Talk:1999 Liberal Democrats leadership election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Politics of the United Kingdom

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Intermediate rounds?[edit]

Were there any intermediate rounds of transfers? Since Ballard, Bruce and Rendel combined still got fewer votes than Hughes I can see why they might go straight to the last two but it'd be interesting to see how the votes moved about and where the last two got their transfers from. Timrollpickering 20:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there will have been - they would have stopped earlier if any candidate had passed the 50% mark then. LibDems are very pure in their STV/AV and wouldn't have used the French presidential "take the top two after round one" approach.

That said, I don't know if the information is out there somewhere. Colin Rosenstiel's site is pretty comprehensive and that's where I sourced those figures from, which are all there were on the page for that election. --Whouk (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The intermediate stages are available on my website: [1]. David | Talk 10:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks David. --Whouk (talk) 12:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly speaking the method I described isn't a French "just the top two" approach or even the supplementary vote used for Mayors in the UK, but instead a common practice of returning officers to expedite the count when the numbers are clear that two or more of the bottom candidates lack the votes combined votes to save them all from elimination. When there are five or more candidates and a lot of ballot papers it can save time immensely and makes no difference to the actual result though makes it harder for commentators to track movements. Timrollpickering 14:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, right, I see what you were getting at. As they answer as that there were intermediate rounds, I suspect it's still LibDem purism, but I don't know for sure. --Whouk (talk) 14:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberal Democrats leadership election, 1999. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060220065739/http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/ldelections/all-member.htm to http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/ldelections/all-member.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:44, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]