Talk:1990 Conservative Party 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 High‑importance

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Election results

After the 1975 review the "15% margin in Round 1" refers to the total electorate and not just those voting for candidates. Consequently I think it's misleading to show figures that give Thatcher a 16% lead over Heseltine when this only refers to those actively voting for candidates and the distinction proved critical. Does anyone have the numbers of abstentions/spoils/not voting? Timrollpickering 23:12, 24 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Under the old rules (with only the 356 who voted counted) she would have led Hezza by 57.3% to 42.6966%, assuming my maths is right. So although it's sometimes said she would have "won" under the old rules (somebody anonymously removed this claim from the article, so I just checked the maths), it would only have been true had the Returning Officer chosen to round the result by dropping the decimals altogether! Put another way, counting only those who voted, a lead of 54 MPs (15% of 356 is 53.4) was needed, whereas counting the entire parliamentary party, a lead of 56 MPs (15% of 372 is 55.8) was needed. Thatcher had a majority of 52, so she was short under either set of rules, and 4 short under the rules in use in 1990.MissingMia (talk) 13:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Error

The totals for the first round add up to 379. But there were only 372 Conservative MPs at the time. The figures for the two candidates are correct, but the Abstention and Spoilt figures are wrong - there should be 16 in total. This error seems to have been in the article for 6 years.--86.178.142.210 (talk) 04:02, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome

This section is argumentative and in my opinion does not belong in this form in Wikipedia, particularly without inline citations. Its analysis of post 1990 UK politics is not necessarily wrong but needs citations and to consider alternative analyses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.5.101 (talk) 22:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Summary box

In the summary box on the top right, what does it mean by "Popular vote: unopposed" and "Popular vote: withdrew"? In those days all Conservative Party leadership contests were settled purely by MPs, though sometimes with multiple rounds. There was never any role for the popular vote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.248.89 (talk) 19:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Triggered by what exactly?

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#1990 Conservative Party leadership election -what triggered it? -Bogger (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]