|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I'm not a member or anything, so don't know exactly where/how to put this, but when doing some research for a-level spanish coursework, I discovered that the introduction to the page entitled 'spanish legislative elections 2004' (or something like that) is horrendously biased. It seriously needs looking at otherwise generations of young spanish students to come will start thinking that PSOE and Zapatero basically illegally cheated their way into power and are all duplicitous scurvy naves etc. thank you lovely wikipedia people, it would be much appreciated. laura 20.04 5 march 2007
Why was the table removed? It had all the links, and the election is on Sunday, so we'll have to put the table back again anyway.... --Vikingstad 01:56, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Fine, so put it back then. People don't expect to open an encyclopaedia and find an emplty table. Adam 02:00, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- True enough. We might just wait until Sunday and then get it back from the history and start filling it... --Vikingstad 02:03, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Instead of complaining, just go and rescue the table from teh page history right now :-) Miguel 17:49, 2004 Mar 14 (UTC)
Is this starting of the 2nd paragraph proper English (I am not a native speaker)? Elections for the elections to the regional parliament... Pfortuny 11:18, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The Interior Ministry website is giving Senate figures only by circumscription, which means a lot of adding up to get national figures. I will do it tonight if no-one else has done it but I don't have time at the moment. Adam 04:13, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
No, it doesn't ;-) Miguel 05:52, 2004 Mar 15 (UTC)
I quite object to the following sentence It is possible that voters swung to the PSOE in the vote for the Congress of Deputies, which determines the government, but stuck with the PP in the voting for the Senate, thus placing a brake on a future socialist government. I suspect the main reason for the differences is the way in which seats are assigned at the senate: usually, the winning party in a constituency gets three seats, and the second party one. Furthermore, the number of seats for constituency is the same everywhere, or almost (I'm not sure about the islands), disregarding differences in population. Besides, PSC (PSOE) went to the senate in coalition to ERC and IC in Catalonia. I haven't checked the results, but I wouldn't write such a sentence unless there is evidence of different patterns of voting in Congress and Senate (and then, we wouldn't need to begin It is possible...) 220.127.116.11 18:51, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Here's how it goes with the Senate vote...
In the senate, constituencies elect one, two, three or four seats depending on their size. Voters are allowed to vote for up to three people on the (rather large) ballot, and parties present up to three candidates. It is therefore impossible for any party to win four seats from any one constituency. Also, Spanish voters tend to be beholden to one particular party and, despite the fact that these are personal votes, the candidates don't campaign individually. As a result, the typical behaviour of the Spanish voter is to vote for the three candidates from their party of choice. That is why, typically, the majority party in each constutuency wins 3 seats and the second 1, but it need not be that way by law. For this reason, a coloured map with who led in each province would give a roughly proportional picture of who got how many senate seats.
Hope that helps. Miguel 20:45, 2004 Mar 15 (UTC)
- Every peninsular district elects 4 senators. Toledo and Teruel are the only districts in which PP and PSOE each win 2 seats. Everywhere else, it is a 3-1 distribution.
- Insular districts are more complex. The Balearic islands (one province) elect 5 senators, 3 in Mallorca, 1 in Menorca and 1 in Ibiza and Formentera. The Canary Islands elect 11, as it consists of two provinces, Santa Cruz de Tenerife (Tenerife 3, Gomera 1, Palma 1 and Hierro 1) and Las Palmas (Gran Canaria 3, Fuerteventura 1, Lanzarote 1). The North-African enclaves Ceuta and Melilla elect 2 senators each.
- In large insular district and the enclaves, voters choose two candidates. The distribution tends to be 2-1 or 2.
- Adam, by the way, I love your archive. Miguel 14:52, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)
It does, thankyou. I haven't had a chance to do a detailed analysis of the Senate voting yet. (So many elections, so little time...). When I do I may change the paragraph. Adam 01:20, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Ohmygod, Adam (to say it in Californian ;-), you did a great job with that map!!! Miguel 14:36, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)
I object to the translation of "chunta"as "junta". Although the translation of "chunta" from Aragonese to Castillian is "junta", the Spanish word "junta" has passed into English with a very specific and undemocratic meaning associated to "military junta". "Junta" in this case has the meaning of "coming together", and the most common meaning os "junta" in Spanish, from which "military junta is derived"is "board", as in "junta directiva" (board of directors) or "junta militar" (an assembly of the top brass leading a coup).
