|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 2, 2021 8:41:26 GMT
If the Green Party had a radical bone in their body they could have hoovered up many of the disaffected left wing Labour members on a ticket of a real green economy. But they’re a protest party and happy to be part of the status quo it seems. Whilst FPTP has many many faults, Farage has shown that a small party can still hold influence without winning a huge amount of seats even under the current system. Those who advocate centrism as an answer to the current problems in society are so far off the mark it’s untrue. They’re still living in the late 90’s…… Hmmm, the late 90s and early 2000s, the last time crime figures declined substantially, the last time NHS waiting times and lists declined substantially, the last time educational funding increased significantly...you know the things that actually matter on a day to day basis to people...provided by a centrist party which garnered broad support across England. Just about the last time the country was moving towards a good place for ordinary people. Look at it now! I genuinely think some leftwingers would prefer to see a country whose public services are continually ravaged by the Tories rather than one where they are improved, if the party doing the improvement isn't quite leftwing enough! You have to take a step back and assess the overall impact of Blair’s tenure. Of course New Labour brought in some positive policies (minimum wage, SureStart etc) but they absolutely failed in leaving a long term legacy that they had the majority and the economic stability to do so if they had been being braver and bolder. In terms of helping the poor and marginalised their legacy is really disappointing (the gap between rich and poor remained roughly the same), deregulation of the banks and financial sector led to our finances collapsing, PFI contracts were badly thought out and negotiated, and Iraq was an unmitigated disaster that spawned the likes of ISIS. It’s no coincidence that his popularity dropped election after election and Labour’s slide continued thereafter. Politics and the world has changed even in 25 years, you could sum Blair’s reign up quite simply as “a massive missed opportunity”
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 2, 2021 9:03:23 GMT
Not really. You called me a Tory. Which I’m not. I’m a liberal (with a small l). I have no party political affiliation of any sort. I called you a weirdo based on your Brexit obsession, which seems fair enough. Right, so "Tory" is on the same insult level as "weirdo", is it, in your eyes! I wonder what the Tories on this board make of that I doubt whether anyone else (hartshill excepted ) sees that as anything other than childish nonsense! Lighten up.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Jul 2, 2021 9:08:29 GMT
You can't pretend they weren't censored! Yes NF made the odd appearance on question time but did you see those episodes?! It was like watching a pack of (incredibly woke) Hyenas. Pretty much any headline by the BBC reflected Farage or Corbyn in a negative light. I'm not sure why you'd claim they didn't censor and tarnish their politics at every opportunity. I despise Corbyn politics but I can see how he got taken down by the media and same with Farage. The difference was Farage beat the media. When you see how difficult it is for the likes of Reform to get off the ground, it makes you realise Farage's success was very much the exception not the rule. It was once in a lifetime stuff. Brexit was down to him. Farage was rarely off QT (not the odd appearance!) and Corbyn became leader of one of the main political parties whose every utterance was covered by all of the media outlets. To pretend they were in any way censored is nonsense. Farage didn't "beat the media" (although I bet he claims that!). His views were shared by numerous members of the Conservative Party (and some of the Labour Party), so it was inevitable that he would become the "spokesperson" for the large numbers of Tories who were quite happy to have him expressing what they thought while they stayed quietly behind the scenes agitating within the Tory party, safe in the knowledge that, whatever the eventual outcome, Farage would be the one carrying the can/celebrating outside of the main political arena while they (Boris, Gove etc) satisfied their political ambitions on the back of it. There may not be mass coverage of the views you hold but, as I said, that is probably because they are at the more extreme end of the political spectrum, don't reflect what most people think and therefore don't get the coverage that you would expect. It's not censorship, just your disappointment that your views are not more widely covered, but GB News should be addressing that, surely?! Respectfully, I think you need to look up the definition of "censorship" and particularly "media censorship". Censorship is not simply hiding someone. It's altering or changing what someone has said or hiding certain parts of what they've said to suit an agenda. Farage and Corbyn were absolutely targeted with it. You also massively underestimate the views of the British people. How do you explain Brexit? The most stunning democratic vote in both British and modern European history. Brexit was absolutely NOT supported by all the big TV media outlets from Sky News, the BBC, ITV etc and very few of the newspapers. It was an astonishing vote and as much as anything a huge vote for fucking off failed process, cronyism, bureaucracy and politicians who are detached from reality beyond words. Even the vast majority of the big woke corporates despised Brexit. The challenge the likes of Reform and other minor parties face is they are stuck with this mindset of "if I vote x I let y through the back door".. It's fear. You would be amazed at how many Conservative voters would prefer a Farage over a Boris. In much the same way many on the left prefer a Corbyn over a patronising centrist snob and a bunch of wokie luvvies. Albeit Corbyn didn't help himself 😉 P.s for clarity this is the first and only time I'll ever defend Jezza C. It doesn't sit well 🤭
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 2, 2021 9:12:09 GMT
I reckon Starmer is playing a bad hand as best he can.
