Looking at the results of 2012, assuming that the popular vote was unchanged, but that every congressional district voted according to the
party of its
member of Congress (not
entirely valid, but the best proxy I could come up
with)
To be sure, one should be cautious
with celebrating the recent expansion of
party membership as a sign that Labour has become the «first mass
party in the advanced capitalist world this century,» for if all it takes to count as a
party member is a payment of # 3, it is not
entirely clear why an increase in membership figures would be a reliable indicator of public support, let alone signalling increased support from the «communities that send Labour MPs to parliament.»