Continuing the theme of my last post, the Tories' talk of getting more votes than Labour did in 2005 (repeated here by The Sun) is particularly disingenuous. In the last election, on a lower turnout, Labour's 9,562,122 votes translated into a 35.3% share of the vote and a majority of sixty-seven seats. In the first-past-the-post system, it's the number of seats, not the number of votes, that matters. The Conservatives have failed to win more than 50% of the vote in any of the countries which make up the United Kingdom. They have also failed to win the three hundred and twenty six seats neeeded to gain a majority of seats.
"It's not a presidential system, it's a parliamentary one," as David Steel rightly said. As things stand, with no outright winner, the incumbent gets first shot at forming a government. What is it about the constitution that the Tories don't quite get?