He is working on two principles...
Elections are won by parties that are perceived to be closest to middle ground
The Tories are riding a wave and that wave will crash at some point
His strategy then is to establish Labour as a centre ground party and to bide his time and wait for the inevitable Tory fall.
Time is a big positive for Starmer. It diminishes Brexit from people’s minds (well, weirdos excepted) which is a personal weakness for him, and it allows the Tories fuck ups to accumulate. What he can’t allow to happen in this time is for Labour to be seen as Corbyn mark 2.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Jul 2, 2021 9:21:08 GMT
I reckon Starmer is playing a bad hand as best he can. He is working on two principles... Elections are won by parties that are perceived to be closest to middle ground The Tories are riding a wave and that wave will crash at some point His strategy then is to establish Labour as a centre ground party and to bide his time and wait for the inevitable Tory fall. Time is a big positive for Starmer. It diminishes Brexit from people’s minds (well, weirdos excepted) which is a personal weakness for him, and it allows the Tories fuck ups to accumulate. What he can’t allow to happen in this time is for Labour to be seen as Corbyn mark 2. Yep. A huge problem Labour have is Boris is so far away from right wing politics. He's been centrist at best and in many cases centre left. Clearly I appreciate some of that is down to the pandemic. There is such negligible difference in voting Boris or Starmer. As you say, take Brexit out of people's minds and the next general election is anyones guess. If Boris continues to lead with this "green agenda" madness driven by his wife, then he may as well put a gun to his head. Traditional Conservatives don't want to hear that shit. We've had enough state intervention, lies and fear propaganda to last a lifetime... We don't need more of it. Enter Big Ricky Tice 🔥🔥🔥
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 9:45:29 GMT
Hmmm, the late 90s and early 2000s, the last time crime figures declined substantially, the last time NHS waiting times and lists declined substantially, the last time educational funding increased significantly...you know the things that actually matter on a day to day basis to people...provided by a centrist party which garnered broad support across England. Just about the last time the country was moving towards a good place for ordinary people. Look at it now! I genuinely think some leftwingers would prefer to see a country whose public services are continually ravaged by the Tories rather than one where they are improved, if the party doing the improvement isn't quite leftwing enough! You have to take a step back and assess the overall impact of Blair’s tenure. Of course New Labour brought in some positive policies (minimum wage, SureStart etc) but they absolutely failed in leaving a long term legacy that they had the majority and the economic stability to do so if they had been being braver and bolder. In terms of helping the poor and marginalised their legacy is really disappointing (the gap between rich and poor remained roughly the same), deregulation of the banks and financial sector led to our finances collapsing, PFI contracts were badly thought out and negotiated, and Iraq was an unmitigated disaster that spawned the likes of ISIS. It’s no coincidence that his popularity dropped election after election and Labour’s slide continued thereafter. Politics and the world has changed even in 25 years, you could sum Blair’s reign up quite simply as “a massive missed opportunity” I don't doubt that there were missed opportunities, no government is perfect and has all the answers or you'd hope we'd have sorted things out by now! Some are better than others is all you can ever say. And, overall, for ordinary people in the UK and the things that really make a difference to their lives, the period from 97 to 08 was better than most over the last forty years.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 9:45:51 GMT
Right, so "Tory" is on the same insult level as "weirdo", is it, in your eyes! I wonder what the Tories on this board make of that I doubt whether anyone else (hartshill excepted ) sees that as anything other than childish nonsense! Lighten up. Grow up
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 9:55:54 GMT
