Ordinary Gweilo

Following on from the debate about the voting system in Hong Kong, David Webb has done some detailed research and come up with an interesting analysis of how different systems might have produced different results. However, as we know, this system was put in place precisely to produce the results that is has done.

He is also sympathetic to the Democrats, and feels that their strategy did make sense:

In HK Island they split their 4 main candidates onto two separate lists, headed by barrister Audrey Eu Yuet Mee and the Democratic Party’s Yeung Sum and with a third member on the Democratic Party list. The split lists was a risky gamble which did not pay off, but you can’t blame them for trying, because the main strategic goal of the pan-democrats in this election was to give themselves a slight chance of getting 30 or 31 of the 60 votes in LegCo, even if it meant increasing the downside risk. Politically, there isn’t much difference between 24 and 26 votes (they won 25) but 30 or 31 would have made a big difference. Other factors, such as the pecking order for 3rd and 4th place on a combined list, also may have kept them apart.

Interesting article, and well worth reading. [Via Simon, again.]