|
Post by AlliG on Nov 13, 2023 15:17:08 GMT
Quite right.. I'd go further and say that the rules of the referendum should have been such that an absolute majority of the entire electorate should have been required in order to force the whole Country into undertaking such a radically dissolute action, at all. I see alot of people on here arguing for and against Brexit on economic grounds but the cultural isolation and lack of free movement we now have as individuals within our nation is in my opinion culturally and individually stifling. Something which is hard to quantify in financial terms but definitely noticeable in cultural effects and it grates on the soul, as far as I'm concerned. Not sure about the rules surrounding the Brexit vote but Cameron did as much as he possibly could to ensure a Remain victory. I think he would have been happy with a simple majority vote because he never expected to lose. Bloody hell! There was I thinking he ran the most insipid, lack-lustre, uninspiring pigs ear of a Remain campaign deliberately. It never even occurred to me that he was doing his best to win.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Nov 13, 2023 15:35:41 GMT
The unelected PM appointing unelected ministers. I think he may have shot himself in the foot with some of the criticism he may get for this decision. Just highlights the disarray at present. Just call an election and get it over with. I'm not sure what they're expecting to happen in the next 12 months to suddenly change the public perception. Thank God we voted to restore Sovereignty and Took Back Control so that the Government we Elect can be accountable at the Ballot Box .... oh wait Call me Dave Cameron the Architect of Austerity is immediately granted a Peerage so he can take up the position of Foreign Secretary to Represent UK abroad including EU, you couldn't make it up This is the same Dave who after he resigned as an MP was censured by a House of Commons Parliamentary Committee for not investigating the Company he was paid £10M to work for, Greensill, more thoroughly and for persistently lobbying Ministers on their behalf Greensill is still under investigation by the UK Serious Fraud Office as well as similar fraud investigations in Switzerland and Germany. What could possibly go wrong. Integrity, professionalism and accountability
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 13, 2023 15:37:32 GMT
You remember...Crapslinger, Slippyblunger, Aureliuspotter, that bloke you and Felonious kept telling me I was wrong about but who seems to keep getting banned time after time You were wrong. But that’s not important We both know I wasn't 😄 It doesn't matter, you're right. Although it does beg the question how such new posters got perma-banned so quickly 🤣
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 13, 2023 15:38:44 GMT
Has there been a time in your life when the entire country (regardless of political viewpoint) seemed so disinterested in politics? Typically, one party splinters and the minor party loses out. When have the two extremes ever sat down and tried to pull the rug out? I imagine that a lot of people on this thread would consider voting for Corbyn if he pulled away. I imagine a lot of others would vote for Braverman if she ran her expected campaign of making Britain White Again. I think that it would present a completely different situation to what has come before. It's impossible for the smaller parties to have a significant impact under FPTP. Things will only change with the introduction of PR. Part of the reason for apathy is that people are presented with a false choice of Labour or Tory neither of which properly represent most people's views. Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party. If PR were introduced (and I hope it does) not only will those supporting the smaller parties get a voice but I think it would precipitate a split in the Tory and Labour parties with the Labour left breaking away to create a genuinely socialist party of the left and the Tory right breaking away to form a party of the hard right - either that or merge with Reform. I think that would actually benefit The Tory and Labour parties as it get rid of the in fighting that has had such a detrimental effect on government and it would benefit the electorate because they are more likely to find a political home. It would also mean political parties could be more honest - it's obvious that both the Tory's and Labour are lying to sections of the electorate to con them into voting for them. The socially conservative working class is particularly badly served - neither party represents them and both are bullshitting them purely on the basis of getting their vote and once in will just ignore them (levelling up anyone?). Our current political system isn't fit for purpose - the views of the electorate are far too diverse to be represented by a two party system. Parliament should facilitate a debate where the diversity of views get aired and a compromise reached. As it stands political debate is stifled and it's just the views of the faction currently holding the reins of either the Labour or Tory party that has any say. That isn't the basis for anyone to have a healthy interest in politics. Apathy just facilitates the tiny minority in either if the two main parties who have any chance of actually gaining power. Spot on.