I reckon Starmer is playing a bad hand as best he can. He is working on two principles... Elections are won by parties that are perceived to be closest to middle ground The Tories are riding a wave and that wave will crash at some point His strategy then is to establish Labour as a centre ground party and to bide his time and wait for the inevitable Tory fall. Time is a big positive for Starmer. It diminishes Brexit from people’s minds (well, weirdos excepted) which is a personal weakness for him, and it allows the Tories fuck ups to accumulate. What he can’t allow to happen in this time is for Labour to be seen as Corbyn mark 2. Oddly enough, that's pretty much exactly what I said about a month ago (apart from the childish and unnecessary insult!) At the moment, there are enough Brexit voters who still cling to the idea that to vote for anyone other than a Tory might be seen as a tacit admission that voting for Brexit wasn't such a great idea. Time will need to pass before the realities of Brexit - job pressures, costs rising, poorer public services, travel problems, Scottish independence, Northern Irish problems etc etc are seen as just part of everyday life which the Tories can't do anything about because they're part of the Brexit outcome. The Batley & Spen result should send a few worries through Tory HQ because, despite being gifted 8,000 votes or so off the Labour tally, they still failed to win the seat in a constituency which was over 60/40 split in favour of Leave. That might suggest a combined effect of the start of Brexit wearing off, together with the sleaze and hypocrisy that have been a central part of this administration starting to cut through. I think Starmer's biggest problem is the lack of big hitters underneath him. Whatever you thought of them, New Labour had Straw, Brown, Prescott, Blunkett, Beckett, Mo Mowlam, all of whom were well known political heavyweights. Starmer has nobody really.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 9:59:48 GMT
Farage was rarely off QT (not the odd appearance!) and Corbyn became leader of one of the main political parties whose every utterance was covered by all of the media outlets. To pretend they were in any way censored is nonsense. Farage didn't "beat the media" (although I bet he claims that!). His views were shared by numerous members of the Conservative Party (and some of the Labour Party), so it was inevitable that he would become the "spokesperson" for the large numbers of Tories who were quite happy to have him expressing what they thought while they stayed quietly behind the scenes agitating within the Tory party, safe in the knowledge that, whatever the eventual outcome, Farage would be the one carrying the can/celebrating outside of the main political arena while they (Boris, Gove etc) satisfied their political ambitions on the back of it. There may not be mass coverage of the views you hold but, as I said, that is probably because they are at the more extreme end of the political spectrum, don't reflect what most people think and therefore don't get the coverage that you would expect. It's not censorship, just your disappointment that your views are not more widely covered, but GB News should be addressing that, surely?! Respectfully, I think you need to look up the definition of "censorship" and particularly "media censorship". Censorship is not simply hiding someone. It's altering or changing what someone has said or hiding certain parts of what they've said to suit an agenda. Farage and Corbyn were absolutely targeted with it. You also massively underestimate the views of the British people. How do you explain Brexit? The most stunning democratic vote in both British and modern European history. Brexit was absolutely NOT supported by all the big TV media outlets from Sky News, the BBC, ITV etc and very few of the newspapers. It was an astonishing vote and as much as anything a huge vote for fucking off failed process, cronyism, bureaucracy and politicians who are detached from reality beyond words. Even the vast majority of the big woke corporates despised Brexit. The challenge the likes of Reform and other minor parties face is they are stuck with this mindset of "if I vote x I let y through the back door".. It's fear. You would be amazed at how many Conservative voters would prefer a Farage over a Boris. In much the same way many on the left prefer a Corbyn over a patronising centrist snob and a bunch of wokie luvvies. Albeit Corbyn didn't help himself 😉 P.s for clarity this is the first and only time I'll ever defend Jezza C. It doesn't sit well 🤭 Once again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think Farage or Corbyn were censored in any way. Unless you count people disagreeing with them as censoring them? I think you need to get over this woke nonsense. If people disagree with your views, which it would appear the majority do if your response to "mainstream" political views is anything to go by, that doesn't automatically make them "wokie" luvvies... Btw do you support PR?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 2, 2021 10:18:13 GMT
Farage was rarely off QT (not the odd appearance!) and Corbyn became leader of one of the main political parties whose every utterance was covered by all of the media outlets. To pretend they were in any way censored is nonsense. Farage didn't "beat the media" (although I bet he claims that!). His views were shared by numerous members of the Conservative Party (and some of the Labour Party), so it was inevitable that he would become the "spokesperson" for the large numbers of Tories who were quite happy to have him expressing what they thought while they stayed quietly behind the scenes agitating within the Tory party, safe in the knowledge that, whatever the eventual outcome, Farage would be the one carrying the can/celebrating outside of the main political arena while they (Boris, Gove