Nearly half (43 percent) of those in dispute are Conservatives, the center-right party’s only right-wing party with three center-left candidates – Labor, Liberal Democrats and Greens – effectively separating the “progressive” vote in a way the victory of Boris Johnson’s party. And in another third (36 percent) of the battles, the Tories are the only “conservative” representative to fight candidates from two “progressive” parties. Of the nearly 3,000 city council seats, only 15 (0.5%) will see more conservative than progressive parties on the ballot. The investigation, by the Politics for the Many trade union campaign, came a day after Tory President Oliver Dowden accused Labor and the Liberal Democrats of colluding with a secret deal – which was rejected by both Sir Keir Starmer and Ed Davey. – to help each other on Thursday. elections. Citing statistics showing Labor was fewer candidates than usual in the south-west of England and the Liberal Democrats were fewer in the Northeast, Mr Downen claimed that the parties were conspiring to “deny voters” a democratic choice. Politics for the Many said its analysis, using data collected by the Democracy Club, showed that England’s winning voting system meant that left-wing voters were actually punished for having a choice of parties to vote for, while right-wing voters. they see their chances of success being enhanced by the fact that there are fewer candidates to choose from. Campaign coordinator Nancy Platts said it meant that many voters on the left wing of the political spectrum had to “keep their noses” and vote for a party they did not support in order to pursue the priority of preventing a Tories victory. “We have seen too many times how our voting system acts as an obstacle to progressive change, boosting the votes of some while throwing away the pile,” Ms Platz said. “The result – a system that wins everything that gives unearned majorities to the government of the time; governments that are very often conservative. “It’s a system that forces voters to vote regularly, often supporting the ‘least bad’ candidate to try to play the spoiled system. In these local elections, the odds are once again stacked against the progressives and the results will most likely reflect that in seats up and down the country. “The Labor Party must take the electoral reform seriously in order to overcome the structural advantage that our electoral system provides to the Conservatives. “Only then can progressive views at the ballot box be given a fair chance.” The campaign analysis found that, in the 2,859 constituencies claimed, there were an average of 2.2 Labor, Liberal Democrat or Green candidates for each Conservative, Reformist candidate in the UK or Ukip. About 43.3 percent of the chambers will see a party from the right facing three from the left, while 35.5 percent will see one from the right versus two from the left. In an additional 2.4 percent of the vote, two center-right parties will face three “progressives.” No sections were found in which all three parties on the center-right were standing, and only 15 will be claimed by more parties on the right than on the left. Only 16.1 percent of the booths had an equal number of parties on each side. Proportional voting systems, such as those used in the local elections in Scotland and Northern Ireland and the parliamentary elections in Scotland and Wales, allow voters to count candidates in order of preference, eliminating the problem of “split votes”. Most city council ballots in England use a straightforward first-party system, and in some areas residents have up to three votes, but no means of ranking candidates. The major parties in these areas tend to have three candidates in hopes of winning all three X. Boris Johnson’s victory in the 2019 general election was greatly aided by Nigel Farage’s decision to step down from the Brexit Party candidates to avoid a split in the center-right vote, allowing Tories to claim a “Complete Brexit” in elections held by a majority in favor of the parties offering a second referendum.