|
|
|
Post by potteringermany on Nov 13, 2023 15:59:46 GMT
It's impossible for the smaller parties to have a significant impact under FPTP. Things will only change with the introduction of PR. Part of the reason for apathy is that people are presented with a false choice of Labour or Tory neither of which properly represent most people's views. Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party. If PR were introduced (and I hope it does) not only will those supporting the smaller parties get a voice but I think it would precipitate a split in the Tory and Labour parties with the Labour left breaking away to create a genuinely socialist party of the left and the Tory right breaking away to form a party of the hard right - either that or merge with Reform. I think that would actually benefit The Tory and Labour parties as it get rid of the in fighting that has had such a detrimental effect on government and it would benefit the electorate because they are more likely to find a political home. It would also mean political parties could be more honest - it's obvious that both the Tory's and Labour are lying to sections of the electorate to con them into voting for them. The socially conservative working class is particularly badly served - neither party represents them and both are bullshitting them purely on the basis of getting their vote and once in will just ignore them (levelling up anyone?). Our current political system isn't fit for purpose - the views of the electorate are far too diverse to be represented by a two party system. Parliament should facilitate a debate where the diversity of views get aired and a compromise reached. As it stands political debate is stifled and it's just the views of the faction currently holding the reins of either the Labour or Tory party that has any say. That isn't the basis for anyone to have a healthy interest in politics. Apathy just facilitates the tiny minority in either if the two main parties who have any chance of actually gaining power. Spot on. Dito
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 13, 2023 16:12:59 GMT
A circle that cannot be squared?
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Nov 13, 2023 16:25:21 GMT
I've no time for Lord Snooty's but I actually thought Cameron and the coalition government did a reasonable job of governing considering the difficult circumstances in 2010. Certainly when you compare it to the successors. The Tory right have completely lost their marbles if they think Braverman has any chance with the wider electorate.
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Nov 13, 2023 16:31:22 GMT
I've no time for Lord Snooty's but I actually thought Cameron and the coalition government did a reasonable job of governing considering the difficult circumstances in 2010. Certainly when you compare it to the successors. The Tory right have completely lost their marbles if they think Braverman has any chance with the wider electorate. Talk about being damned with faint praise!!
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Nov 13, 2023 16:34:02 GMT
I see the Tories have recruited Fabrizio Romano to work on their social media, it's like they're announcing a new left back from Ligue Un...............
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2023 16:37:28 GMT
Has there been a time in your life when the entire country (regardless of political viewpoint) seemed so disinterested in politics? Typically, one party splinters and the minor party loses out. When have the two extremes ever sat down and tried to pull the rug out? I imagine that a lot of people on this thread would consider voting for Corbyn if he pulled away. I imagine a lot of others would vote for Braverman if she ran her expected campaign of making Britain White Again. I think that it would present a completely different situation to what has come before. It's impossible for the smaller parties to have a significant impact under FPTP. Things will only change with the introduction of PR. Part of the reason for apathy is that people are presented with a false choice of Labour or Tory neither of which properly represent most people's views. Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party. If PR were introduced (and I hope it does) not only will those supporting the smaller parties get a voice but I think it would precipitate a split in the Tory and Labour parties with the Labour left breaking away to create a genuinely socialist party of the left and the Tory right breaking away to form a party of the hard right - either that or merge with Reform. I think that would actually benefit The Tory and Labour parties as it get rid of the in fighting that has had such a detrimental effect on government and it would benefit the electorate because they are more likely to find a political home. It would also mean political parties could be more honest - it's obvious that both the Tory's and Labour are lying to sections of the electorate to con them into voting for them. The socially conservative working class is particularly badly served - neither party represents them and both are bullshitting them purely on the basis of getting their vote and once in will just ignore them (levelling up anyone?). Our current political system isn't fit for purpose - the views of the electorate are far too diverse to be represented by a two party system. Parliament should facilitate a debate where the diversity of views get aired and a compromise reached. As it stands political debate is stifled and it's just the views of the faction currently holding the reins of either the Labour or Tory party that has any say. That isn't the basis for anyone to have a healthy interest in politics. Apathy just facilitates the tiny minority in either if the two main parties who have any chance of actually gaining power. “Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party.” In my opinion, this is mainly true because when fractures happen, they only come from one direction. As such, a right wing voter is left with the choice of voting for Tory, or voting for the party they believe in more but knowing that if they do, Labour will win. If two parties are born at the same time to represent actual opposites of the spectrum, then a vote not for Tory doesn’t equate to a vote for Labour (as everyone will be making the same decision, rather than just one side). Then you have representation of choices. If not enough people still don’t want the new left/right party to win in their constituency, then they won’t. PR coming into UK elections is about as likely as what I’ve just suggested. No party in power will carry it out unless they have VERY strong evidence to suggest that in doing so, they’d take even more seats next time (which is kind of against the point of PR).
