[EL] UK election and what "mandates" mean in U.S.-style plurality voting system

Fri Dec 13 04:31:42 PST 2019

I just sent something about this same striking statistic--that the Tories
will have overwhelming control with about 44% of the vote--to the
CONLAWPROF list.  Here's the gist, FWIW:

The systems of allocating power in the US and UK are, of course, very
different.  Even so, [that statistic] sure jumped out at me [because of
what appears to be a potentially eerie parallel here in the U.S.]

Like many of you, I've been pondering lately why Trump--a far more
dangerous and divisive, and a far, far less popular, president--has so much
more loyalty among GOP members of Congress than Nixon did in the months
after the October 1973 "Saturday Night Massacre," leading to his
resignation in August 1974.  Recall that Nixon had just been re-elected
with over 61% of the vote, and that he had carried *47 states by at least
eight points.  *Trump has never realized support anywhere close to that.  And
even *after *the October 1973 "Massacre," the public *disapproved* of
Nixon's impeachment by about 51-38%, whereas today a majority supports
impeaching Trump.  Yet GOP support for Nixon in Congress began gradually
slipping away in late 1973--almost all among members in very safe seats,
and in states & districts that Nixon had carried in a landslide.  And less
than ten months later Nixon was gone.

The standard explanations for the discrepancy are (i) Fox News and (ii) the
threat of being "primaried" from the Right if a Republican congress member
jumps ship w/r/t Trump.  No doubt those are very important factors.  But I
think there's at least one other important thing in play, too--not
unrelated to those things--which I mention briefly at the end of this post
<https://balkin.blogspot.com/2019/12/who-massacred-whom-on-that-saturday.html>,
about Bill Ruckelshaus and the Saturday Night "Massacre":

In 1973-1974, if the GOP had been able to retain only 44% or so percent of
popular support--Trump's "ceiling" of support for the past three years--it
would have been routed in successive elections, unable to control either
the White House or Congress (or the courts), akin to 1964.  It would have
been an utterly defeated party.  It didn't need to retain Nixon's 61% in
order to compete (see 1968), but it sure enough did need to stay close to
if not exceed 50%.  Today, by contrast, if Trump can hold his 44% base--in
effect, those who get their news from FoxNews and similar outlets--the GOP
might well retain the White House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court for
*another *half-century (thanks to Mitch McConnell, the Court hasn't had a
Democratic majority for more than 50 years
<https://balkin.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-vicious-entrenchment-circle.html>).
Accordingly, GOP members feel comfortable sticking with Trump for the
simple reason that such support (which means nonconviction in the Senate)
does not necessarily mean a loss of overwhelming GOP control of the federal
government, even if the party and Trump never get much, if at all, above
44% public support.

I don't have to explain to this audience *why *the electoral math is so
different today.  I merely wanted to point out the striking parallel with
the 44% Tory support number in the UK that Prof. Dingwall cited.

On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 7:21 AM Rob Richie <rr at fairvote.org> wrote:

> Hi, Folks,
>
> The UK elections are a fascinating example of how a plurality voting
> system is not the same thing as a majoritarian voting system. Here was my
> tweet about it just now, linking to my piece last month anticipating
> yesterday's results.
>
> I'll note that a ranked choice voting district by district might not have
> changed the outcome, as geographic dispersion of votes matters as well as
> winning districts by majorities rather than pluralities. But if you add up
> the parties associated with Remain, it's a clear majority, with the
> Conservative Party (43.6%), its Northern Ireland allies and Brexit party
> (2.0%) combining for about 46% of the vote.
>
> Rob
>
>
> Rob Richie
> @Rob_Richie
> <https://twitter.com/Rob_Richie>
> ·
> 2m <https://twitter.com/Rob_Richie/status/1205460187362017281>
> British "mandate" for Brexit comes when slim majority of voters want to
> "remain." Most Labour voter defections went to pro-remain parties, not
> pro-Brexit voters, yet a pro-Brexit party now can move forward. See my
> piece last month anticipating results
>
>
>
> https://www.fairvote.org/brexit_plurality_rules_and_the_united_kingdom_s_broken_democracy
>
> Brexit, Plurality Rules, and the United Kingdom’s Broken Democracy
> ROB RICHIE
> NOVEMBER 12, 2019
>
>
>    -
>    Share on Twitter
>    <https://twitter.com/share?text=Brexit,%20Plurality%20Rules,%20and%20the%20United%20Kingdom%E2%80%99s%20Broken%20Democracy&url=http://www.fairvote.org/brexit_plurality_rules_and_the_united_kingdom_s_broken_democracy>
>    - Share via email
>    <?&subject=Brexit,%20Plurality%20Rules,%20and%20the%20United%20Kingdom%E2%80%99s%20Broken%20Democracy&body=http://www.fairvote.org/brexit_plurality_rules_and_the_united_kingdom_s_broken_democracy>
>
> Rarely has a policy debate so divided and paralyzed a nation as the issue
> of “Brexit” in the United Kingdom. In a 2016 national referendum, British
> voters narrowly approved leaving the European Union. The aftermath and
> turmoil ever since provides a case study in how such divisions are poorly
> handled by a plurality, single-choice voting system -- yes, the same voting
> method used by Americans to elect their members of Congress, governors and
> presidential electors.
>
> One problem is being able to win a majority of seats without trying to win
> a majority of votes. Since 1980,
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_elections_overview> no
> British political party has won even 44% of the national vote. In 2015, for
> example, David Cameron’s Conservative Party won a majority of seats with
> only 36.9% of the votes
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Kingdom_general_election>. His
> plurality victory was reminiscent of Bill Clinton winning a huge majority
> of electoral votes in 1992 with only 43% of the vote
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presidential_election> (and
> only a single state with more than 50%) and, more recently, Justin
> Trudeau of Canada's Liberal Party maintaining power with only 33% of the
> vote, less than the Conservative Party.
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Canadian_federal_election>
>
> Now, Boris Johnson leads the Conservatives, and his bid is all about
> playing to the “leave” Brexit base rather than a majority of Britons. “Remain”
> now consistently leads in polls
> <https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/>,
> but its backers are divided among several parties. Johnson received a boost
> this week when Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party announced
> <https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50387254> it would try to avoid
> splitting the “leave” vote by not running candidates in any seats now held
> by Conservatives. Farage is a long-time critic of plurality voting, and his
> party earlier this year joined a cross-party reform coalition
> <https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48847542>in support of a
> proportional voting system. But Farage also knows that, in a plurality
> system, a more united “leave” vote provides the best chance for Johnson to
> turn 40% of the vote into a majority of seats.
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Rob Richie
> President and CEO, FairVote
> 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 240
> Takoma Park, MD 20912
> rr at fairvote.org  (301) 270-4616  http://www.fairvote.org
> *FairVote Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/FairVoteReform>*   *FairVote
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/fairvote>*   My Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/rob_richie>
>
> Thank you for considering a *donation
> <http://www.fairvote.org/donate>. Enjoy our video on ranked choice voting
> <https://youtu.be/CIz_nzP-W_c>!*
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

-- 
Marty Lederman
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
202-662-9937
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20191213/52c1b943/attachment.html>