## X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by mcsproot » Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:16 am

Just to see what folks thought got more votes (as a percentage of those eligible to vote) between X-Factor and the General Election for the UK Parliament.
23 year old guy from the UK.
Send me a private message on the board if you want to add me to your MSN, Yahoo, or anything else.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by sarobah » Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:02 pm

I dread to think what the real answer is.
~ Sarah
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by SamanthaBoundx » Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:10 am

You're question interested me so I thought I'd do a little research online and found some facts and figures. . .
In the last series of X Factor, a total of 15,448,009 votes were cast.
In the last UK general election, a total of 18,946,991 people voted.
Now, while that might not seem like such a huge difference given the size of the numbers, you should take into account that people voting for the x factor would probably have cast multiple votes throughout the series, so the actual numbr of PEOPLE voting will be much less than the number of votes cast. Whereas in the elction, people can only vote once.
So luckily, I think there are FAR more people voting for the general election than for X Factor. So we can still sleep safely in ou beds at night knowing that the UK population aren't a complete bunch of idiots. Or in that respect at least

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by Reidy » Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:45 am

> SamanthaBoundx wrote:You're question interested me so I thought I'd do a little research online and found some facts and figures. . .
> In the last series of X Factor, a total of 15,448,009 votes were cast.
> In the last UK general election, a total of 18,946,991 people voted.
> Now, while that might not seem like such a huge difference given the size of the numbers, you should take into account that people voting for the x factor would probably have cast multiple votes throughout the series, so the actual numbr of PEOPLE voting will be much less than the number of votes cast. Whereas in the elction, people can only vote once.
> So luckily, I think there are FAR more people voting for the general election than for X Factor. So we can still sleep safely in ou beds at night knowing that the UK population aren't a complete bunch of idiots. Or in that respect at least

And, these are the words of a massive X Factor geek speaking.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by mcsproot » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:09 pm

> SamanthaBoundx wrote:You're question interested me so I thought I'd do a little research online and found some facts and figures. . .
> In the last series of X Factor, a total of 15,448,009 votes were cast.
> In the last UK general election, a total of 18,946,991 people voted.
> Now, while that might not seem like such a huge difference given the size of the numbers, you should take into account that people voting for the x factor would probably have cast multiple votes throughout the series, so the actual numbr of PEOPLE voting will be much less than the number of votes cast. Whereas in the elction, people can only vote once.
> So luckily, I think there are FAR more people voting for the general election than for X Factor. So we can still sleep safely in ou beds at night knowing that the UK population aren't a complete bunch of idiots. Or in that respect at least

Well that just doggone ruined the fun of seeing what folks would answer I had heard it was the other way around but didn't get hard figures. Which made me think...
RANT ALERT
People fight and die for the right to vote, it's going on right now in northern Africa. Yet in countries that have had democracy for a long time, people get complacent. They don't cast their vote, and would rather vote on who wins a karaoke contest. That makes me sad, but I can see the frustration. The UK uses a First Past the Post system. For those who don't know, that means whoever gets the most votes wins. So if you didn't vote for the winner, your vote pretty much didn't count.
Now the UK did have a referendum on changing the voting system to Alternate Vote, which is a more rank based system. You would give a preference rating to each candidate, and the winner would be the person with the most votes but only if they had 50% of the total votes. If there was no such winner using the first choices, then this is what happens...
The person with the least votes is discounted from the election. Anyone who chose them as their first choice now votes with their second choice. Still no winner? Then the second lowest voted for person is discounted, and anyone who voted for them as a first choice now votes with their second choice. If someone voted for them with their second choice, and this is their vote that counts, they not vote with their third choice. This pattern continues until someone has 50% or more of the votes, and that person wins.
Now I'm poor at explaining things, but I feel I understand Alternate Vote and feel it is a superior system. But not everyone does and it got voted against by a pretty hefty majority. Which I think is a shame because I feel many who voted against did so because they simply didn't understand it. The fact is, with First Past the Post, someone can win with 45% of the votes. How can they win when, frankly, the majority of people did NOT vote for them? First Past the Post votes in the 'most liked' candidate, while Alternative Vote votes in the 'least hated'. Sure, they might not have been everyone's first choice, but more people support them than not.
23 year old guy from the UK.
Send me a private message on the board if you want to add me to your MSN, Yahoo, or anything else.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by SamanthaBoundx » Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:40 pm

