Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Why the Alternative Vote system is proving awesome once more – politicalbetting.com

2

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,054
    DougSeal said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    The Toon losing already

    They’ve been the better side since they conceded but can’t quite close the deal.
    Aye, we’re not shite. Amazing really
    Deserved. And why it was ever even thought to be offside I’ve no idea
    Saw the Aston Villa/Crystal Palace game (MOTD). Some shocking VAR decisions, as agreed even by the BBC commentator - ruining the game, he said.

    And I must say that on MOTD when "VAR" comes up on the screen it seems like a satire on the future of football and how it will be destroyed which could come straight out of either The Day Today or Black Mirror.
    Generally I agree but the system worked in this case

    Well it will of course work de temps en temps but the question is overall does it harm the game. Do we want an goal disallowed because a computer determines that Player A's shirtsleeve was 1.5mm offside? Perhaps we do. I'm not sure I do, that said, and am happy to take the word of the assistant referee or to limit VAR usage to, say, three per side
    which the manager can trigger.
    Fair. But I’m quite heavily supporting Newcastle here and was caught in the moment!
    Well absolutely. I thought about this wrt dead heats in racing. You rarely get them now because the camera can determine to a gnat's ****** which horse has won.

    And I'm torn about it. On the one hand I think that's too precise, but on the other, if a horse has its nose in front, no matter by how much, then it surely should be acclaimed as the winner. If I was a connection of the winning horse I would certainly think so but I can't help thinking that it is somehow diminishing the sport.
  • Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    No one is going to give a shit about the SNP (or PR) if they can’t afford to heat their homes. Just saying.

    Real privileged stuff.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,268

    Holy shit 2-1

    Shouldn't be too shocked - your boys were the third best team in the second half of last season.

    Fingers crossed you can seal the deal.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    The Toon losing already

    They’ve been the better side since they conceded but can’t quite close the deal.
    Aye, we’re not shite. Amazing really
    Deserved. And why it was ever even thought to be offside I’ve no idea
    Saw the Aston Villa/Crystal Palace game (MOTD). Some shocking VAR decisions, as agreed even by the BBC commentator - ruining the game, he said.

    And I must say that on MOTD when "VAR" comes up on the screen it seems like a satire on the future of football and how it will be destroyed which could come straight out of either The Day Today or Black Mirror.
    Generally I agree but the system worked in this case

    Well it will of course work de temps en temps but the question is overall does it harm the game. Do we want an goal disallowed because a computer determines that Player A's shirtsleeve was 1.5mm offside? Perhaps we do. I'm not sure I do, that said, and am happy to take the word of the assistant referee or to limit VAR usage to, say, three per side which the manager can trigger.
    I am in favour of VAR, and now it runs a lot more swiftly and smoothly. So much better to have the correct decision than some of the ridiculous decisions that I have seen over the years.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ponder that we are getting to the last chance for revelation announcement for La Truss prior to the election result. Although if the left wing red tops have it then maybe they are waiting until after the results.

    It was put to me.

    Bit late to swing results. Mind you sunak is so inept he may not realise that and may be saving something up.

    Quite a lot of sex and drugs and republicanism and charging for the NHS baked in with Liz, and you can get away with most things these days.
    Foresees an earlier GE than 2024 with you know how ready to ride to the rescue.
    BTW we have a live bet, on which I expect to concede on 6 September.
    Arghh what was it?
    Chillax, fear not, let nothing you dismay. I bet that R Sunak would be PM at the party conference this year. As this will not be the case, I get to pay £25 to the Injured Jockeys Fund. Which I will do on 6 September.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    edited August 2022

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    If you want to be bound by your own preconceptions, then I can't help you.

    What's the point of being in a United Kingdom with political parties such as yours, then
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825

    Holy shit 2-1

    Shouldn't be too shocked - your boys were the third best team in the second half of last season.