etc) satisfied their political ambitions on the back of it. There may not be mass coverage of the views you hold but, as I said, that is probably because they are at the more extreme end of the political spectrum, don't reflect what most people think and therefore don't get the coverage that you would expect. It's not censorship, just your disappointment that your views are not more widely covered, but GB News should be addressing that, surely?! Respectfully, I think you need to look up the definition of "censorship" and particularly "media censorship". Censorship is not simply hiding someone. It's altering or changing what someone has said or hiding certain parts of what they've said to suit an agenda. Farage and Corbyn were absolutely targeted with it. You also massively underestimate the views of the British people. How do you explain Brexit? The most stunning democratic vote in both British and modern European history. Brexit was absolutely NOT supported by all the big TV media outlets from Sky News, the BBC, ITV etc and very few of the newspapers. It was an astonishing vote and as much as anything a huge vote for fucking off failed process, cronyism, bureaucracy and politicians who are detached from reality beyond words. Even the vast majority of the big woke corporates despised Brexit. The challenge the likes of Reform and other minor parties face is they are stuck with this mindset of "if I vote x I let y through the back door".. It's fear. You would be amazed at how many Conservative voters would prefer a Farage over a Boris. In much the same way many on the left prefer a Corbyn over a patronising centrist snob and a bunch of wokie luvvies. Albeit Corbyn didn't help himself 😉 P.s for clarity this is the first and only time I'll ever defend Jezza C. It doesn't sit well 🤭 Where I differ to those who want Labour to lurch back towards the centre is that I genuinely believe there is an appetite for a progressive left wing agenda (and forget Corbyn I'm talking about the ideology, and not ridiculous notions of Marxism simply social democratic policies that you'll find in other parts of the world). And pandering to Red Wall voters by standing in front of flags and getting pictured supping a pint every other day isn't the way to do it in my opinion. Take Batley and Spen for example, Labour polled 55% in 2017, then in 2019 Labour and the Heavy Woollen District Independents polled 55%, followed by Labour and The Workers Party polling 56% this time around. Constituencies like this up and down the country are inherently anti-Tory and are crying out for a radical agenda to throw their weight behind.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Jul 2, 2021 11:00:04 GMT
Respectfully, I think you need to look up the definition of "censorship" and particularly "media censorship". Censorship is not simply hiding someone. It's altering or changing what someone has said or hiding certain parts of what they've said to suit an agenda. Farage and Corbyn were absolutely targeted with it. You also massively underestimate the views of the British people. How do you explain Brexit? The most stunning democratic vote in both British and modern European history. Brexit was absolutely NOT supported by all the big TV media outlets from Sky News, the BBC, ITV etc and very few of the newspapers. It was an astonishing vote and as much as anything a huge vote for fucking off failed process, cronyism, bureaucracy and politicians who are detached from reality beyond words. Even the vast majority of the big woke corporates despised Brexit. The challenge the likes of Reform and other minor parties face is they are stuck with this mindset of "if I vote x I let y through the back door".. It's fear. You would be amazed at how many Conservative voters would prefer a Farage over a Boris. In much the same way many on the left prefer a Corbyn over a patronising centrist snob and a bunch of wokie luvvies. Albeit Corbyn didn't help himself 😉 P.s for clarity this is the first and only time I'll ever defend Jezza C. It doesn't sit well 🤭 Where I differ to those who want Labour to lurch back towards the centre is that I genuinely believe there is an appetite for a progressive left wing agenda (and forget Corbyn I'm talking about the ideology, and not ridiculous notions of Marxism simply social democratic policies that you'll find in other parts of the world). And pandering to Red Wall voters by standing in front of flags and getting pictured supping a pint every other day isn't the way to do it in my opinion. Take Batley and Spen for example, Labour polled 55% in 2017, then in 2019 Labour and the Heavy Woollen District Independents polled 55%, followed by Labour and The Workers Party polling 56% this time around. Constituencies like this up and down the country are inherently anti-Tory and are crying out for a radical agenda to throw their weight behind. Broadly agree.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Jul 2, 2021 11:08:38 GMT