Oh gosh, don't get me started on the whole alternative vote thing - I could rant for hours. I'll try and keep it short though
I too agree that Alternative Vote is far superior to the First Past The Post system, which is well . . .barely democratic at all if you think about it. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people simply didn't understand the system and so they voted against it. To a lot of people it would make sense that the person with the highest number of votes should win - because on paper that seems to make sense. It's just when you think about it a little more (or you know. . .watch the news or doing something in the slightest bit intellectual) that you realise that the system is completely twisted. We've ended up with a party in charge of the country that NO ONE voted for - but I'll stop that point here because I don't want to get started on a "Die, Clegg, Die" rant. . .
However, what I have MORE of a problem with isn't the fact that Alternative Vote was rejected, but that it was proposed in the first place. I know that sounds a bit crazy given what I've just said, but hear me out xD The thing is, although AV is superior to FPTP, it is only marginally better. It still isn't a brilliant system and it still doesn't get a truly democratic answer to the question "Who Do We Want To Run Our Country?" - as you said, it rather answer the question "Who Do We Hate The Least?". The system is just FULL of flaws and I am absolutely convinced that they could have proposed a far better and far fairer equivalent. However, because the AV really benefits the two parties in power at the moment, in particular the Lib Dems, when it comes to the next elections, we were presented with some sub standard system. If I'm completely honest, I'm sure that if Nick Clegg hadn't already gone back on every other promise he had made in his campaign, then he wouldn't have even bothered pushing the electoral reform through. I know a lot of people who voted against AV simply on that principle.
Ugh.
I wonder whether more people voted in the AV vote than in the X Factor. . ? (I won't spoil the fun with my nerdy facts and figures this time )

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by SamanthaBoundx » Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:42 pm

> Reidy wrote:
> And, these are the words of a massive X Factor geek speaking.

And hush, you I was trying to pull of the "cool, political, intellectual" vibe. And now you have outed my love of X Factor for the wide world to see.
*hissssssssssss*

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by skybird137 » Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:08 am

I remember an old quote.
"Democracy is four wolves and a lamb deciding on what to eat for dinner."
Participating Democracy is best left to choose winners of the X-factor than to directly run a country.
Calling Fifty Shades of Grey a Bondage Story is like calling Titanic an Iceberg Movie...
http://skybird137.deviantart.com

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by sarobah » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:51 pm

Two of the things I am proud of as an Australian:
(1) We have compulsory voting. The participation rate at each election is around 95%. So it is a true peopleâ€™s democracy.
(2) We use the alternative (or preferential) vote, which I believe is the best possible system.
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by xtc » Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:26 am

What price the Liberal Party (please excuse foul langhuage) at the next election?
Am I the only person who thinks Clegg is a walking suicide note? Or is that just wishful thinkning?
Boxer shorts are cool,
but little speedos rule!
More by the same author: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=22729

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by mcsproot » Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:14 am

> sarobah wrote:Two of the things I am proud of as an Australian:
> (1) We have compulsory voting. The participation rate at each election is around 95%. So it is a true peopleâ€™s democracy.
> (2) We use the alternative (or preferential) vote, which I believe is the best possible system.

Compulsory voting? How does that work? Do they look at the roll and if you didn't vote you get arrested?
Compared to the UK , 95% blows us out of the water. I believe (I have no hard facts) that not even 50% of the population voted, and that just makes me sad. Soldiers have died in the past to give us the freedom to vote, and soldiers are dying now in some countries to fight for that right.
23 year old guy from the UK.
Send me a private message on the board if you want to add me to your MSN, Yahoo, or anything else.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by lonewolfandfriends » Thu Sep 29, 2011 1:24 pm

mc i agree so those guys fought for nothing way to thank them huh????

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by sarobah » Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:02 pm

> mcsproot wrote:Soldiers have died in the past to give us the freedom to vote, and soldiers are dying now in some countries to fight for that right.

I entirely agree.
Here in Oz, you donâ€™t get arrested for not voting but you do get fined â€“ I think itâ€™s $50, more a symbolic amount than a real deterrent.
While some people believe that compulsory voting is undemocratic, it ensures that every citizen has a personal stake in the government and that elections arenâ€™t dominated by organized special interests.
~ Sarah
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by mcsproot » Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:11 pm

> sarobah wrote:

> > mcsproot wrote:Soldiers have died in the past to give us the freedom to vote, and soldiers are dying now in some countries to fight for that right.

