Your point would be true if it were a ‘presidential’ style election, which it was not, despite the three debates. It appears that voters in the UK are influenced more by their local MPs and local issues then by the national leadership, hence Labour’s resilience.

[Daphne – The fact that Labour did very well shows that Brown’s popularity was NOT in the pits, but only that this was the received wisdom.]

“I can’t understand an election system where number of seats don’t represent number of votes.”

It is obvious, therefore, that you don’t understand the Maltese system. Under this system it is possible for a party to obtain up to 16% of the vote and yet not gain a single seat in parliament.

It’s Gt Britain – they were always a slightly eccentric race.

Some cases of electoral fraud have been reported. The Afghans are sending a delegation to ensure that the election process was duly followed.

> who don’t take an oath to the Queen so they don’t vote

When are they going for republic? I’m still baffled at how Blair sold Labour’s principles for better electability.

[Daphne – Hux republic! What do you have in mind – a Bolshevik revolution? The vast majority of people there are either delighted with their royal family or indifferent to the system. And the rest have the good sense to know what amazing things the Crown does for ‘brand Britain’.]

No perspex to bang on, no policemen to be seen, ballot boxes arriving by car, boxes arriving in some counting halls within 2 minutes, children running around the boxes, no security rails, votes being put in supermarket baskets, no proof of identity, candidates with brightly coloured rosettes standing on a platform while results are being read, no excitement in seeing votes mount in pigeon holes…

I imagine the counting of votes is double checked but it all seems so strange to us Maltese.

I also can’t understand an election system where number of seats don’t represent number of votes.