My family has an Aragonese-Castilian dictionary, I can try to find out whether "chunta" translates as something other than "junta". Miguel 06:02, 2004 Mar 15 (UTC)
I assumed that chunta is the Aragonese version of the Castilian junta, which literally translates as group in English, but is usually used in the sense of "military junta." Perhaps it could be translated as Alliance or Union. Adam 06:07, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Or translate as "convergence"? Certainly not the English-language "junta", though, for all the reasons stated above. -- Jmabel 06:15, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- "Assembly"? The autonomous governments of Andalusia, Extremadura and Galicia are called Junta. It goes at least to the Peninsula war, when the local authorities organized autonomous governments in the name of the king Fernando instead of the French-ruled State. The American juntas later planned for independence, but that is another story. Could we also use the cognate joint? I think that Chunta is pro-legalization of cannabis :).
> In the Senate the PP won 102 seats to the PSOE's 81, a better result than in the lower house.
"better" ? Wiki is rooting for PP?
No, it is just a comparative relating to the PP's performance in the two houses. Adam 06:13, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I have changed Junta to Union, which is short and seems to capture the meaning. Adam 06:18, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Since Aznar was not a candidate at this election, of what relevance is his photo? A photo of Rajoy would be better. In any case, please reupload the Aznar photo with him facing inwards. It is serious design error to have a profile photo facing outwards like that. Adam 09:30, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Replaced Aznar's pic with one of Rajoy. As for flipping Aznar around his axis -- not so sure about that. Political considerations aside, what about the future generations burning with curiosity as to which side he parted his hair on? –Hajor 15:52, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
In the map it should say "plurality", not "plurity". --Wik 17:15, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)
Yes, I guess so. Adam 23:08, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Mailed-in overseas ballots need to *arrive* by March 17, regardless of postmark, and people could also vote at consular offices up to the weekend before the electron (March 7). For instance, I received my ballot On March 5, filled it out on March 6, and mailed it on march 8. This is important, because it means absentee ballots don't reflect the political impact of the events of March 11-14.
So, Adam, do you know if it is possible to know the voting pattern of absentee (mail-in and overseas) ballots?
Miguel 16:10, 2004 Mar 17 (UTC)
No, I have no idea about that. There is probably a section on election law at the Interior Ministry election website (linked in the article), but my Spanish won't be up to reading that. It looks like we need a new article on the Spanish electoral system (on the lines of my Australian electoral system, rather than including all this at this article. Adam 01:13, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Actually, if you look at this link you'll see it is possible to get data for residentes ausentes, ie., absentee voters. It is not available for 2004 yet, but it should be soon. Miguel 21:32, 2004 Mar 19 (UTC)
The map, the Congress, the Senate and everything
Just a question: the map refers to the Senate, doesn't it? If so, it ought to be stated in the caption. You know, we in Spain care about the Congress, as the Senate is quite useless, in the end.
So... I would also suggest including a map for the Congress... with the Autonomías instead of the provinces... uhmmm :) Pfortuny 16:12, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The point of the map is that the electoral district is the province, not the autonomous community. I said earlier that such a map would be more useful for the comparative analysis of congress and senate results. I think "who leads" is (or should be) in number of votes for the congreso, because it is one person, one vote while the senate is one person, from one to three votes. Miguel 20:54, 2004 Mar 18 (UTC)
The map is for the Congress, not the Senate. The electoral districts are called circimscriptions, not provinces. So far as I know there is no such thing as a province in Spain. There are Autonomous Communities and circumscriptions. I did include a map showing the Autonomous Communities, (spain2.jpg) but I decided later that the circumscriptions were the more useful unit. Adam 00:03, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Administratively, Spain is divided into 52 provinces which are then grouped into 17 autonomous communities. Geographically provinces are sometimes divided into comarcas. Electorally, the electoral district (I would not object to translating circunscripción electoral as electoral district if circumscription is awkward in English) is the province for the Congress, but islands are treated differently in the Senate. For European parliament elections there is a single district for the whole country, with 60 seats (circunscripción única). Miguel 01:35, 2004 Mar 19 (UTC)
- My apologies for the mistake. I was completely wrong in my appreciation... I really did not know the electoral system (the division) of my country! Now it is clear for me. Funny, isn't it? Pfortuny 11:18, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- At least our system is not like in the USA, where the electoral districts need not have anything to do with administrative or geographical divisions and congressional districts are redrawn every 10 years. Miguel 14:36, 2004 Mar 19 (UTC)