Respectfully, I think you need to look up the definition of "censorship" and particularly "media censorship". Censorship is not simply hiding someone. It's altering or changing what someone has said or hiding certain parts of what they've said to suit an agenda. Farage and Corbyn were absolutely targeted with it. You also massively underestimate the views of the British people. How do you explain Brexit? The most stunning democratic vote in both British and modern European history. Brexit was absolutely NOT supported by all the big TV media outlets from Sky News, the BBC, ITV etc and very few of the newspapers. It was an astonishing vote and as much as anything a huge vote for fucking off failed process, cronyism, bureaucracy and politicians who are detached from reality beyond words. Even the vast majority of the big woke corporates despised Brexit. The challenge the likes of Reform and other minor parties face is they are stuck with this mindset of "if I vote x I let y through the back door".. It's fear. You would be amazed at how many Conservative voters would prefer a Farage over a Boris. In much the same way many on the left prefer a Corbyn over a patronising centrist snob and a bunch of wokie luvvies. Albeit Corbyn didn't help himself 😉 P.s for clarity this is the first and only time I'll ever defend Jezza C. It doesn't sit well 🤭 Once again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think Farage or Corbyn were censored in any way. Unless you count people disagreeing with them as censoring them? I think you need to get over this woke nonsense. If people disagree with your views, which it would appear the majority do if your response to "mainstream" political views is anything to go by, that doesn't automatically make them "wokie" luvvies... Btw do you support PR? Wokery has gone way beyond fun and games and indeed beyond politics. It's propped up by creepy extremists with sinister agendas! And like it or not, it's part of the reason the North has distanced itself from Labour and on the flip side why Labour has seized London (Chelsea aside 😉) Good question re PR. I never used to because it felt like all three major parties were different and clear enough with their ideology to represent the people. I don't like the idea of everything stalling in parliament and nothing getting through either - See Italy. That said, I think it is now time to seriously consider PR and give others a chance. The major parties are a total disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 11:14:38 GMT
Once again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think Farage or Corbyn were censored in any way. Unless you count people disagreeing with them as censoring them? I think you need to get over this woke nonsense. If people disagree with your views, which it would appear the majority do if your response to "mainstream" political views is anything to go by, that doesn't automatically make them "wokie" luvvies... Btw do you support PR? Wokery has gone way beyond fun and games and indeed beyond politics. It's propped up by creepy extremists with sinister agendas! And like it or not, it's part of the reason the North has distanced itself from Labour and on the flip side why Labour has seized London (Chelsea aside 😉) Good question re PR. I never used to because it felt like all three major parties were different and clear enough with their ideology to represent the people. I don't like the idea of everything stalling in parliament and nothing getting through either - See Italy. That said, I think it is now time to seriously consider PR and give others a chance. The major parties are a total disgrace. Nah, I think it's just a deflection issue to stop people thinking about the things that really matter. "Wokery" affects hardly anyone in their day to day life, apart from posting on football forums/social media about it! It has absolutely zero impact on my life and probably yours too. You can't choose Italy as a reason for not liking PR for the supposed impact on governance, whilst ignoring all the other parliaments which function perfectly adequately with it. Pretty much every independent assessment of democratic political systems arrives at the same decision: that PR is the least worst option and that FPTP is one of the most unbalanced and least genuinely representative ways of doing things.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 2, 2021 11:23:42 GMT
Wokery has gone way beyond fun and games and indeed beyond politics. It's propped up by creepy extremists with sinister agendas! And like it or not, it's part of the reason the North has distanced itself from Labour and on the flip side why Labour has seized London (Chelsea aside 😉) Good question re PR. I never used to because it felt like all three major parties were different and clear enough with their ideology to represent the people. I don't like the idea of everything stalling in parliament and nothing getting through either - See Italy. That said, I think it is now time to seriously consider PR and give others a chance. The major parties are a total disgrace. Nah, I think it's just a deflection issue to stop people thinking about the things that really matter. "Wokery" affects hardly anyone in their day to day life, apart from posting on football forums/social media about it! It has absolutely zero impact on my life and probably yours too. You can't choose Italy as a reason for not liking PR for the supposed impact on governance, whilst ignoring all the other parliaments which function perfectly adequately with it. Pretty much every independent assessment of democratic political systems arrives at the same decision: that PR is the least worst option and that FPTP is one of the most unbalanced and least genuinely representative ways of doing things. If the least worst option results in unstable governments and regular elections Than I will happily take the option that generally gives stable governance and and governments serving full terms That and the fact I prefer the dog to wag the tail not the tail wagging the dog