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Nov 13, 2023 16:38:21 GMT
I've no time for Lord Snooty's but I actually thought Cameron and the coalition government did a reasonable job of governing considering the difficult circumstances in 2010. Certainly when you compare it to the successors. The Tory right have completely lost their marbles if they think Braverman has any chance with the wider electorate. Hmmm, Brexit referendum aside, I agree. It's got gradually worse since though and that's as a direct result of the referendum to a large degree. He's not an elected MP though so he shouldn't be anywhere near the cabinet.
|
|
|
Post by dexter97 on Nov 13, 2023 16:43:29 GMT
It's impossible for the smaller parties to have a significant impact under FPTP. Things will only change with the introduction of PR. Part of the reason for apathy is that people are presented with a false choice of Labour or Tory neither of which properly represent most people's views. Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party. If PR were introduced (and I hope it does) not only will those supporting the smaller parties get a voice but I think it would precipitate a split in the Tory and Labour parties with the Labour left breaking away to create a genuinely socialist party of the left and the Tory right breaking away to form a party of the hard right - either that or merge with Reform. I think that would actually benefit The Tory and Labour parties as it get rid of the in fighting that has had such a detrimental effect on government and it would benefit the electorate because they are more likely to find a political home. It would also mean political parties could be more honest - it's obvious that both the Tory's and Labour are lying to sections of the electorate to con them into voting for them. The socially conservative working class is particularly badly served - neither party represents them and both are bullshitting them purely on the basis of getting their vote and once in will just ignore them (levelling up anyone?). Our current political system isn't fit for purpose - the views of the electorate are far too diverse to be represented by a two party system. Parliament should facilitate a debate where the diversity of views get aired and a compromise reached. As it stands political debate is stifled and it's just the views of the faction currently holding the reins of either the Labour or Tory party that has any say. That isn't the basis for anyone to have a healthy interest in politics. Apathy just facilitates the tiny minority in either if the two main parties who have any chance of actually gaining power. “Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party.” In my opinion, this is mainly true because when fractures happen, they only come from one direction. As such, a right wing voter is left with the choice of voting for Tory, or voting for the party they believe in more but knowing that if they do, Labour will win. If two parties are born at the same time to represent actual opposites of the spectrum, then a vote not for Tory doesn’t equate to a vote for Labour (as everyone will be making the same decision, rather than just one side). Then you have representation of choices. If not enough people still don’t want the new left/right party to win in their constituency, then they won’t. PR coming into UK elections is about as likely as what I’ve just suggested. No party in power will carry it out unless they have VERY strong evidence to suggest that in doing so, they’d take even more seats next time (which is kind of against the point of PR). A narrow Labour victory that means they need the Lib Dems to prop them up might be a good outcome at the next GE. PR would be top of Sir Ed's list of demands in return for for providing support.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Nov 13, 2023 16:45:53 GMT
I've no time for Lord Snooty's but I actually thought Cameron and the coalition government did a reasonable job of governing considering the difficult circumstances in 2010. Certainly when you compare it to the successors. The Tory right have completely lost their marbles if they think Braverman has any chance with the wider electorate. I think if you compare Camerons era to the last 7 it looks succesful in contrast but I see that more as an indictment on how bad the last 7 years have been. The one thing which always sticks with me in the build up to 2010 was the focus on the economy, debt, borrowing, labour can't be trusted with the economy etc.. The only difference between now and 2010 is all the above has gotten much worse. The tabloids don't speak about it but it certainly hasn't disappeared. I doubt the average person knows how bad it has gotten given the media's blackout on it.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Nov 13, 2023 16:55:46 GMT
I see the Tories have recruited Fabrizio Romano to work on their social media, it's like they're announcing a new left back from Ligue Un............... She should be in jail, no idea how she sleeps at night.
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Nov 13, 2023 16:59:01 GMT
oh , i thought he might've being sarcastic .