Ah well, Pfortuny, psephology is an esoteric discipline. Miguel, I see that I was wrong to say that there are no Provinces in Spain. I should have said that for electoral purposes the Provinces are called circumscriptions. "Circumscription" is not a very common word in English but it is a perfectly good word to use. I suppose "electoral district" could be used instead, but I would prefer to use the correct word. Adam 11:29, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Funny how we call the Presidente Prime Minister but it would be "less correct" to call circunscripción Electoral District Miguel 19:25, 2004 Mar 19 (UTC)
- Agreed. Pfortuny
- The reason for that is that "Prime Minister" is the established English usage and using President is very confusing in English. There is no established English usage for Spanish electoral units, because only specialists like me pay any attention to Spanish elections at that level of detail. I have no objection to changing "circumscription" to "electoral district." I would be opposed to using "constituency" because that in English means a district which elects one Member of Parliament, as in Britain. Adam 06:36, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to argue that "circumscription" isn't immediately transparent in an English-speaking electoral context and that "constituency" or "(electoral) district" would be better options. But I also acknowledge that Adam's more of an election junkie than I am. –Hajor 19:37, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Re constituency: in the UK it is also used for the multi-member electoral districts that return MEPs to the European Parliament on a PR basis, not only for the single-member Westminster districts. But presumably it is heavily marked as a UK usage, and "electoral district" would be more neutral. Still, I don't know whether it's worth taking the time and trouble to change in the article. –Hajor 14:15, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I have added changes in vote numbers, and placeholders for total census, participation numbers and percentage, changes, and totals.
The reason is that it has been claimed that the largest effect in this election is that the PSOE got 3,000,000 votes from people who stayed at home in 2000, and the table did not contain enough information to test that claim. It istill doesn't, but at least there are placeholders. Miguel 20:50, 2004 Mar 19 (UTC)
claims that 90% of Spaniards voted as they intended before the March 11 attacks, and 8% decided their vote afterwards. 60% think Aznar is responsible for the PP's defeat, and only 3% think Rajoy is responsible.
Miguel 21:03, 2004 Mar 22 (UTC)
I'm probably being a bit politized, but do you seriously rely on Cadena SER? I think that a reference to the 11-M attacks should be added. We don't have to say whether they changed the vote or not (I think they didn't: 13-M on-the-border-of-law manifestations did), but simply say what happened.
Why is there a table of provincial election results for the Senate but not for the Congress of Deputies?
Acegikmo1 20:20, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone know the election statistics such as Lsq (least-squares index of disproportionality), DM (district magnitude), ENEP (effective number of elective parties), ENEP (effective number of parliamentary parties), effective threshold etc.? If they do, can the please put it up? Cheers, --18.104.22.168 03:32, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- You have the data. If you know the definitions of these things you might want to calculate them yourself. D we even have pages about them? — Miguel 12:46, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)
- I've got to calculate then anyway, I was just trying to save time :) Once I've calculated them I'll put them up. As far as I know Wikipedia does not have articles on them. They tend to be the realm of political scientists who still look down at Wikipedia. --Gregstephens 03:47, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've put up the stats now (finally). I've only calculated for the lower house, as that is the more important of the two--Gregstephens 09:19, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
By whom and on what grounds are the netrality and accuracy of this article disputed? Unless they state their reasons, I will delete the tag. Adam 01:14, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- The socialists received more votes than expected probably as a result of the government's handling of the 11 March 2004 Madrid attacks. During the days following the attacks, the national government initiated efforts to convince citizens and the media that ETA was to blame for the attacks, when evidence pointed to the possibility that an Islamic extremist group was behind the massacre. If the latter were the case, the attack could have been perceived by the electorate to be a consequence of the Spanish government's support of the invasion of Iraq and the provision of Spanish troops to participate in that conflict.
While I agree with this text, the issue is still highly controversial in Spain. Just take a look at the article on Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and [[Talk:Jos%E9_Luis_Rodr%EDguez_Zapatero|its talk page]] to see what I mean.
I think I'll leave it to someone who is not a Spaniard to decide what to do with this paragraph. — Miguel 08:58, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
I agree the paragraph is mostly speculation, and the opinions in it should be attributed to someone. Adam 09:23, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Since the person who added the NPOV tag has offered no explanation for doing so, I have deleted it. Adam 09:30, 3 May 2005 (UTC)