An unsatisfying answer, even if it is likely correct.

Pointless is a fucking great premise for a game.

But whoever the poll to determine the points makes me sometimes feel utterly insane watching the show. When they don’t know obscure Australian towns as well as me, that’s one thing, and not very surprising. But when major Disney Renaissance films, or some other thing that to me is part of the most fundamental 21st century culture, scores in the low 20s, it makes it very hard to relate to the show.

If the polling was done by an audience more representative of the general population in terms of age, instead of clearly skewing very old, it would be greatly to the show’s benefit.

How could you possibly tell‽

Hmm, how confident are you in that?

I’m from Australia, and here I know that it’s a fairly common misconception that the AEC vote counting staff are volunteers. But they’re not. They’re hired to work on the day, and only on the day, with a little online training beforehand. They’re paid minimum wage at casual loading rates. Usually they work the whole day issuing votes and then switch to counting once polls have closed. There are also “scrutineers”, who are volunteers (IIRC they legally must be volunteers, not paid) representing the candidates/parties, who watch the counting process and may challenge how a ballot has been counted, but may not ever touch.

Instant Runoff was on the table in the 2011 referendum. Very similar to STV, but generally STV is what’s referred to in a multi-winner situation. Australia uses STV in the Senate, as does the Irish Dáil. IRV is what Australia uses in the House of Representatives, and a few areas of the US, like Maine. STV actually is a proportional (or at least quasi-proportional) system, unlike IRV.

But you’re right that unfortunately proportional representation has never been on the table in the UK. I don’t agree with the guy’s more recent takes on comedy and “free speech”, but I have great respect for the fact that this is something John Cleese has been on about since 1987. And again in 1998. And most recently in 2018.

First Past the Post, everybody:

That’s:

• Conservatives: 19.5% of seats from 22.9% of the vote
• Labour: 63.7% of seats from 35.2% of the vote
• LibDems: 10.5% of seats from 11.3% of the vote
• Reform: 0.6% of seats from 14.5% of the vote
• SNP: 1.2% of seats from 2.5% of the vote
• Others: 4% of seats from 13.6% of the vote

I love this guy’s expression.

No, majority means 50%. The term for the largest number is “plurality”.

Considering some were suggesting a chance Sunak would lose his own seat, his victory is pretty overwhelming. Even if you try simulating an IRV vote where everyone apart from Reform preferences Labour, the distribution would still see Labour fall 5 thousand votes behind the tories before you distribute Reform’s votes to the Conservatives. A 62% victory on 2 candidate preferred once all is said and done.

But would he win more electorates by pandering to the further right, or by giving the middle a reason to be enthusiastic about them?

Why’s a guy holding up a big “L” sign behind Sunak?

And Hunt also retains.

Aww, Sunak retains.

Also, the ITV guy referred to Count Binface as “Mister”. The disrespect. 😞

Jeremy Corbyn describes his victory as “a good majority”.

He did not, in fact, win a majority, although he got very close. 49.2%

It’s subtle, but see if you can tell what party she represents. (lower third graphic unrelated)

Jacob Rees Mogg suggesting Conservatives were demolished because they weren’t far right enough. Interviewer says “don’t you think maybe it’s because you let down the centre?” And Mogg is like “no way. Maggy Thatcher is based.”

😬

I do like that Farage tries to call himself “centre-right”.

On the other hand, I unironically do like that he calls out how shit FPTP is.

UKIP still exists? Wat?

Holy shit the crowd’s reaction at Jeremy Corbyn getting 24,000. 😲

I do love the trend of Returning Officers wearing silly hats.