As far as I'm aware, a Lord cannot sit in the chamber of the HOC. That's why tony Benn renounced hid peerage to stand for parliament think windy had to too
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Nov 13, 2023 17:01:57 GMT
Seems he's been given his handover. 1. Just keep saying "stop the boats" till they believe you King canute springs to mind lol
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Nov 13, 2023 17:05:50 GMT
I've no time for Lord Snooty's but I actually thought Cameron and the coalition government did a reasonable job of governing considering the difficult circumstances in 2010. Certainly when you compare it to the successors. The Tory right have completely lost their marbles if they think Braverman has any chance with the wider electorate. I think if you compare Camerons era to the last 7 it looks succesful in contrast but I see that more as an indictment on how bad the last 7 years have been. The one thing which always sticks with me in the build up to 2010 was the focus on the economy, debt, borrowing, labour can't be trusted with the economy etc.. The only difference between now and 2010 is all the above has gotten much worse. The tabloids don't speak about it but it certainly hasn't disappeared. I doubt the average person knows how bad it has gotten given the media's blackout on it. I think the electorate are going to be in for a bit of a shock when Starmer strolls into power next year. Hes not proposing anything radically different and he's going to have very little room to maneuvre economically. He certainly wont be able to splash the goodies like Blair.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 13, 2023 17:09:20 GMT
It's impossible for the smaller parties to have a significant impact under FPTP. Things will only change with the introduction of PR. Part of the reason for apathy is that people are presented with a false choice of Labour or Tory neither of which properly represent most people's views. Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party. If PR were introduced (and I hope it does) not only will those supporting the smaller parties get a voice but I think it would precipitate a split in the Tory and Labour parties with the Labour left breaking away to create a genuinely socialist party of the left and the Tory right breaking away to form a party of the hard right - either that or merge with Reform. I think that would actually benefit The Tory and Labour parties as it get rid of the in fighting that has had such a detrimental effect on government and it would benefit the electorate because they are more likely to find a political home. It would also mean political parties could be more honest - it's obvious that both the Tory's and Labour are lying to sections of the electorate to con them into voting for them. The socially conservative working class is particularly badly served - neither party represents them and both are bullshitting them purely on the basis of getting their vote and once in will just ignore them (levelling up anyone?). Our current political system isn't fit for purpose - the views of the electorate are far too diverse to be represented by a two party system. Parliament should facilitate a debate where the diversity of views get aired and a compromise reached. As it stands political debate is stifled and it's just the views of the faction currently holding the reins of either the Labour or Tory party that has any say. That isn't the basis for anyone to have a healthy interest in politics. Apathy just facilitates the tiny minority in either if the two main parties who have any chance of actually gaining power. “Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party.” In my opinion, this is mainly true because when fractures happen, they only come from one direction. As such, a right wing voter is left with the choice of voting for Tory, or voting for the party they believe in more but knowing that if they do, Labour will win. If two parties are born at the same time to represent actual opposites of the spectrum, then a vote not for Tory doesn’t equate to a vote for Labour (as everyone will be making the same decision, rather than just one side). Then you have representation of choices. If not enough people still don’t want the new left/right party to win in their constituency, then they won’t. PR coming into UK elections is about as likely as what I’ve just suggested. No party in power will carry it out unless they have VERY strong evidence to suggest that in doing so, they’d take even more seats next time (which is kind of against the point of PR). Plus of course we had a referendum on PR (taht was the Libs price for joining the coalition) which saw a very low turnout & a resounding defeat for PR
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Nov 13, 2023 17:10:41 GMT
I think if you compare Camerons era to the last 7 it looks succesful in contrast but I see that more as an indictment on how bad the last 7 years have been. The one thing which always sticks with me in the build up to 2010 was the focus on the economy, debt, borrowing, labour can't be trusted with the economy etc.. The only difference between now and 2010 is all the above has gotten much worse. The tabloids don't speak about it but it certainly hasn't disappeared. I doubt the average person knows how bad it has gotten given the media's blackout on it. I think the electorate are going to be in for a bit of a shock when Starmer strolls into power next year. Hes not proposing anything radically different and he's going to have very little room to maneuvre economically. He certainly wont be able to splash the goodies like Blair. I fully agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Nov 13, 2023 17:12:36 GMT
I don't understand where the Cameron appointment has come from. Are things in Israel more serious than what we think or is he just fed up of what's been going on and potentially going to run for leader again? At least Cameron isn't embarrassing, he always comes across very professional. Definitely a step up on what's been in the cabinet in recent years.
|
|
|
Post by satoshi on Nov 13, 2023 17:18:05 GMT
I see the Tories have recruited Fabrizio Romano to work on their social media, it's like they're announcing a new left back from Ligue Un............... How come health secretaries always look nearly dead?
