To ask you to help me understand how it all works?

[namechangeafternamechange]

I accept that I have been somewhat politically ignorant over the years, I am nearly 33 and this is the first election I have ever paid attention to let alone voted in [blush ] so I need to ask what, to some, might be very stupid questions.

Firstly I have put the results on when I woke up before my tv got invaded by milkshake and seen that UKIP votes accounted for around 12% of the national vote whilst Lib Dem votes account for around 8% of the national votes (is that correct? ) but the Lib Dems hold 8 seats and UKIP only hold 1....how does that work?

Also, there are many, many people who seem horrified at the tories coming back into power. I have met only 1 person (my sister) who has voted conservatives so where have all these voters been hiding?

Last one...say I voted green and they got the vote in my area, do they remain my mp even if conservatives win overall? How does that work?

As I have said, I have been very ignorant over the years. I am far from thick, I am actually quite intelligent not that you can tell right now

Because more people vote in different constituencies, and some constituencies have more people in them in the first place.

You voted to put a person in parliament. Your overall winner in your area gets a seat in parliament. If the Tories get more seats overall than any other party, then they win.

3 areas might need only 10,000 votes to get an X majority, where as another area might need 30,000 and return a win of Y, but yet the actual votes are X = 30000 for 3 seats, and Y = 30000 for 1 seat. So the number of votes cast doesn't always bear an exact representation of the overall majority.

Perhaps google Proportional Representation to explain the ins and outs.

Well done to you for taking an interest, and really I mean that! Too many of us are sleepwalking into being ruled by people who do not act in our interest, whether it's we don't vote, or because we do not really know what the parties stand for.

Here's a good primer: www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/may/07/general-election-2015-explainer-for-non-brits-video

Ahhh got you, thank you tiggy!

God politics is a minefield!

Each constituency (= a geographical area) elects its MP. The candidate who gets the most votes in that area is elected. They only need to get a bare majority - if they tied they'd toss a coin, which does very occasionally happen.

When they get to Westminster, they buddy up with the others from their party (if there are any - UKIP looks as if it will just have one MP). They usually all vote together on party lines.

The party with the largest number of MPs usually becomes the party in government and their leader becomes Prime Minister. However, they need to be sure they can win votes in the House of Commons on any measures they want to bring in. There are 650 MPs. If there are (say) 300 MPS from one party and all the other parties have fewer MPs, the biggest party will win a lot of votes - but if all the others voted together that would make 350 MPs voting against, so they might lose. That's why the parties want to get more than 325 MPs so that they can be pretty sure of always winning votes on their proposals without having to compromise and negotiate with other parties.

After the last election, the Tories didn't have 325 MPs so they went into coalition with the LibDems. This time it looks as if (a) the Tories will have 325 MPs (or nearly) and (b) the LibDems will only have 8 MPs. So no need for a coalition this time and even if there were the LibDems are now insignificant.

X post with a couple of you, thank you for your explanations I feel a little clearer!

A recount has been ordered in Morely, why?

A recount is usually due to a close run result.

Right, get it.

Sorry if I'm frustrating you, my OH is asleep and I only have my 3yo to ask! although he probably knows more than I do

422 votes in it in Morley - was very close

I am nearly 33 and this is the first election I have ever paid attention to

And people wonder why we end up with governments elected by older voters.

A popular sport amongst the young appears to be to not vote, and then blame those that did vote for not voting the way the young would have done, had they been bothered.

Turn out was 65% yesterday. When it's broken down, you'll find that turnout amongst those over 45 is high, and those are big years. The peak age in the UK is 50, as 1964/5 had the highest number of births there have ever been, and the age group 5070 is the post-war baby boom more generally. Turnout amongst those under 30 will be much lower and I hope Russell Brand is proud of himself--. For a lot of those over 50 who bought houses or got secure council tenancies twenty or thirty years ago, things are OK, and they voted accordingly. For a lot of those under thirty, things are distinctly not OK, but not sufficient so for them to actually vote.

