Yes it is. The more parties there are receiving significant numbers of votes the less likely it is any one party will receive over 50% of the vote. This is just numerical fact.
"This isn't true" referred to your claim "In a strictly two party system the winner will get 50+% of the vote", and I explained why it's not true. You ask "has this ever happened", when of course it hasn't - we've never had a strictly two-party system. It has happened often that the geographical distribution of votes has led to absurd electoral results. In one of those you list the results for, 1983, Labour and the Liberals got almost the same number of votes, yet Labour got ten times the number of seats. It's also happened a couple of times in the 20th century that the party with the most votes got less seats than the party who finished second in the popular vote.
You are welcome to complain about the British electoral system. I voted against it in the recent referendum remember? But the same electoral environment is true of every other UK Prime Minister so this isn't really anything that can be tied to Thatcherism specifically.
And I never pretended it did. I was just arguing against specific claims from earlier in the thread, it's not a general comment on Thatcherism.
The UK currently has a coalition government. Here are the results for that:
2010 Con 36.1% Lab 29.0% Lib 23.0%
Now you could say that the present government got 59.1% of the vote. Or you could, on the basis that both parties have used the fact of coalition as an excuse to jettison firm manifeso pledges, say that nobody at all voted for the present programme of policies.
Which would you say?
Well, both, obviously.
™ Version 4.2
