Sentences with phrase «larger electoral vote»

Not exact matches

If the electoral districts are large enough (possibly nationwide), a party does get a weight in parliament roughly equivalent to the number of votes they received in the election.

Labour received 300,000 fewer votes than the Conservatives but because of Britain's controversial electoral geography Labour became the largest party in the House of Commons.

But in terms of the Conservative electoral coalition, Brexit has produced a less ambiguous effect: the party has absorbed a large portion of the former UKIP vote, as voters on the authoritarian side of the political spectrum have migrated, or returned, to a Conservative Party that now promises concrete, credible action to regain control of the borders.

In this form, the plurality principle can be problematic and ambiguous given the disproportionality of the UK's first - past - the - post electoral system, as a result of which the party with the largest number of seats may be different from the party which wins most votes.

Geography will have a very significant impact here, while first past the post electoral systems, such as the one used in the United Kingdom, will always act to the advantage of the largest parties and will significantly disadvantage the smaller parties, unless their votes are strongly clustered in a specific geographical region — e.g. Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

The Lib Dems and their Liberal and SDP predecessors have suffered especially, [143] particularly in the 1980s when their electoral support was greatest while the disparity between the votes and the number of MPs returned to parliament was significantly large.

FPTP can produce an electoral result where the party that «wins» is not the party to win the largest number of votes in the election.

The Minneapolis rally with Mitt Romney's vice presidential running mate drew an impressive and enthusiastic crowd — it was one of Ryan's largest solo events since he joined the ticket — gives Republicans anecdotal evidence that their map to 270 electoral votes could be expanding.

If the bill does manage to pass, it would be the biggest victory for the National Popular Vote movement to date, not only because New York, with its 29 electoral votes, would represent the largest signatory of the compact so far, but also because of the publicity it would lend to a movement that still flies largely under the radar.

As such, in elections where a large portion of electorate isn't terribly inspired by either candidates, and mostly votes for «lesser of two evils» in current FPTP, the two major party candidates just might accrue enough down - votes that a 3rd party candidate who isn't nearly as disliked will, on balance, win over both of them (or at the very least, acquire more than the abysmal 4 % combined popular vote and 0 electoral vote like 2016 US presidential elections, despite 3rd party candidates combined likely being preferred by 40 % of electorate, as a low bound).

For a sufficiently informed electoral, this voting scheme should make a plurality victory by an extremist less likely, since to guarantee a victory the candidate needs a larger proportion of positive voters to counteract negative voters who don't have strong views between the moderates.

One example where this was particularly obvious was the 2016 Presidential election, where one candidate won one large state by such a massive margin, and lost many smaller states by slivers of margins, that one single state by itself caused the electoral college result to differ from the popular vote (the state was California - if add up the remaining 49 states and DC, the other candidate comfortably won the popular vote as well as the electoral college).

The largest number ever was sixty - three, but that was because Horace Greeley died after the election but before the electoral college voted.

The 2011 parliamentary vote was followed by anti-government street protests across Russia, sparked by what was widely perceived to have been large - scale electoral fraud: a rigged election in favour of United Russia.

Although Labour losses in Scotland are likely to undo some of the pro-Labour bias in the electoral system and so reduce the chances that the party will emerge largest on seats but not votes, that scenario is still possible.

Under this fourth consequence of the possible electoral arithmetic, policy for non-Scottish areas of the country would be partially formed by a party that has never received a single vote in those areas, is completely unaccountable to the electorate and has an electoral incentive in ensuring that another part of the country, Scotland, gets as large a slice of the national budget as possible.

Reacting in large part to Russian efforts to hack the presidential election last year, a growing number of states are upgrading electoral databases and voting machines, and even adding cybersecurity experts to their election teams.

Under the first past the post electoral system, many Labour votes were «wasted» as part of large majorities for MPs in safe seats rather than into holding onto marginal seats.

With its worst electoral performance since 1918, the Labour vote fell by over 3,000,000 votes from 1979 and this accounted for both a national swing of almost 4 % towards the Conservatives and their larger parliamentary majority of 144 seats, even though the Conservative Party's total vote fell by almost 700,000.

MUF received victory in only 4 of the contested 43 electoral constituencies despite its high vote share of 31 per cent (this means that its official vote in the Valley was larger than one - third).

Given the vagaries of the electoral system, an even smaller popular vote than this for Labour might return us as the largest party.