Politics is determined by those that turn up, and therefore our country is governed by older, more affluent people, who vote as a solid bloc. There was a referendum on changing the voting system five year ago which, presumably, the OP didn't bother to vote in. It was heavily defeated in a turnout which was even older and even more affluent than usual.

Even I can see that was close! Just watching Ed Balls speaking after losing his seat, I feel a bit sorry for him.

Does that mean he won't feature in labour over the next 5 years? Or will they slip him in somewhere?

Thanks for that Namechange, that was really unhelpful

The only way they can slip him in is by making him a Labour peer, so he can go into the House of Lords. Either that or wait for a bye-election in a safe seat - bye-elections happen when a serving MP resigns or dies and a replacement is needed.

Some young people take an interest. My 18 yr old had been reading lots about all the parties, made an informed decision, and was the third person through the polling station door at 7.00 am yesterday morning.

It is complicated, though, and I can understand why some people find it hard to follow (that was not meant to sound patronising at all).

OP - out of curiosity..what kept you away from previous elections and what drew you to this one?

Middleage - I understood politics in my teens. Being taught about fascism, the Labour movement etc etc for history gave me an understanding of ideology. I wouldn't say it's too complicated for youngsters. They might not get all the implications of a particular government but would know their right from left and where they stood? That's a pretty good start.

OP- Miliband will step down as Leader today. Ed Balls is married to Yvette Cooper who must be a front runner. They have youngish children- I expect he will now concentrate on supporting her leadership bid.

OP was presumably born in 1982. General Elections since then:

1983 - she was a babe in arms
1987 - she was in the Infants
1992 - she would have been about 10, probably not that interested
1997 - landslide for Labour, OP not old enough to vote
2001 - Labour won very comfortably, not all that exciting as I recall
2005 - amazingly, Labour still won pretty comfortably
2010 - absolutely gripping - took ages to sort out who'd won - resulted in the first coalition we've had in living memory - but maybe more gripping if you're a connoisseur

This election was always shaping up to be very unusual because of the meteoric rise of UKIP and the SNP in the last few years. So I can understand why this might be the one finally to get somebody interested, especially if she's recently had children and started to think more about politics as it affects family life and her children's prospects.

prole I won't lie, I have never been on the electoral roll as I spent a fair few years hiding from creditors. This wasn't a simple situation of living beyond my means, it was an appalling situation orchestrated by ex who applied for, and gained, many loans and cc cards in my name (unbeknown to me until after I left) and never paid any bills. I have explained my situation in a thread I started but was met with a torrage of abuse by a certain poster

O have become interested in this election as, for the first time in my life, I finally feel that I have a right to voice my choice (but struggled to make that choice! )

Good luck to you, namechange. It sounds as if you've had a lot on your plate and I can understand why elections didn't seem all that relevant while you were struggling with all that.

And, of course, gasp is correct in that I now have a toddler so I have had to pay attention for his sake.

Thank you gasp, nobody has ever bought me flowers before

OP - that's a legit reason. I missed 1992 election for similar reasons.

You're a bit late but welcome to the party! Sorry to say you've arrived just as the Tories nicked all the booze and ran off.

If you're a Tory, I guess you'll be happy. If (like me) you're Labour - you arrived to see your mates throwing up in the corner and crying about their ex. If you're in Scotland - you're in the party next door that's got more booze and better music. LibDems - they went home hours ago.

Thank you for that party analogy Prole.
You've made DH and myself laugh on a very depressing morning!

to you!

To answer your question about where the Conservative voters come from - BBC this morning talked about "shy Tories". It is my experience that many conservative voters will maintain a fairly dignified silence as they don't want to be drawn into hyperbolic conversations with Labour voters. If you head over to the other thread with about 500 replies it is littered with statements such as "I may as well go and just die like they want me to" etc.

You can't have an intelligent conversation about politics with bleeding hearts lefties who hold those kind of emotive views, its a waste of time, and people have worthwhile things to be getting on with, that, contrary to popular belief, doesn't involve punching kittens and poking old ladies with walking sticks.