h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Cool, LOTR country! But I bet you hear that all the time, hey?

We do indeed - and the LOTR films are among the best ever made!

Yes alot - and soon Mount Fuji in the movie "Last Samuri" (Tom Cruise) will be played by Mount Taranaki .

But back to it. How does it work in Scotland. Do you get two votes?

The principle of PR is that the number of candidates returned for each party is, as far as possible, the nearest integer to that needed to represent the proportion of votes gained by that party. One usually finds, however, that the chosen algorithm tends to under-represent the smaller parties. I don't know if this is the case in Scotland, but I suspect it is. Does anyone know the algorithm?

Returning to the Iraqi problem, for the coalition not to have handed the administration of Iraq to the UN was clearly a recipe for (further)disaster. This clearly shows (in case there was any doubt) that the desire of Blair & Bush to ensure that any future Iraqi government is suitably tailored to their needs overrides their proclaimed desire for freedom for the Iraqi people.

For some reason the US (in particular) seems to want to blame the present unrest on Ba'ath party remnants, despite the fact that, when the protesters are interviewed, they invariably turn out to be Shia Moslems.

Dry.

What I'm after is a Scott version of this
http://www.elections.org.nz/elections/esyst/govt_elect.html

Dryopithecus, I agree with you on the Iraq problem. If the UN were there to form government then the US would not get an easy influenced push-over government.

Thanks, Apparïtïon, I've had a look at that URL, which is fairly informative.

The first point is that, given there are 120 seats, any party that gains more than one 120th of the party votes should get a seat, but the limit is set at 5%, which is enough to qualify the party for 6 seats. The usual excuse is that minority parties represent undesirable extreme views, but this isn't necessarily so, and cutting these out accumulates more seats for the other parties.

Next, we are told that each party's share of the total 120 seats will be "close to its share of all the Party Votes cast for parties that cross the threshold" but, without knowing precisely what the Sainte-Laguë mathematical formula is, we can't know what happens to the inevitable fractions of seats.

Having said that, I would definitely prefer the NZ system to our FPP system or to some other so-called PR systems. Also, your web-site is pretty good & I'd like to see something similar not only for the Scottish parliament but also for the UK voting system for the European Parliament.

Dry.

The reason they don't exactly match is because there are 69 eletorate seats out of the 120 total seats. If you are a small party it is easier to win one electorate seat(you can bring a list MP with you). There is a party in government now with only two seats and it's part of the ruling coalition.

Let's hope someone out there has the links for the Scottish parliament, the UK voting system and the European Parliament (I bet the Italains aren't up to talking about it at the moment).

Are you saying that, in NZ, the 5% rule doesn't apply if you already have one or more electorate seats?

The UK parliament elections are still first past the post.

Dry.

>>For some reason the US (in particular) seems to want to blame the present unrest on Ba'ath party remnants, despite the fact that, when the protesters are interviewed, they invariably turn out to be Shia Moslems.<<
Self delusion seems to be a very important part of the Bush'n'Blair way of thinking about Iraq.
I noted in my local Sunday paper that Bush had declared the war back on, but I haven't heard anything more about it, and our local Sunday paper is not the most reliable source...

The poor Italians! I heard on the World Service on one night last week (Wednesday?) Berlusconi's remark described as 'the fastest political suicide on record'

"Are you saying that, in NZ, the 5% rule doesn't apply if you already have one or more electorate seats?"

Exactly, the threshold is 5% of party votes *or* an electorate seat. The party or "list MPs" account for 59 seats out of the 120 seat parliament. I can't remember the equation but that's why the minimum for party votes alone is 5%.

Since the change from FPP. It's meant that local MPs have had to get off their ar5es and do for their electorate.

----------------

According to BBC world(TV), Berlusconi own much of the media in Italy and that made Italians even more anoyed at his performance or under-reported lack of it.

Better still, he had recently passed a law to exempt *him personally* from prosecution for fraud!

gee, replace "fraud" with "war crimes", replace "him" with "countrymen" and add the word "forign". Presto, you have the current US administration.

Good point, Apparition! I hadn't (but should have) thought of that!

Fairly - I do recall either Andrew Jackson or Thomas Jefferson proposing the idea of an electoral college to Congress... but I can't find hide or hair of it online. Guess I'll have to dig up my college textbooks...

I did find this, which explains (at least to me) my confusion. Al Gore's not the only victim of the electoral college.
http://www.avagara.com/e_c/ec_1824.htm

Apparition - I like that system better - giving *everybody* a little money is better than only funding the two major parties.

Being that you're not right wing, I thought you might. It's an equality thing.

Look at this everyone.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3054549.stm

With this in mind, how can anyone now doubt that the invasion of Iraq was founded on lies and wishful thinking? The implications for the future are truly scary. If the US and its lapdogs can do this to Iraq, will your country be next?

The only mystery remaining is that of Tony Blair's thinking. Despite everything, Blair still believes that the invasion was justified and that weapons will be found.

Does he also believe in feng-shui and fairies at the bottom of his garden?

Is he so stupid as to be thoroughly hypotised and corrupted by Bush?

Is he as evil as Bush and complicit in the deceptions from the start?

Does he know something that the rest of the world doesn't? If so why hasn't he made it public? (It would certainly provide some vindication and help to restore his shattered reputation.)

Does Tony Blair only remain prime-minister because there's no effective opposition in Britain? Or is he confident in keeping his job because Bush has promised him that the votes in the next British general election will be sent to Florida to be counted?

One thing's for certain. The coalition forces in Iraq are not liberators, they're malevolent invaders and occupyers. Empire builders, by force.

And you thought you lived in an enlightened age.

" the votes in the next British general election will be sent to Florida to be counted?"

You're telling me there aren't fairies at the bottom of my garden? They're wearing pink plastic sunglasses, talking with a lisp, and listening to Broadway - I thought for sure... ah well.

Yup. The more objective news sources, like the BBC, are saying there's no real evidence of WMD in Iraq - something we've all known for a while. And everybody except for Fox News (I've got to get one of those shirts!) is saying there's some suspicious behavior going on.

What I don't get is Bush and Blair's refusal to admit that they lied. It gets more embarrassing by the minute!

I love the fact that the US have admitted they were wrong on some things - fair enough, but to blame it on 'faulty UK intelligence'?