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Nov 13, 2023 17:25:34 GMT
I see the Tories have recruited Fabrizio Romano to work on their social media, it's like they're announcing a new left back from Ligue Un............... How come health secretaries always look nearly dead? Because the majority are Tories
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Nov 13, 2023 17:37:13 GMT
oh , i thought he might've being sarcastic .
As far as I'm aware, a Lord cannot sit in the chamber of the HOC. Along with Minors (that is, anyone under the age of 18)and prisoners, members of the House of Lords are not qualified to become members of the House of Commons. Cameron has been made a Lord so he can become a cabinet member without being an MP. The loonies really are running the asylum.
|
|
|
Post by dexter97 on Nov 13, 2023 17:38:07 GMT
Seems he's been given his handover. 1. Just keep saying "stop the boats" till they believe you King canute springs to mind lol The correct spelling is Cnut.
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Nov 13, 2023 17:38:47 GMT
Not checked yet but surely Cruella's rant is due out on twitter. Should be a good read.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 13, 2023 17:39:01 GMT
I've no time for Lord Snooty's but I actually thought Cameron and the coalition government did a reasonable job of governing considering the difficult circumstances in 2010. Certainly when you compare it to the successors. The Tory right have completely lost their marbles if they think Braverman has any chance with the wider electorate. Hmmm, Brexit referendum aside, I agree. It's got gradually worse since though and that's as a direct result of the referendum to a large degree. He's not an elected MP though so he shouldn't be anywhere near the cabinet. You need to separate the coalition with Cameron government post-coalition. During the coalition, the lib dems were able to water down the worst of austerity and the tories. They did some progressive things largely stolen from the lib dem manifesto. In the Cameron government after the coalition austerity got much worse and the progressive policies generally dried up and then we got to the brexit referendum, the shit hit the fan and everything since has been an unmitigated disaster in every single way. Cameron isn’t a lunatic like most ministers since the Johnson government got in. But that isn’t a ringing endorsement that “he isn’t a lunatic”.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 13, 2023 17:39:47 GMT
“Effectively millions of people are disenfranchised because if you aren't in a marginal constituency your vote is worthless unless you vote for the dominant party.” In my opinion, this is mainly true because when fractures happen, they only come from one direction. As such, a right wing voter is left with the choice of voting for Tory, or voting for the party they believe in more but knowing that if they do, Labour will win. If two parties are born at the same time to represent actual opposites of the spectrum, then a vote not for Tory doesn’t equate to a vote for Labour (as everyone will be making the same decision, rather than just one side). Then you have representation of choices. If not enough people still don’t want the new left/right party to win in their constituency, then they won’t. PR coming into UK elections is about as likely as what I’ve just suggested. No party in power will carry it out unless they have VERY strong evidence to suggest that in doing so, they’d take even more seats next time (which is kind of against the point of PR). Plus of course we had a referendum on PR (taht was the Libs price for joining the coalition) which saw a very low turnout & a resounding defeat for PR The biggest political error in modern history. Had we got PR, this country would be so much better than now.
|
|
|
Post by satoshi on Nov 13, 2023 17:40:33 GMT
How come health secretaries always look nearly dead? Because the majority are Tories Have you seen the Belgium and American counterparts?
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Nov 13, 2023 17:41:05 GMT
Hmmm, Brexit referendum aside, I agree. It's got gradually worse since though and that's as a direct result of the referendum to a large degree. He's not an elected MP though so he shouldn't be anywhere near the cabinet. You need to separate the coalition with Cameron government post-coalition. During the coalition, the lib dems were able to water down the worst of austerity and the tories. They did some progressive things largely stolen from the lib dem manifesto. In the Cameron government after the coalition austerity got much worse and the progressive policies generally dried up and then we got to the brexit referendum, the shit hit the fan and everything since has been an unmitigated disaster in every single way. Cameron isn’t a lunatic like most ministers since the Johnson government got in. But that isn’t a ringing endorsement that “he isn’t a lunatic”. He's a tw*t just a professional one.
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Nov 13, 2023 17:42:06 GMT
Because the majority are Tories Have you seen the Belgium and American counterparts? No, can't say I have. Are they Tories too?
|
|