Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Watching the news. It is ridiculous that an apparently very expensive counting system for London takes longer than doing it by hand, shows up the electronic results to everyone at the count as it proceeds but prevents an 'official' announcement of what is clearly a decisive win for Boris driven by the suburbs even though Ken's absolute vote has risen. A warning for the coming general election, the Conservatives spent their money well in the suburbs and this suggests that their targeting of the marginals will have a big impact on the House of Commons whenever the election is called.
London's vote
This article is published by , and openDemocracy.net under a Creative Commons licence. You may republish it without needing further permission, with attribution for non-commercial purposes following these guidelines. These rules apply to one-off or infrequent use. For all re-print, syndication and educational use please see read our republishing guidelines or contact us. Some articles on this site are published under different terms. No images on the site or in articles may be re-used without permission unless specifically licensed under Creative Commons.
Comments
Ray: little brokering was needed. Boris's overall majority was 140,000 with first and second votes combined. In "gin and jag" Bexley and Bromley Boris got a first vote majority of over 80,000, ie more than half his majority, thanks to Tory focus on the suburban turnout. See Boulton's analysis: http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/05/joke-boris-has.html
'A warning for the coming general election, the Conservatives spent their money well in the suburbs and this suggests that their targeting of the marginals will have a big impact on the House of Commons whenever the election is called.'
I doubt it - Tory voters are more likely than Labour voters to turn out already. There aren't that many additional voters to get to the polling stations. London-wide elections were anomalous in this, as apparently (and I don't have the figures, so correct me if I'm wrong) suburban voters perceived that the mayor and assembly concentrated only on central London, and were therefore irrelevant to them, so they didn't vote. 'Correcting' this might well have granted Boris victory, but I don't see how it could be repeated in a general election.
Count yourselves lucky that you didn't have a fiasco like the last Scottish election.
"this suggests that their targeting of the marginals will have a big impact on the House of Commons whenever the election is called."
Not sure about this - this is a PR vote, whereas the marginals will be decided by FPTP.
In a PR election like this one, you have to do a lot of brokering, trying to get people's second vote etc, whereas in FPTP, that counts for nothing.
Post new comment