Italian elections

graphics person has left right disability...

What the graph tells me is:

In the elections for the House of Deputies:

- Prodi's Union and its allies got 49,8% of the vote and 348 seats
- Berlusconi's House of Liberty got 49,7% of the vote and 281 seats

Here, Berlusconi falls in a hole he dug for the other side. The 0,1% lead for the left translates in such an ample majority of seats because of a provision in the new electoral law, which Berlusconi pushed through shortly before the elections: it guarantees a 'bonus', safe majority for whoever wins the elections, by however small a margin.

In the elections for the Senate:

- Prodi's Union and its allies got 48,9% of the vote, but 158 seats
- Berlusconi's House of Liberty got 50,2% of the vote, but only 156 seats

In both the House of Deputies and the Senate, one independent candidate made it in.

Oh, thanks, Nimh, that's what has been confusing me silly. I didn't get that you can somehow get more of the seats with a lesser percentage of the vote. This is a challenge for my understanding.

CBC reports that both a Canadian and an American have been elected to the Senate, under the new provisions for native-born Italians in other countries to vote and to stand for office.

On my not understanding, I didn't think far enough, that different votes would accumulate for different seats variously. (doh).

Yeah, I had the same problem trying to figure out how Bush could get more votes in the Electoral College, when Gore got more votes... ;-)

That and this is basically for the same reason: the role played by the assignment of seats by region/state. Though in Italy's case it's more subtle because at least the number of seats each region gets to elect is proportional to their population size.

In Italy, seats (in the brand-new system) are distributed on the basis of proportional representation - but, this is done by province, in each of 26 (House) or 20 (Senate) constituencies, rather than on a national level. So some distortion can come into play that way. Moreover, in the case of the Senate, the electoral thresholds for parties and coalitions are applied separately in each of the 20 constituencies, meaning that a party can be assigned seats proportional to its vote in one constituency, but get none in another because it failed the threshold there. So that can create some additional distortion.


Why? The left is on the left of each graphic, the right is on the right; the left is red, the right is blue; just like it should be :wink:

(Only Americans could be as daft to assign the colour red to the right-wing party...)

No, when I was whining about the graphic I was assuming higher vote percentage meant higher seats...so I thought the graphic artist was confusing everything.

(Sigh of relieg)
Very good that Berlusconi's "Legge Truffa" played against him.
Very bad to see Italy divided by half.

That's - what nimh said - similar in the USA and the UK: eg. Blair's Labour Party just got something about 30% of the seats but a comfortable plus in seats or in the USA ....

From the Manchester Evening News (1rst edititon) of today:



(Related report in today's Independent

So, what do you people think?

Should Berlusconi graciously call Prodi and congratulate him, acknowledging his defeat?

Or is he right to wait until the customary review of disputed ballots (some 40,000, I think) is finished, probably on Friday?

And if that review doesnt change the outcome, should he admit defeat?

Or would he be right to ask for a recount, which might take weeks?

And for those like me, who find themselves instinctively thinking, at first blush: he should just acknowledge defeat and allow Prodi to start governing - also to avoid the country from getting into a protracted and possibly dangerous mess - there's a clincher question: how would you reason your position in comparative perspective to the position you held on the Bush/Gore Florida race and proposed recount?

The review of the ballots could take weeks since a lot of the questioned votes are among the votes from Italians living abroad.

I mean, more than have of those votes 43,000 should be pro-Berlusconi, none pro-Prodi if he wants to win ...

I suppose, if this doesn't work as he wants, he'll ask for a complete recount.

While Prodi already got congratulations from some couple of countries, the UK and the USA are still being missed.

Well, your question how I would consider compared to my Florida position ...

The Italian Interior Ministery which supervised the elections, wasn't in the opposition's hands, right? :wink:

Not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify?

While not purporting to speak for Walter, he might be referring to the belief that the Supremes stopped the Florida recount because of their conservative complexion.

Well, thanks Set :wink:

Actually I just wanted to say that the counting etc was - more or less - supervised by the government and not by the oppsition.
(That's one reason, why I hold Berlusconi's call for UN_observers [besides that it would been an OSCE-team] for ridiculous.)

Eh, now I'm just more confused. How does the make-up of the Supreme Court come into the comparison? I'm asking whether you would approve or disapprove of a recount being even started -- whereas in Florida, the role of the Supreme Court only ever came into play when a recount had already been started, but then was ceased.

I still don't get Walter's point. Yes, UN observers - whatever, that was just Berlusconi bluster. But that wasn't what I was asking about. I gather that you would disapprove if Berlusconi would call for a recount, then? Because ... the initial count of the votes has been supervised by the government?

But the initial count in Florida was supervised by the government as well, and that was not a reason to oppose a recount there.

Because it was Berlusconi's own government that supervised the initial count, so he shouldn't complain? Whereas in the case of Florida in 2000 the initial count was supervised by a Republican state government (in opposition to the Clinton/Gore administration)?

But that makes a difference how - I mean, bottom line - would you have opposed a recount in Florida, then, if the state government there had been Democratic?

OK, let me try again. This is what I'm curious about.

Should Berlusconi graciously call Prodi and congratulate him, acknowledging his defeat? Or is he right to wait until the customary review of disputed ballots (some 40,000, I think) is finished, probably on Friday?

And if that review doesnt change the outcome, should he admit defeat? Or would he be right to ask for a recount, which might take weeks?

If you oppose a recount now, but supported a recount in Florida, what is the reason for the difference, specifically?

He might be referring to the fact that the elections (and the recounts) in Florida were supervised by the state elections officials, who were appointed by the governor, Jeb Bush(Republican, winning candidate's brother). I'm assuming it's not done that way in Italy.

Oh, nevermind, I see you counted that already.

Don't forget Katherine Harris, then Florida's Secretary of State and Chair of the Shrub's campaign in that state. She is now the Republican member for Florida's 13th congressional district.

<mulling this over>

Do they often have recounts in Italy?

This Prodi government may not last long as it is (his last one lasted longer than most recent ital governments). Seems detrimental to make a recount and review of recount go on ad infinitum. On the expat italian vote recount, I thought that was presumed to be going for Prodi and that it filled expectations.

On the other hand, when the outcome is so close...

On the other hand, be gracious and move on. Berlusconi is still a powerful man.

I think that given the nature of the rather rapidly changing governmental composition, going for recount is unbecoming.
(but I only think that - say - 54% to 46%.)