> I entirely agree.
> Here in Oz, you donâ€™t get arrested for not voting but you do get fined â€“ I think itâ€™s $50, more a symbolic amount than a real deterrent.
> While some people believe that compulsory voting is undemocratic, it ensures that every citizen has a personal stake in the government and that elections arenâ€™t dominated by organized special interests.
> ~ Sarah

I've always been told by my parents that every time you don't vote, you essentially vote for the <insert undesirable extremist party here>. Don't know if anyone outside the UK has heard of the BNP (British National Party), but they're an extreme right wing party who's main policy is 'if you're not white british, GTFO'.
Shockingly, the party leader of the BNP was elected as an MEP (Member of the European Parliament).
The are not to be confused with the SNP (Scottish National Party) who's main policy is for Scotland to be an independent nation. A policy which has my support, assuming we don't join the Euro currency. If that happens I won't be a Scottish resident for a day longer!
23 year old guy from the UK.
Send me a private message on the board if you want to add me to your MSN, Yahoo, or anything else.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by sarobah » Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:10 pm

> mcsproot wrote:If that happens I won't be a Scottish resident for a day longer!

Come to the land of Oz, if you donâ€™t mind crazy weather.
~ Sarah
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by bookl0ver » Sun Oct 16, 2011 9:01 am

xfactor of course! way better than a bunch of dick heads who are gonna make life even harder for the honest of grafters of this once great nation of ours.
DIRECTIONER FOR LIFE!
NIALL HORAN'S FUTURE WIFE
Also addicted to slash. ^,^

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by Games_Bond » Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:23 pm

Wow, well, looky here, this is absolutely brilliant....
Because, as I write this, "General Election" is taking the vote by ONE vote... mine. And yet I may well have voted X-Factor had I not cheated and read the statistics SamanthaBoundx posted. What's interesting about this is that "General Election" wins on First Past The Post, when a Proportional Representative vote would say let's call it a draw - surely fairer, as X-Factor could just as easily be winning right about now.
I have to say I don't understand the AV system but then, nobody has explained it to me. I voted for it on principle but I was one of the few who did. Thanks for trying, Mcsproot! I will need to read it again because it sounds like the fa fa fa French system where a man that the vast majority of country hate can sweep into power by a landslide in the final round of voting just because he's managed to get himself up against the one person everyone hates more. Clearly AV is better than this. I seem to remember the Conservatives' basic campaign against AV was "nobody will understand it". That's true, but by that token, I can't understand why we voted David Cameron into Number 10 Downing Street and we still have him nonetheless
I personally cannot praise the Australians enough for their Compulsary Vote system. It sounds a bit harsh, but I agree with everything that has been said about the sanctity of the right to vote. People died for this and I can't drag my sorry a**e round the corner and put a cross in a box? I'm many things, but I'm not that low.
Then again, ironically, high voter turnout in the UK might be a bad thing. For one thing, we had a good turnout last time round (mostly because we had been led to believe our vote might actually count this time), yet turnouts hitting 70% in places was a disaster as the polling stations couldn't cope with the unexpected(!!!???!!!) numbers and had to turn people away. For another thing, Brits amongst us: look at the people around you on a day to day basis. Look at what you see on the news. Frankly, there are some of my countrymen that I wouldn't trust to vote when it is safe to cross the road, let alone choose who should be in charge of the country. You'll have chancers voting BNP "for a laugh", ques as the simpletons work out which way round to hold the ballot paper, turkeys voting for Christmas... you get the idea. Basically, we were all asked to vote, because the opinion polls were so close, so we voted, the record number of votes were counted, and then we ended up with a Government nobody voted for. But don't worry: the Conservatives have forced through a lot of crap policies and somehow managed to blame it all on the Lib Dems, so we should be back to a 2 horse race next time around.

> xfactor of course! way better than a bunch of dick heads who are gonna make life even harder for the honest of grafters of this once great nation of ours.

Bookl0ver, this has worried me more than any of your sadistic posts I have seen on other threads. How does an 11 year old lose faith in our democracy and talk so reminiscently about the state of our country as it was?? Do you now believe we are no longer Great? I think the idea is (whisper it!) that we're supposed to go and vote so the dick heads don't get into Government So, you'd rather watch X Factor where a bunch of dick heads press a buzzer and humiliate people in front of large audiences because they miss a note? All right then.

> I've always been told by my parents that every time you don't vote, you essentially vote for the <insert undesirable extremist party here>. Don't know if anyone outside the UK has heard of the BNP (British National Party), but they're an extreme right wing party who's main policy is 'if you're not white british, GTFO'.

