|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Apr 3, 2022 20:47:40 GMT
Meanwhile here's an official two tailed dog candidate photograph from the official government website.  |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Apr 3, 2022 21:27:28 GMT
This election has been a disaster for progressive politics in Hungary. After all these pacts, all what has happened, Fidesz-KDNP have actually increased their supermajority despite most credible opposition parties forming the United for Hungary alliance and with a moderate candidate as their lead candidate.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Apr 3, 2022 21:31:32 GMT
3 leads for the opp. outside of BudaPest: Baranya-01 (Pécs): PM/Dialogue Csongrád-Csanád-01 (Szeged): MSZP Féjer-04 (Dunaújváros): Jobbik EnCountered by 3 leads for Fidesz in the capital. Now just 2 with ~90% of votes counted: Baranya-01 ("Pecs Central") and Csongrad-Csanad-01 ("Szeged East"). |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Apr 3, 2022 22:00:53 GMT
It doesn't look like the opposition are going to increase their constituency count as most of the tighter races are almost all over 90% counted. They could even drop back one as one of the seats they're currently leading in in Budapest is very tight and still has 20% or so left to count.
And with just over 10% of the vote left to count on the lists, it's looking increasingly likely that Fidesz will take 135 (aka exactly 2/3rds) of the seats in parliament with the remaining 1/3rd consisting of United for Hungary (56), Our Homeland Movement (7) and one minority seat (the Germans). I don't expect the arithmetic to change beyond maybe one seat swapping one way or another.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Apr 3, 2022 22:02:45 GMT
It doesn't look like the opposition are going to increase their constituency count as most of the tighter races are almost all over 90% counted. They could even drop back one as one of the seats they're currently leading in in Budapest is very tight and still has 20% or so left to count. And with just over 10% of the vote left to count on the lists, it's looking increasingly likely that Fidesz will take 135 (aka exactly 2/3rds) of the seats in parliament with the remaining 1/3rd consisting of United for Hungary (56), Our Homeland Movement (7) and one minority seat (the Germans). I don't expect the arithmetic to change beyond maybe one seat swapping one way or another. There are 199 seats in the Hungarian parliament so 135 is more than 2/3 of the seats (67.84% in fact, to 2 decimal places). |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,815 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Apr 3, 2022 22:03:16 GMT
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,815
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Apr 3, 2022 22:05:48 GMT
It doesn't look like the opposition are going to increase their constituency count as most of the tighter races are almost all over 90% counted. They could even drop back one as one of the seats they're currently leading in in Budapest is very tight and still has 20% or so left to count. And with just over 10% of the vote left to count on the lists, it's looking increasingly likely that Fidesz will take 135 (aka exactly 2/3rds) of the seats in parliament with the remaining 1/3rd consisting of United for Hungary (56), Our Homeland Movement (7) and one minority seat (the Germans). I don't expect the arithmetic to change beyond maybe one seat swapping one way or another. There are 199 seats in the Hungarian parliament so 135 is more than 2/3 of the seats (67.84% in fact, to 2 decimal places). With 10% uncounted they could lose their SuperMajority. But will on the other hand have ~7 exJobbikers for support. |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Apr 3, 2022 22:06:45 GMT
It would be interesting to see if those numbers have shifted at all in the month since the poll was reported |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Apr 4, 2022 2:21:34 GMT
I expected orban to win, but getting a higher share of the vote then in 2010 and winning by more then 18% is a bit of a shock….
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Apr 4, 2022 5:46:11 GMT
3.3%, almost doubled on 2018. I declare moral victory.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Apr 4, 2022 9:18:07 GMT
This election has been a disaster for Hungary There, fixed that for you. Though the failure of the "united opposition coalition" might be a cautionary note to those here who still think an anti-Tory "progressive alliance" (in a formal rather than informal arrangement, that is) can be some sort of cure for all our ills. |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Apr 4, 2022 10:10:19 GMT
One small ray of light though is that the referendum failed to pass as despite a clear "no" result, no enough votes were cast to make it binding. I still expect the law to be introduced anyway in some shape or form as the government will probably argue that their renewed majority will give them the right to legislate as they see fit. Even though it will cause a looming battle with the EU...
