Victory at or Over the Polls?
by
Sean Corrigan
by Sean Corrigan
According
to my calculations, in celebrating his third triumph, RobespiBlaire
managed to garner 36.3% of the 61.2% eligible who voted or 9.3
million votes; equivalent to a bare 22% of the electorate (so a
2:7 against "approval" rating) and amounting to under 16% of the
total populace.
Surely,
none can doubt that such a display of democracy at its finest will
shame all those Third World mobsters who are the object of our scorn
and the target of our covert operations!!
Given
that Labour has increased public sector payrolls since 1997 by a
cool one million, to take the balance to over 7.4 million (and not
counting all the hordes of extra corporatist "contractors" who now
make a living by doing the Treasury's bidding) it certainly looks
as though a good number of the ingrates who are somehow in his pocket
through work, much less those dependent upon him for benefits
(such
as the 11 million pensioners), could not stomach the prospect of
voting again for this hysterical charlatan.
However,
assuming the rump of 23 undeclared seats is distributed pro rata,
this slimmest of "mandates" will nonetheless prove to
be enough to secure him 56.7% of the seats in the Commons and, thus,
100% of the dictatorial royal prerogative we in Britain endure thereby.
It
should also be noted that, thanks to assiduous gerrymandering during
its stay in office (coupled with the effects of the first-past-the-post
system), it took only around 25,400 votes to give Labour a seat,
versus 41,900 for the Tories, 90,500 for the Lib Dems, and 168,800
for the "Other" parties.
For
the marginalists among us, Labour's 795,000 votes beyond the Tory
total were enough to give it up to 163 more seats, or 1 whole seat
for every 4,900 in the surplus (less than 0.01% of the population
per pro) even worse than the 11,682 per seat they needed
at the margin vis-à-vis the Lib Dems.
Though
we are now stretching the logic, if not the maths itself, this means
that just 216,000 marginal crosses on the ballot paper in favour
of Labour, rather than Tory, effectively decided the election well within the margin for error, or fraud among the c.6.5 million
postal votes (of which between one-third and one-half are still
unaccounted for) issued, for the first time in a national election,
under a system which a High Court judge recently thundered would
"put a banana republic to shame"!
Did
somebody say "One man, one vote"?
May
9, 2005
Sean
Corrigan [send him mail]
is an investment analyst in Switzerland.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Sean
Corrigan Archives
|