Mcsproot, you come from good stock. Very sensible advice from your parents. I think the BNP are actually a bit more complicated than that (they claim not to be a racist party but... they are politicians), but your point is still a good one. As Edmund Burke warned us: "All that is required for Evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing"

> "Democracy is four wolves and a lamb deciding on what to eat for dinner."

Indeed. But does the analogy do Democracy justice? It IS what the majority want. After all, a Dictatorship is surely 1 wolf deciding what he and 4 lambs will have for dinner. If you have seen the excellent TV show outnumbered, there's a scene in the recent series where Karen asks her parents why families fight, and her Dad Pete answers: "Families are like Democracy. Completely rubbish, but a lot better than the alternative".

> Am I the only person who thinks Clegg is a walking suicide note? Or is that just wishful thinkning?

Walking scapegoat, more like. But yes, ultimately, the price for being the most successful Liberal Democrat leader ever will be to leave office with several knives embedded in his back.
And when the dust clears.... er, yeah, I guess more people voted in the General election.
This time.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by bookl0ver » Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:29 pm

> xfactor of course! way better than a bunch of dick heads who are gonna make life even harder for the honest of grafters of this once great nation of ours.

Bookl0ver, this has worried me more than any of your sadistic posts I have seen on other threads. How does an 11 year old lose faith in our democracy and talk so reminiscently about the state of our country as it was?? Do you now believe we are no longer Great? I think the idea is (whisper it!) that we're supposed to go and vote so the dick heads don't get into Government So, you'd rather watch X Factor where a bunch of dick heads press a buzzer and humiliate people in front of large audiences because they miss a note? All right then.
my mum works 12 hour shifts for a crap wage to put food on our table! my parents told me politics are a bunch of shit and i beleive it. And we ain't great we;re going fucking bust! and xfactor doesn't use buzzers thats britains got talent! My dad works 3 jobs and hasn't missed a day in years. And we've got politics talking a load of shit on the tv. thats how i lost faith
DIRECTIONER FOR LIFE!
NIALL HORAN'S FUTURE WIFE
Also addicted to slash. ^,^

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by Games_Bond » Sun Oct 16, 2011 2:33 pm

> my mum works 12 hour shifts for a crap wage to put food on our table! my parents told me politics are a bunch of shit and i beleive it. And we ain't great we;re going fucking bust! and xfactor doesn't use buzzers thats britains got talent! My dad works 3 jobs and hasn't missed a day in years. And we've got politics talking a load of shit on the tv. thats how i lost faith

Ouch. Real insight into the hardships of working class Britain right there. No wonder you are so worldy-wise. Someone that has 3 jobs deserves to have have disposable income, not be struggling to provide. I will grant you politicians spend too much time bickering to do anything to help. So... how do we fix this problem? I wonder what would happen if we rounded them up and put them at bookl0ver's mercy?
Actually, let's not go there... the shattered vision of someone so young was scary enough.
Still, I doubt voting for Frankie Cocozza will improve the situation much... is part of the problem not that the politicians have disillusioned so many people that we have a discussion about the possibility that Reality TV, the stuff that you find under your fingernails if you scrape the bottom of the barrel, might just generate more interest.
You know what? Whatever way you look at it; politicians are just not going to come out of this well. End of.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by bookl0ver » Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:13 pm

yh. and by the way xfactor's only on 1nce a year we have to put up wiv polticain crap all year round. and lets face it ladies cocozza is a cutie! and i ain't voting for him i'm voting for janet. soz. i didn't realise my veiw on politics was that bad it's just.....how i c it
DIRECTIONER FOR LIFE!
NIALL HORAN'S FUTURE WIFE
Also addicted to slash. ^,^

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by lonewolfandfriends » Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:51 pm

im just gonna set srtaight what i think about polititcs please no one get mad at me.
politics is just a bunch of crap that promise stuff then 10 years later it hasnt happened. if all runners for office told the truth i mrealize that none would get elected but seriously, the diffrence between republic and democrat or whatever has gone passed me. its just that politics lie and ruin our goverment. i can see that we've had some greats but know a day they all lie.
just my opinion though

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by bookl0ver » Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:47 pm

i have to agree wiv u percy
DIRECTIONER FOR LIFE!
NIALL HORAN'S FUTURE WIFE
Also addicted to slash. ^,^

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by sarobah » Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:06 pm

> Lonewolf wrote:...if all runners for office told the truth I realize that none would get elected...

