Election 2015 - Why The Conservatives Won

#FairVotesNow? Or are the Conservatives just that popular? Find out!

✔ This video is supported through Patreon.

-----Links-----

Election Results:

General:

[yvranx]

I favor the German system, where you have locally elected representatives, and still get a parliament that represent overall votes.

[alexturlais]

I don't like ukip, but I don't think its fair they got so few seats

[armouredskeptic]

I don't know if I praise your animation enough. Amazing work!

[aylim]

Yet we rejected the Alternative Vote in 2011 and this is the result. To be honest I would like to see STV used instead.

[NativLang]

A mere foreign onlooker, I enjoyed the last video, so I'm happy to see you follow it up with some wrap-up analysis!

[SashaandStorm]

Excellent video.
I'm very impressed by the depth and the presentation style.
It's concise yet detailed at the same time and is very pleasing to the eyes and ears.

[Mantafirefly]

You've made an error at 2:00. You've listed the lib dems having EXACTLY the same amount of votes as UKIP. Pretty sure you didn't mean that.

[thomthom]

At 2:12, there is a mistake showing both Lib Dem and UKIP with 3, 881099 votes

[Gman]

In 2011 we had a referendum costing £75m in which just 32% of the voters wanted to replace First Past the Post with Alternative Vote.
As the turn-out was only 42.2% of the registered electorate, this means that c. 1 person out of 7 registered voters was interested enough to seek a change to AV (and more like 1 in 8 of the electorate if you factor in one 2011 estimate that 6m eligible voters were not registered).
Another vote just seems like a waste of money.

[xDagger]

This is very confusing to look at since the party colours are all mixed up.

[buddyltd]

I actually prefer this video to CGP Grey's one. I like the channel. Keep up the good work!

[jamesburke]

In 2005, the winning Labour party gained more seats (355) than the 2015 conservatives (330) with a smaller percentage of the vote (35.2% - versus 36.9%). You can tell the left of centre, embittered thieving agenda in the accent of the narrator. To give readers some valuable insight, remember 13% voted for UKIP. Looking at the overall vote percentages for all the parties and what the parties stand for, a conservative government was the most just result.

[Trepur]

I have to say this is the best video I have seen on the subject.

Every other video I have seen has focused entirely on the downsides of FTTP and the upsides of alternative systems, or focused entirely on the upsides of FTTP and the downsides of alternatives.

This seems to be one of the only videos that acknowledges there will be trade offs in every election, and the best system is subjective depending on the which trade offs you're willing to have.

[stuffystuffclub]

I wouldn't discount too quickly the Additional Member System, used in the Scottish Parliament Elections, where you cast a regular FPTP vote to represent your constituency and a PR vote for a party. The party votes within a region are tallied up and representatives are drawn from a regional 'list' in proportions to reflect votes cast.

[thebatmanover]

I live in 'Murca.
How does this effect me?

[FinetalPies]

God these results are so reminiscent of the 2019 Canadian election

[mrcaljoe]

Why are UKIP's and LD's percentages of the vote different if according to the table, they got the exact same number of votes? Is this a mistake? 1:49

[Extreme_Gardening]

One small effect that you didn't mention was the comfort with which an MP takes their seat, if they get a majority of votes in their constituency or close to a majority, they feel secure in their seat and may be emboldened to vote in the way that their party wants more often, but if they get just a few more votes than the opposing candidate then they may feel less secure in their seat for next election and be more wary of that when voting in parliament.

[ybra]

Edit: The worst part of first pass the post is that it can give majority power to a minority, as happened in this election. The conservatives can now rule without having to compromise even if they are only backed by 37% of people. If the system was actually representative of the population the conservatives would have needed to make a coalition with one or more other parties. They would have needed to listen to other parties and come to a compromise. That is how democracy should work, if you can't actually get a majority you should have to compromise with other parties. Today's system kind of pretends that the conservatives have a majority backing them when they really don't.

Easiest way to fix this system is just to scrap the regional representation. But there a way to fix the system and still keep it. By having a number of seats (maybe 1/3 of the total) that aren't linked to regions. These seats gets distributed after the regional seats in a way to even out the distribution to make the final national parliament as closely as the popular vote at possible. This means you will still have religion representation, but if you don't agree your representative (as going by the vote the majority of people don't), your voice is still heard in the government.

Regional representation is a bit stupid in this day and age. A candidate can get to represent a region without having a majority, essentially leaving the majority in that region unrepresented. As in how can I expect this representative to in any way represent me if I voted for someone totally different? Just because we live in the same place doesn't mean that they will care for my concerns. So I would much rather than my representative comes from anywhere in the country, but actually represents the views I voted for.

The current system is just broken, there is no argument here. People living in a region with a strong win for one party, have no way to have their voice heard, there vote simply doesn't count. It also makes parties with a regional focus stronger, as focusing on getting a lot of votes in a few regions gives you seats. While focusing on a national issue getting the same number (or more) votes spread around the country gives you no seats just because you are spread out.

[mattloulou]

At 2:00 you showed the liberal/yellow party having the same amount of people as the purple, but different percentages. Or am i missing something?