    Fingers crossed you can seal the deal.
    My Fantasy Football is cursed. Last week I captained Darwin, got -4 points. This week I captained Cancelo...
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Luckily we have a few recent years of good governance of the UK so we know what it looks like.
    Quite. Only the Tories can do it. Apparently.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,879

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    So just sit back and let Labour do their equivocating, triangulating centrist thing that pleases no one and the game’s a good ‘un?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    edited August 2022

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    So just sit back and let Labour do their equivocating, triangulating centrist thing that pleases no one and the game’s a good ‘un?
    The problem I have is that if SKS says very loudly he won't cooperate with legitimately elected Scottish MPs even if it means Tory rule, then one wonders why should anyone in Scotland bother to vote Labour to keep the Tories out
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,506
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Luckily we have a few recent years of good governance of the UK so we know what it looks like.
    Quite. Only the Tories can do it. Apparently.
    Not at all. An energetic Scottish Party could be a shining beacon of good governance, and then quite possibly execute a nifty takeover of Westminster too. I wish they would. However we have the SNP.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093

    Holy shit 2-1

    After a decade of shit for brains Newcastle Managers, most of whom wind up at West Brom, Eddie Howe is first rate.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 8,142
    TOPPING said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    "They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be."

    Hmm where have I heard similar sentiments before. I take it you are a huge fan of Scottish independence.
    Are you referring to Brexit? Because I think the allegory is correct: it would be as mad to give the SNP a role in the governance of the UK as to give UKIP a role in the governamce of the EU.
    Now I should stress I'm not a principled unionist. I can see the argument for an independemt Scotland, just as I can see the argument that the UK should be independent of the EU. My point is that including a party in the governance of the UK whose explicit raison detre is the breakup of the UK is not likely to lead to a good result for the UK.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,268
    BOOOOOM!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093

    BOOOOOM!

    Has Boris won the Tory Party Leadership vote with write-ins?
  • pingping Posts: 3,297
    edited August 2022
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-62624382

    Terrible news re: Tyson Fury’s cousin.

    If there is one good thing that can come from this, it’s that Fury’s words re: knife crime will cut through to the kind of demographic that we really need to reach to get knife crime down.

    Pleas from parents, police, teachers, community workers etc etc for teenage boys and young men not to carry knives only have so much effect.

    These words coming out of Fury’s mouth will hopefully make a real difference.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    Kieran Trippier over the wall
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,879
    Cookie said:

    TOPPING said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    "They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be."

    Hmm where have I heard similar sentiments before. I take it you are a huge fan of Scottish independence.
    Are you referring to Brexit? Because I think the allegory is correct: it would be as mad to give the SNP a role in the governance of the UK as to give UKIP a role in the governamce of the EU.
    Now I should stress I'm not a principled unionist. I can see the argument for an independemt Scotland, just as I can see the argument that the UK should be independent of the EU. My point is that including a party in the governance of the UK whose explicit raison detre is the breakup of the UK is not likely to lead to a good result for the UK.
    Tbh I’m not sure that UKIP by any other name hasn’t played a significant & influential role in government for the last few years.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,054
    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ponder that we are getting to the last chance for revelation announcement for La Truss prior to the election result. Although if the left wing red tops have it then maybe they are waiting until after the results.

    It was put to me.

    Bit late to swing results. Mind you sunak is so inept he may not realise that and may be saving something up.

    Quite a lot of sex and drugs and republicanism and charging for the NHS baked in with Liz, and you can get away with most things these days.
    Foresees an earlier GE than 2024 with you know how ready to ride to the rescue.
    BTW we have a live bet, on which I expect to concede on 6 September.
    Arghh what was it?
    Chillax, fear not, let nothing you dismay. I bet that R Sunak would be PM at the party conference this year. As this will not be the case, I get to pay £25 to the Injured Jockeys Fund. Which I will do on 6 September.
    Excellent! Winners all round.

    Except for the nation. Who will be royally ****ed.
  • Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,054
    Foxy said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    The Toon losing already

    They’ve been the better side since they conceded but can’t quite close the deal.
    Aye, we’re not shite. Amazing really
    Deserved. And why it was ever even thought to be offside I’ve no idea
    Saw the Aston Villa/Crystal Palace game (MOTD). Some shocking VAR decisions, as agreed even by the BBC commentator - ruining the game, he said.

