On Aug 30, 11:37*am, 1506 wrote:
On Aug 29, 8:22*pm, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote:





On Aug 29, 8:09*pm, wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 01:32:15 -0700 (PDT)

Tom wrote:
limits. *There's a graph around the net of the Tory share of the vote
since the war and it's clearly declining, which possible explains why

Really? Hmm, thats odd:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/el...ml/england.stm

Looks pretty blue to me in england. (sic)

That's because the Tories tend to do well in the affluent countryside
constituencies that cover the largest geographical areas. Even in the
event of a Labour landslide, those maps would still look pretty blue.

The countryside: That would be farms. *Farmers are the folks who work
long hours to put food on your table. *They are common sense people.
They vote Conservative because they have worked very hard for what
they have. *Do you have a problem with that?

The Countryside is also home to countless small businesses. *These
people work hard and do not rely on government hand outs. *They do pay
ample taxes and collect VAT.

The countryside of the home counties is home to myriad commuters who
buy expensive tickets in order to commute to London and do real work.
Without their effort and taxes London's welfare insanity would not
exist.

Nock the countryside if you wish. *You are biting the hand that feeds
you.

He's not knocking the countryside. He's just pointing out that rural
areas have lower population densities, and are therefore larger
(sometimes considerably larger) than urban constituencies. Therefore,
the map can look blue, even though a majority of people can still be
voting red (albeit not at the last election).