PoliticsSeptember 28, 2005 12:00 pm
The Conservative Party voting system is quite simple. MPs vote for their preferred candidate and the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Repeat until there are just two candidates left. At that point, all Party members vote for their preferred candidate, the winner becoming party leader.
Is it possible for the Conservative Party’s conservative wing (supporters of David Davis and Liam Fox, for example) to vote tactically so that Ken Clarke does not make it to the final two?
Maybe the excess Davis vote can ensure that Fox is never the last-placed candidate by voting for him. When we get to, say, three remaining candidates could that knock Mr Clarke out?
Could they arrange it so that the final battle is between Mr Fox and Mr Davis?
I’m not a member (steady) so it’s nothing to do with me, nonetheless it does strike me as a daft system. Why not just have the membership vote for their preferred choice from amongst all the candidates instead of have the MPs whittle them down with all the maschinations that involves. It might be a good use for Approval Voting.
Comment by Mark Holland — September 28, 2005 @ 5:24 pm
The weakness of the current system was exposed at the last leadership election when 3 candidates
all recevied roughly the same number of MP’s votes and one had to drop out.
Perhaps a preferential voting system would be better, where party members indicate a first, second, third preference etc and the bottom candidate drops out until one candidate obtains more then 50% of the vote. MP’s would exercise their vote as party members.
However, one could say this would risk electing someone MP’s didn’t want. Some weighting meccanism could be built into the system if this was thought a problem.
Comment by The Fog is Clearing — September 28, 2005 @ 7:46 pm
One of the first things Ken said was that he would be happy to lead the party if it was governable. I’m sure Ken will take the big hint and depart without waiting to lose to guys who were using potties when he was first winning seats.
Comment by DE — September 29, 2005 @ 1:51 am
Personality and Party Politics is all about getting power over other people.
This game is designed to distribute rewards to those who will give the most to our corporate government which never faces elections.
The tweedle dumb and twaddle dumber circus gives the allusion that the public govern themselves.
If a candidate studied the “credit creation” mechanism and decided this issue should be examined openly he would not receive the favour of the Conservative Party. Nor Labour of course!
Any politician who demonstrates any serious intention, mouthing “British values” is fine, to confront the policy of monopoly incarnate in the money creation process and justly release the abundance of creation will very quickly discover they are marginalised and rendered impotent.
The Conservative “election” process is designed to ensure that the candidates the “members” get to vote for are suitable to the power that easily controls politicians with rewards and promised ambitions fulfilled.
What always gives amusement to me is that educated adults play these games believing that the will of the people is being served.
Self interest over a just and moral order is the foundation of Power Politics.
Gary, do you comprehend the credit creation mechanism at the foundation of your nations economy?
Comment by Christopher Brooks — September 29, 2005 @ 3:29 am
Gary, do you comprehend the credit creation mechanism at the foundation of your nations economy?
I can honestly say Mr Brooks that I do not. If you want to explain how it directly influences the voting intentions of MPs though I’d be interested to hear….
Comment by Gary Monro — September 29, 2005 @ 6:28 am