    And I must say that on MOTD when "VAR" comes up on the screen it seems like a satire on the future of football and how it will be destroyed which could come straight out of either The Day Today or Black Mirror.
    Generally I agree but the system worked in this case

    Well it will of course work de temps en temps but the question is overall does it harm the game. Do we want an goal disallowed because a computer determines that Player A's shirtsleeve was 1.5mm offside? Perhaps we do. I'm not sure I do, that said, and am happy to take the word of the assistant referee or to limit VAR usage to, say, three per side which the manager can trigger.
    I am in favour of VAR, and now it runs a lot more swiftly and smoothly. So much better to have the correct decision than some of the ridiculous decisions that I have seen over the years.
    What proportion of decision are referred, though? Yesterday the players had celebrated, both teams accepted it and the ball was in the centre circle about to be kicked off for the restart.

    How you can say that is swift and smooth is beyond me.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,643

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    They are just all criticism, no answers.
    Of course Labour shouldn’t touch SNP with bargepole.

    For one, English voters don’t want them to.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,662
    Are we back in the mid 90's with Newcastle about to lose 3-4 but winning plaudits from all the neutrals?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,268
    Squeaky bum time - 3-3!
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,604

    Squeaky bum time - 3-3!

    And there it is… :s
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    Oof
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,604
    Lennon said:

    Are we back in the mid 90's with Newcastle about to lose 3-4 but winning plaudits from all the neutrals?

    Looking that way…
  • CookieCookie Posts: 8,142

    Cookie said:

    TOPPING said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    "They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be."

    Hmm where have I heard similar sentiments before. I take it you are a huge fan of Scottish independence.
    Are you referring to Brexit? Because I think the allegory is correct: it would be as mad to give the SNP a role in the governance of the UK as to give UKIP a role in the governamce of the EU.
    Now I should stress I'm not a principled unionist. I can see the argument for an independemt Scotland, just as I can see the argument that the UK should be independent of the EU. My point is that including a party in the governance of the UK whose explicit raison detre is the breakup of the UK is not likely to lead to a good result for the UK.
    Tbh I’m not sure that UKIP by any other name hasn’t played a significant & influential role in government for the last few years.
    No, I'm not saying UKIP shouldn't be in the UK gov, just as I'm not saying the SNP shouldn't be in the Scottish gov (though they wouldn't be my choice, personally, but that is another issue). The point is that it is not in the interests of the institution in question to be led by any coalition which includes a party commutted to the abolition of that institution.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    Red card lol
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,604

    Red card lol

    Reprieve
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    Always loved var me
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,879

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    TOPPING said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    The Toon losing already

    They’ve been the better side since they conceded but can’t quite close the deal.
    Aye, we’re not shite. Amazing really
    Deserved. And why it was ever even thought to be offside I’ve no idea
    Saw the Aston Villa/Crystal Palace game (MOTD). Some shocking VAR decisions, as agreed even by the BBC commentator - ruining the game, he said.

    And I must say that on MOTD when "VAR" comes up on the screen it seems like a satire on the future of football and how it will be destroyed which could come straight out of either The Day Today or Black Mirror.
    Generally I agree but the system worked in this case

    Well it will of course work de temps en temps but the question is overall does it harm the game. Do we want an goal disallowed because a computer determines that Player A's shirtsleeve was 1.5mm offside? Perhaps we do. I'm not sure I do, that said, and am happy to take the word of the assistant referee or to limit VAR usage to, say, three per side which the manager can trigger.
    I am in favour of VAR, and now it runs a lot more swiftly and smoothly. So much better to have the correct decision than some of the ridiculous decisions that I have seen over the years.
    What proportion of decision are referred, though? Yesterday the players had celebrated, both teams accepted it and the ball was in the centre circle about to be kicked off for the restart.

    How you can say that is swift and smooth is beyond me.
    I didn't see it as I was at the Leicester match. Since the Euros they have VAR running a lot smoother generally. Having seen some really crap decisions over the years* I am in favour of getting them right.

    * for example, I remember Liverpool getting a penalty awarded against us for handball, when Wes Morgan was on the ground, and the ball hit his face, not his arm.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    Will take that point!
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,604
    edited August 2022

    Will take that point!