And this is precisely the problem.
An honest politician is an unemployed politician.
I have known quite a few politicians and, whether I agree or disagree with their ideology, every single one of them starts out as an idealist. So what goes wrong? Itâ€™s a myth that they are corrupted by politics â€“ most are talented enough that they would be earning ten times as much in private enterprise. No, the sad fact is that they are made cynical by having to deal with the â€œnewsâ€ media (and I use the term â€œnewsâ€ very loosely) and the ignorant, short-sighted and (too often) bigoted general public. Eventually they learn to tell whatever lies they need to tell in order to get into office, and are then trapped a vicious circle of dishonesty in order to stay in office.
It is a simple fact (in my humble opinion, at least) that the only hope for good government is for progressive politicians to lie like hell to get elected and then hopefully be in a position to do some good before the voters turn on them. But who is going to suspend a career and sacrifice family life to pursue what the voters will ensure is a very short term in politics?
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by bookl0ver » Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:14 am

nah never gonna happen they're all a bunch off overpayed lying bastards and if anything they're wreking our country
DIRECTIONER FOR LIFE!
NIALL HORAN'S FUTURE WIFE
Also addicted to slash. ^,^

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by lonewolfandfriends » Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:49 am

Book lover go to games and role plays section then marriage poultry post by Shane and read post no.2

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by Qarl » Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:20 pm

> sarobah wrote:I have known quite a few politicians and, whether I agree or disagree with their ideology, every single one of them starts out as an idealist. So what goes wrong? Itâ€™s a myth that they are corrupted by politics â€“ most are talented enough that they would be earning ten times as much in private enterprise. No, the sad fact is that they are made cynical by having to deal with the â€œnewsâ€ media (and I use the term â€œnewsâ€ very loosely) and the ignorant, short-sighted and (too often) bigoted general public. Eventually they learn to tell whatever lies they need to tell in order to get into office, and are then trapped a vicious circle of dishonesty in order to stay in office.

In American politics at least, there's another factor that corrupts politicians, in addition to the news media and (predominantly) ignorant public.
The political system requires an idealist to constantly compromise in order to accomplish anything. An idealist must compromise his/her personal convictions in order to comply with the strategies and policies of the political party that got them elected. In legislative committees, legislators have to compromise and reciprocate with other legislators to get legislation passed. The entire system of checks and balances built into the consitutional framework requires an individual with high ideals to water down their convictions in order to push actual laws through the system and get them passed. The constitution of the US was built on a foundational principle of distrust of those in power, requiring them to jump through structural hoops in order to actually get things done, with the idea that if the system puts enough obstacles in the way, very little will actually get done, and things will tend to remain stable and change will occur slowly over time.
And all of this ignores the influence of money in politics, in the US at least. Wealthy people, large corporations, and interest groups spend large amounts of money to influence political leaders' opinions, and (predominantly ignorant) public opinions. An idealistic politician who would like to do something to help ordinary people is fighting an uphill battle against an unending flood of money spent by people and organizations that benefit from the system staying the way it is.
In the U.S., if there was a practical way to significantly reduce the way big money influences the political system, there would be more of a chance for idealists inside and outside government to actually make changes. Every time they try to pass campaign finance reform, it either gets defeated, watered down to uselessness, or bypassed through the judicial appeal process.

### Re: X-Factor VS UK General Election

Post by sarobah » Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:16 pm

The biggest difference I see between the US and Australia is the corrupting power of the â€œnewsâ€ media. (I cannot rally speak for the rest of the world.)
Americans rage about media bias â€“ too liberal if youâ€™re conservative, too conservative if youâ€™re liberal, too wishy-washy if youâ€™re centrist.
We donâ€™t have that problem here because the media is universally and unanimously right-wing. Every outlet in the country is controlled directly or indirectly by two or three large corporations. We have one of the most centralized and homogenized media (TV, radio, newspapers, magazines) anywhere in the world. Even our â€œpublicâ€ media has been corrupted because every journalist is angling for a juicy contract with one of the corporations.
As a result, even the most left-wing politicians must pander to the media, and anyone who stands up to the moguls and their personal agenda has a very short life expectancy in politics. As a result, for example, the Australian economy, which two years ago was the most dynamic on earth â€“ we survived the GFC with barely a heart flutter â€“ is now beginning to falter. Conservative politicians donâ€™t have to do anything constructive because they know they have the full power of media propaganda on their side. Centrist and left-wing politicians know that any attempt at progress or reform will see them out of office in a landslide.
The interesting thing about Australian politics is that money is not a big issue. The left-wing parties have the backing of the unions and wealthy idealists, while the right-wing parties have the support of the corporations (and of course donâ€™t have to pay for advertising because they get it free).
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.