This is exemplified in Table 2 where a distribution of 57, 37 and 6 per cent in a state with 10
electoral votes translates into 6, 4 and 1 votes respectively.
Not exact matches
Gerrymandering is all about drawing
electoral boundaries such that the artifact of most
electoral systems (that one citizen's
vote doesn't
translate directly into
voting weight in parliament) can override the natural outcome of a
vote.
Data from British Election Study panel surveys shows that the main problem UKIP has faced in
translating its success from European Parliament elections to general elections has been retaining voters, whether because some UKIP voters only
vote UKIP at European Parliament elections in protest and the return to their «normal» party for general elections or because the nature of the British
electoral system incentivises voters to cast their
vote for one of the existing main parties rather than a new entrant.
Given how the First Past The Post
electoral system works, concentrated support can
translate into huge gains in seats (the PCs came third in the popular
vote — in fact, they almost came second — but a distant fifth by seat count, which is all that matters).
Although 40 per cent is regarded as the «election winning» mark, the weighting of the
electoral system means today's poll would result in a hung parliament if
translated into
votes.
A cynic might argue that with an
electoral system that
translated slightly less than 40 % of the popular
vote into a commanding majority in the Commons, the Liberals — in third place in the polls when they released their proposal — will rue having promised to replace first - past - the -
vote elections.
It is also becoming evident, on the basis of
votes cast, how skewed the
electoral system is: for the Conservatives, 2m more
votes than Labour
translates into 48 more Tory seats, while Labour's similar 2m
vote advantage over the Lib Dems means 200 more seats.