    That Nick Pope’s quite good - despite the three goals he was fantastic
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    O/T and apologies if this has been mentioned / suggested before in a previous thread. Re the Daria Dugina assassination, seems like four possible candidates here:

    1. Ukrainians did it as part of stepping up their anti-Russian activities.

    2. Russians staged it as a 'false flag'.

    3. Dugin / Dugina were targeted because of their activities and transactions, possibly financial, between the Kremlin and the West.

    4. Elements within the FSB / SVR assassinated her to send a signal to Putin and / or they are getting ready to move against Putin himself.

    I don't believe 1 or 2. The Ukrainians have denied it but more to the point it serves them little and they would know this could potentially backfire reputation wise (especially with the Brits given the IRA's use of the tactic). Re the false flag, given the closeness of Dugina's father and Putin and the lack of any signs of tension between them, there are plenty of far less dramatic false flag attacks to stage.

    3. is a possibility (cash siphoned off from Kremlin to far-right groups?) but if it was something like that, I would imagine she would have been arrested / there would have been leaks. So my guess is on 4. In which case, that's bad for Putin and there is another obvious question whether such elements are helping the Ukrainians with their SOF efforts (unlikely but...).

    One final point. How much has Putin's control apparatus being weakened by the deaths / refusal to serve of so many Rosgvardia / OMON personnel in Ukraine? Some cities have lost most of their senior personnel. While we talk about the front line issues for Russia, the internal control problem may be more of a factor.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,494

    Always loved var me

    "var"??? We are writing javascript?

    function sample() {
    var me = 'hello world';
    console.log( me );
    }
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    MrEd said:

    O/T and apologies if this has been mentioned / suggested before in a previous thread. Re the Daria Dugina assassination, seems like four possible candidates here:

    1. Ukrainians did it as part of stepping up their anti-Russian activities.

    2. Russians staged it as a 'false flag'.

    3. Dugin / Dugina were targeted because of their activities and transactions, possibly financial, between the Kremlin and the West.

    4. Elements within the FSB / SVR assassinated her to send a signal to Putin and / or they are getting ready to move against Putin himself.

    I don't believe 1 or 2. The Ukrainians have denied it but more to the point it serves them little and they would know this could potentially backfire reputation wise (especially with the Brits given the IRA's use of the tactic). Re the false flag, given the closeness of Dugina's father and Putin and the lack of any signs of tension between them, there are plenty of far less dramatic false flag attacks to stage.

    3. is a possibility (cash siphoned off from Kremlin to far-right groups?) but if it was something like that, I would imagine she would have been arrested / there would have been leaks. So my guess is on 4. In which case, that's bad for Putin and there is another obvious question whether such elements are helping the Ukrainians with their SOF efforts (unlikely but...).

    One final point. How much has Putin's control apparatus being weakened by the deaths / refusal to serve of so many Rosgvardia / OMON personnel in Ukraine? Some cities have lost most of their senior personnel. While we talk about the front line issues for Russia, the internal control problem may be more of a factor.

    The war is not very popular with some in Russia. Maybe it is the beginning of the end for Putin, though whether replaced by a Menshevik wanting to fight on, or a Bolsheveik wanting bread and peace, who knows?

    ⚡️Another military draft office is on fire in Russia🇷🇺. Russians from the Tver region are in no hurry to die for the Kremlin.

    Since the beginning of the full-invasion of Ukraine🇺🇦, Russians have tried to burn down more than two dozen military registration and enlistment offices. https://t.co/UFFvYanwTr
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,317
    What do people make of the goings on in Oxford Street in recent days?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,506

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
    I am sorry it has happened, but I do think it's inevitable that suspicion will fall on Dugin himself, since it was his car, and he decided last minute to travel separately, and was following the vehicle. Why?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696

    What do people make of the goings on in Oxford Street in recent days?

    What goings on?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,978
    edited August 2022

    Will take that point!

    C'mon you were 3-1 up at home!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093
    edited August 2022
    Posted in error.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,059
    Partly on topic: The 2006 Senate election in Connecticut was won by Joe Lieberman, after he lost the first two contests. He lost the convention endorsement of the Democratic Party by a large margin to Ned Lamont, lost the primary to Lamont, narrowly (48.21-51.79%), and then, running as a third party candidate, defeated Lamont 49.71-39.73%. (The Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger, received 9.62% of the vote. As I recall, he did not campaign vigorously.)
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_history_of_Joe_Lieberman

    So centrists can win, even without ranked-choice voting systems.

