lundi 8 juin 2009


Some perspective on the BNP fiasco from
"BNP gained seats with fewer votes
In Yorkshire and the Humber, the BNP actually polled 6399 fewer votes than in 2004. In the North West, 2865 fewer people voted for the BNP this time than last. However, the BNP still won a seat in each of those regions.
The BNP has not gained many more recruits at all in 5 years, just solidified the ones it had already. Instead, what we saw was a huge drop in turnout and a large drop in support for Labour. These two factors together enabled the BNP to squeak in to win the final seat available in each region.
It was very close though.
In Yorkshire and the Humber, Labour needed its vote to hold up by 10,270 more votes to keep out the BNP. The Greens needed only 15,683 more votes to have come above BNP and get that final seat instead.
In the North West, it was really tight. If UKIP had received another 1200 votes, than they would have taken another seat instead of Nick Griffin. The Greens tactic of saying they were the ones who could beat the BNP in the NW almost worked: they were within 5000 votes of overtaking them and this winning that final seat.
Therefore, even within very large regions, the result can be very close and a few votes here and there really can make a difference. Unfortunately, people do not seem to have got that message: they stayed away rather than vote. They, and the parties who failed to mobilise them, should hopefully get the message from now on that voting in proportional elections is not just important, it can easily effect the whole result, no matter where in the region you live."

For dickheads to prosper, what needs to happen is for good people not to do enough. But then again, we did vote New Labour once and look where it got us. It'll take more than voting. . .