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 11:55:25 GMT
Nah, I think it's just a deflection issue to stop people thinking about the things that really matter. "Wokery" affects hardly anyone in their day to day life, apart from posting on football forums/social media about it! It has absolutely zero impact on my life and probably yours too. You can't choose Italy as a reason for not liking PR for the supposed impact on governance, whilst ignoring all the other parliaments which function perfectly adequately with it. Pretty much every independent assessment of democratic political systems arrives at the same decision: that PR is the least worst option and that FPTP is one of the most unbalanced and least genuinely representative ways of doing things. If the least worst option results in unstable governments and regular elections Than I will happily take the option that generally gives stable governance and and governments serving full terms That and the fact I prefer the dog to wag the tail not the tail wagging the dog But it doesn't. Unless Italy is as far as you ever go for an example. Something like 90% of European parliaments use a form of PR. Are you saying they are all unstable? I have no idea what the last sentence means, unless it was to indicate that you prefer the government to tell the people what to do?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 2, 2021 13:06:21 GMT
If the least worst option results in unstable governments and regular elections Than I will happily take the option that generally gives stable governance and and governments serving full terms That and the fact I prefer the dog to wag the tail not the tail wagging the dog But it doesn't. Unless Italy is as far as you ever go for an example. Something like 90% of European parliaments use a form of PR. Are you saying they are all unstable? I have no idea what the last sentence means, unless it was to indicate that you prefer the government to tell the people what to do? Belgium spent how long without a government And as for my last sentence l have a feeling you are aware of description With pr small parties Weald far more power than there share of the vote warrant So let’s assume pr is adopted which form would you prefer Would you prefer some sort constituency element party lists Or regional single transferable vote to name a few
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Jul 2, 2021 14:15:29 GMT
Joining the discussion with my penny's worth. I would prefer sticking with constituency MPs but have the transferable vote where you rank candidates in preference with the last candidates being eliminated and their votes being redistributed until a candidate gets over 50%. The winner may not be everyone's first choice but will have had some buy in from the majority of voters. This avoids increasing the chances of tiny parties holding the balance of power and also prevents candidates winning seats with 35% of the vote. If you want an element of real PR this could be used for an elected upper house if one was felt necessary although I am not convinced it is.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 2, 2021 14:49:41 GMT
But it doesn't. Unless Italy is as far as you ever go for an example. Something like 90% of European parliaments use a form of PR. Are you saying they are all unstable? I have no idea what the last sentence means, unless it was to indicate that you prefer the government to tell the people what to do? Belgium spent how long without a government And as for my last sentence l have a feeling you are aware of description With pr small parties Weald far more power than there share of the vote warrant So let’s assume pr is adopted which form would you prefer Would you prefer some sort constituency element party lists Or regional single transferable vote to name a few So you've now managed two examples where individual countries have experienced issues with PR in trying to form a government, in amongst decades of governments and numerous other countries where that hasn't been the case.... I'm not really fussed what form of PR is used, provided it delivers a better system of representation so that, for example, 4million UKIP votes don't go unrepresented and by contrast 1.5million SNP votes don't result in 55 MPs. People could then vote for who they wanted to/believed in, safe in the knowledge that their vote will contribute to the overall potential for representation within parliament, instead of all the tactical voting and geographical biases like the above which we currently endure; a system where 500-550 of the seats rarely change hands, which means that the country is effectively in the hands of 100-150 swing seats every election. It's daft!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 2, 2021 14:56:19 GMT
