and they then think "well they can't be that bad if more than half the country wants it".

The basics should be taught in schools from age 14 upwards. It seems fairly obvious that this basic understanding should be ensured. But the establishment actually benefits from ignorance, so they're happy to let it remain vague and convoluted.

I agree.I'm 33 and i feel i'm only just at the point now that i really understand it.Mainly due to a lack of interest until 2010.I knew abit and i used to vote but i really did'nt immerse myself in the facts until the last GE.As far as i remember i did'nt learn about the voting system in school and the only politics i learned were the politics of the past in history.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by EyeballPaul

I agree.I'm 33 and i feel i'm only just at the point now that i really understand it.Mainly due to a lack of interest until 2010.I knew abit and i used to vote but i really did'nt immerse myself in the facts until the last GE.As far as i remember i did'nt learn about the voting system in school and the only politics i learned were the politics of the past in history.

Originally Posted by Livia

I learned the basics of voting and of government when I was at school. Most people I know have a decent grasp on it. We've had this conversation before TS, but I have faith in the British public, I don't assume they're a bit dim and don't know what they're doing because as far as I can see people generally have a decent grasp on what's going on.

And as before Livia, I maintain my suspicion that you run in politically active circles and more importantly in the City. It's a world of its own. I live in a world where I have a coworker who didn't know what SNP stood for and kept referring to the Conservatives as the "Conservatories". I actually thought she was just making a play on the word with "Tories" but no; she thought that's what they were called.

It's really not that unusual. Some find it confusing, some find it boring, others just find it too depressing to think about (and I sort of understand that last stance) but it's fairly evident that a huge number of people have no interest at all, and even those who do have a passing interest, a large number don't fully understand the process.

I challenge you to quiz some random people in the street (normal ones, not professionals who will be up on politics) and ask them to explain the concepts of FPTP, Alternate Vote, and Proportional Representation. If you had a pound for the number of blank stares you would get, and another for the number of people who would get it wrong...

Also, as with Eyeball above, modern politics was not taught at all at my high school unless you opted to take Social Studies, which I have to say, was not a very popular choice, with most opting for History or Geography instead. I think there was a class of around 27 in my year, out of a year group of nearly 160 pupils.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

And as before Livia, I maintain my suspicion that you run in politically active circles and more importantly in the City. It's a world of its own. I live in a world where I have a coworker who didn't know what SNP stood for and kept referring to the Conservatives as the "Conservatories". I actually thought she was just making a play on the word with "Tories" but no; she thought that's what they were called.

And these people understand betting odds?

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by EyeballPaul

And these people understand betting odds?

Worryingly, not always