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Apr 4, 2022 10:17:50 GMT
This election has been a disaster for Hungary There, fixed that for you. Though the failure of the "united opposition coalition" might be a cautionary note to those here who still think an anti-Tory "progressive alliance" (in a formal rather than informal arrangement, that is) can be some sort of cure for all our ills. Particularly looks as if Jobbik supporters deserted their leadership en masse. |
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,267
|
Post by WJ on Apr 4, 2022 10:22:51 GMT
As others have pointed out, Jobbik have gone on quite the journey in recent years. I would not be surprised if many of their voters switched to "Our Homeland" which appear to have filled the space that Jobbik formerly occupied.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Apr 4, 2022 10:42:17 GMT
This election has been a disaster for Hungary There, fixed that for you. Though the failure of the "united opposition coalition" might be a cautionary note to those here who still think an anti-Tory "progressive alliance" (in a formal rather than informal arrangement, that is) can be some sort of cure for all our ills. As I keep reminding people, the original "progressive alliance" were groupings opposed to the Socialists. And had about as much effect. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Apr 4, 2022 11:06:16 GMT
Thread on how bad the opposition campaign was, which seems plausible and rational to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Apr 4, 2022 11:26:19 GMT
There, fixed that for you. Though the failure of the "united opposition coalition" might be a cautionary note to those here who still think an anti-Tory "progressive alliance" (in a formal rather than informal arrangement, that is) can be some sort of cure for all our ills. As I keep reminding people, the original "progressive alliance" were groupings opposed to the Socialists. And had about as much effect. I don't think that's correct .
The earliest reference i can find to a 'progressive alliance' is in the Evening Standard in November 1894, which refers to a Progressive Alliance of England and er....Russia. But laughter in the dark aside...
At a British political level Progressive Alliances between Labour and others are also referred to also in 1894/5, and the first warning against them on the left at almost exactly the same time, with reference to a vestry election in London.
I think you are referring to what was called at the time (first ref 1902) "Moderate-Progressive alliances" ie those between the Tories (Moderates) and Progressives (Liberals). So roughly contemporary, but not the same thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Apr 4, 2022 13:30:36 GMT
Looked up the entirely Roma village in the south whose population pyramid is cited in the demographics of Hungary page... 94% FIDESZ, 5% opposition alliance.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,772
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Apr 4, 2022 14:04:10 GMT
As I keep reminding people, the original "progressive alliance" were groupings opposed to the Socialists. And had about as much effect. I don't think that's correct .
The earliest reference i can find to a 'progressive alliance' is in the Evening Standard in November 1894, which refers to a Progressive Alliance of England and er....Russia. But laughter in the dark aside...
At a British political level Progressive Alliances between Labour and others are also referred to also in 1894/5, and the first warning against them on the left at almost exactly the same time, with reference to a vestry election in London.
I think you are referring to what was called at the time (first ref 1902) "Moderate-Progressive alliances" ie those between the Tories (Moderates) and Progressives (Liberals). So roughly contemporary, but not the same thing.
The Progressive Alliance in 1920s/1930s Sheffield were Liberal Party and Conservative Party candidiates "sharing out" seats to avoid splitting the vote with the aim of preventing "the Socialists", ie, Labour candidates, getting on the council. It morphed into the Citizens' Association. It was so successful, that Labour ran the council continuously from 1926 for all but 7 years, and destroyed William Clegg's Liberal Party for decades. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Apr 4, 2022 14:08:06 GMT
I don't think that's correct .
The earliest reference i can find to a 'progressive alliance' is in the Evening Standard in November 1894, which refers to a Progressive Alliance of England and er....Russia. But laughter in the dark aside...
At a British political level Progressive Alliances between Labour and others are also referred to also in 1894/5, and the first warning against them on the left at almost exactly the same time, with reference to a vestry election in London.
I think you are referring to what was called at the time (first ref 1902) "Moderate-Progressive alliances" ie those between the Tories (Moderates) and Progressives (Liberals). So roughly contemporary, but not the same thing.
The Progressive Alliance in 1920s/1930s Sheffield were Liberal Party and Conservative Party candidiates "sharing out" seats to avoid splitting the vote with the aim of preventing "the Socialists", ie, Labour candidates, getting on the council. It morphed into the Citizens' Association. It was so successful, that Labour ran the council continuously from 1926 for all but 7 years, and destroyed William Clegg's Liberal Party for decades. I'm aware of all of that JG but the 'original progressive alliance' it was not.
I agree with you about the 'principle' though. These alliances are made by politicians - there is no guarantee that the general public will know about them, agree with them if they do know about them or vote for them even if they agree with them. As you illustrate, they could quite easily have the opposite effect to the one desired.
|
|