Belgium spent how long without a government And as for my last sentence l have a feeling you are aware of description With pr small parties Weald far more power than there share of the vote warrant So let’s assume pr is adopted which form would you prefer Would you prefer some sort constituency element party lists Or regional single transferable vote to name a few So you've now managed two examples where individual countries have experienced issues with PR in trying to form a government, in amongst decades of governments and numerous other countries where that hasn't been the case.... I'm not really fussed what form of PR is used, provided it delivers a better system of representation so that, for example, 4million UKIP votes don't go unrepresented and by contrast 1.5million SNP votes don't result in 55 MPs. People could then vote for who they wanted to/believed in, safe in the knowledge that their vote will contribute to the overall potential for representation within parliament, instead of all the tactical voting and geographical biases like the above which we currently endure; a system where 500-550 of the seats rarely change hands, which means that the country is effectively in the hands of 100-150 swing seats every election. It's daft! It ain’t going to happen. So why get excited about it.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 2, 2021 15:15:50 GMT
Belgium spent how long without a government And as for my last sentence l have a feeling you are aware of description With pr small parties Weald far more power than there share of the vote warrant So let’s assume pr is adopted which form would you prefer Would you prefer some sort constituency element party lists Or regional single transferable vote to name a few So you've now managed two examples where individual countries have experienced issues with PR in trying to form a government, in amongst decades of governments and numerous other countries where that hasn't been the case.... I'm not really fussed what form of PR is used, provided it delivers a better system of representation so that, for example, 4million UKIP votes don't go unrepresented and by contrast 1.5million SNP votes don't result in 55 MPs. People could then vote for who they wanted to/believed in, safe in the knowledge that their vote will contribute to the overall potential for representation within parliament, instead of all the tactical voting and geographical biases like the above which we currently endure; a system where 500-550 of the seats rarely change hands, which means that the country is effectively in the hands of 100-150 swing seats every election. It's daft! Five hundred ninety two days it took Belgium to form a government I’d say that’s more than a issue I don’t think first past the post is totally perfect but it gives each seat it’s mp that stands as much on there record as that of there party The night of the election there is a result you know who the government will be baring 2010 but even then it was pretty certain There isn’t weeks of horse trading where only half of the manifesto you voted for can possibly be carried out and plenty that you might not of voted for will
|
|
|
Post by yeswilko on Jul 2, 2021 21:19:31 GMT
I reckon Starmer is playing a bad hand as best he can. He is working on two principles... Elections are won by parties that are perceived to be closest to middle ground The Tories are riding a wave and that wave will crash at some point His strategy then is to establish Labour as a centre ground party and to bide his time and wait for the inevitable Tory fall. Time is a big positive for Starmer. It diminishes Brexit from people’s minds (well, weirdos excepted) which is a personal weakness for him, and it allows the Tories fuck ups to accumulate. What he can’t allow to happen in this time is for Labour to be seen as Corbyn mark 2. Yep. A huge problem Labour have is Boris is so far away from right wing politics. He's been centrist at best and in many cases centre left. Clearly I appreciate some of that is down to the pandemic. There is such negligible difference in voting Boris or Starmer. As you say, take Brexit out of people's minds and the next general election is anyones guess. If Boris continues to lead with this "green agenda" madness driven by his wife, then he may as well put a gun to his head. Traditional Conservatives don't want to hear that shit. We've had enough state intervention, lies and fear propaganda to last a lifetime... We don't need more of it. Enter Big Ricky Tice 🔥🔥🔥 Hahahahaha
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 5, 2021 9:00:51 GMT
This was always Starmer's only route to power in my opinion, sit and wait for the Murdoch press to endorse him and go from there. This is the first step towards that from The Sun......
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 6, 2021 11:59:03 GMT
Belgium spent how long without a government And as for my last sentence l have a feeling you are aware of description With pr small parties Weald far more power than there share of the vote warrant So let’s assume pr is adopted which form would you prefer Would you prefer some sort constituency element party lists Or regional single transferable vote to name a few So you've now managed two examples where individual countries have experienced issues with PR in trying to form a government, in amongst decades of governments and numerous other countries where that hasn't been the case.... I'm not really fussed what form of PR is used, provided it delivers a better system of representation so that, for example, 4million UKIP votes don't go unrepresented and by contrast 1.5million SNP votes don't result in 55 MPs. People could then vote for who they wanted to/believed in, safe in the knowledge that their vote will contribute to the overall potential for representation within parliament, instead of all the tactical voting and geographical biases like the above which we currently endure; a system where 500-550 of the seats rarely change hands, which means that the country is effectively in the hands of 100-150 swing seats every election. It's daft! Can I add a third example having read the thread from our resident swede Sweden’s current state isn’t helped by fringe parties holding the balance of power Something of course unlikely to happen under first past the post
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 7, 2021 6:50:41 GMT
Personally picked by Steptoe to be an MP, I know there is plenty of very very average mps but jesus......
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 7, 2021 7:16:29 GMT
Personally picked by Steptoe to be an MP, I know there is plenty of very very average mps but jesus...... Fair play to Pollard for taking the time out of his busy schedule of being sued for libel to tweet…….
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 7, 2021 7:22:44 GMT
So you've now managed two examples where individual countries have experienced issues with PR in trying to form a government, in amongst decades of governments and numerous other countries where that hasn't been the case.... I'm not really fussed what form of PR is used, provided it delivers a better system of representation so that, for example, 4million UKIP votes don't go unrepresented and by contrast 1.5million SNP votes don't result in 55 MPs. People could then vote for who they wanted to/believed in, safe in the knowledge that their vote will contribute to the overall potential for representation within parliament, instead of all the tactical voting and geographical biases like the above which we currently endure; a system where 500-550 of the seats rarely change hands, which means that the country is effectively in the hands of 100-150 swing seats every election. It's daft! Can I add a third example having read the thread from our resident swede Sweden’s current state isn’t helped by fringe parties holding the balance of power Something of course unlikely to happen under first past the post Three examples out of hundreds of government cycles in numerous countries is not a good hit rate!
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 7, 2021 7:33:52 GMT
Can I add a third example having read the thread from our resident swede Sweden’s current state isn’t helped by fringe parties holding the balance of power Something of course unlikely to happen under first past the post Three examples out of hundreds of government cycles in numerous countries is not a good hit rate! It’s getting higher I shall of course sniff out more 😁
|
|
|
Post by Kpsje on Jul 16, 2021 16:38:49 GMT
‘labour is coming home’, says sir keith. 7 days later… oh dear, how sad, never mind. edit: why did eggybread delete his post? - strange goings on
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jul 17, 2021 18:00:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 17, 2021 20:40:44 GMT
The way he’s going there won’t be a thousand members left soon……
|
|