    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman )
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,968
    O/T For any PBer living in Birmingham and surrounds, I highly recommend “Counting and Cracking”. Saw it yesterday and it’s amazing.

    https://www.ft.com/content/d4b8eb8b-369a-45ad-8203-4159d7dbac1d
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,317

    What do people make of the goings on in Oxford Street in recent days?

    What goings on?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkfnD6oFElE
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,594
    kinabalu said:

    Will take that point!

    C'mon you were 3-1 up at home!
    Yup, 3-1 up at home and ran up the white flag. Spineless.
  • ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002
    You know, that @MarqueeMark is a hard nosed bastard.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002

    Partly on topic: The 2006 Senate election in Connecticut was won by Joe Lieberman, after he lost the first two contests. He lost the convention endorsement of the Democratic Party by a large margin to Ned Lamont, lost the primary to Lamont, narrowly (48.21-51.79%), and then, running as a third party candidate, defeated Lamont 49.71-39.73%. (The Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger, received 9.62% of the vote. As I recall, he did not campaign vigorously.)
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_history_of_Joe_Lieberman

    So centrists can win, even without ranked-choice voting systems.

    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman )

    One might also point to Alaska 2010, when Lisa Murkowski won as a write in candidate.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    Get that and I totally understand the reaction. And I'm not a soft-hearted liberal. But I just don't think it's right to gloat regardless of his views.

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
    iirc Dugin believes in Traditionism, an obscure right wing philosophy that, in part, views the history of the world in cycles, of which we are currently in the dark cycle, and the end of which is a cleansing with fire and death and burning.

    Perhaps he wanted the cleansing of fire a little too much?
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    There's a strong line of thinking that what will get the movers and shakers in Moscow and St Petersburg finally moving against Putin is when he is being seen to be closing the door to their middle class lifestyles. In that regards, the attacks in Crimea - with the Ukrainians using that ''Cruel Summer" video on social media - may be having more of an impact on Putin's crucial support base than we think.
    Foxy said:

    MrEd said:

    O/T and apologies if this has been mentioned / suggested before in a previous thread. Re the Daria Dugina assassination, seems like four possible candidates here:

    1. Ukrainians did it as part of stepping up their anti-Russian activities.

    2. Russians staged it as a 'false flag'.

    3. Dugin / Dugina were targeted because of their activities and transactions, possibly financial, between the Kremlin and the West.

    4. Elements within the FSB / SVR assassinated her to send a signal to Putin and / or they are getting ready to move against Putin himself.

    I don't believe 1 or 2. The Ukrainians have denied it but more to the point it serves them little and they would know this could potentially backfire reputation wise (especially with the Brits given the IRA's use of the tactic). Re the false flag, given the closeness of Dugina's father and Putin and the lack of any signs of tension between them, there are plenty of far less dramatic false flag attacks to stage.

    3. is a possibility (cash siphoned off from Kremlin to far-right groups?) but if it was something like that, I would imagine she would have been arrested / there would have been leaks. So my guess is on 4. In which case, that's bad for Putin and there is another obvious question whether such elements are helping the Ukrainians with their SOF efforts (unlikely but...).

    One final point. How much has Putin's control apparatus being weakened by the deaths / refusal to serve of so many Rosgvardia / OMON personnel in Ukraine? Some cities have lost most of their senior personnel. While we talk about the front line issues for Russia, the internal control problem may be more of a factor.

    The war is not very popular with some in Russia. Maybe it is the beginning of the end for Putin, though whether replaced by a Menshevik wanting to fight on, or a Bolsheveik wanting bread and peace, who knows?

    ⚡️Another military draft office is on fire in Russia🇷🇺. Russians from the Tver region are in no hurry to die for the Kremlin.

    Since the beginning of the full-invasion of Ukraine🇺🇦, Russians have tried to burn down more than two dozen military registration and enlistment offices. https://t.co/UFFvYanwTr
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 5,781

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
    I quite agree. In time of war, it is quite reasonable to rejoice at the death of an enemy. It's no different to all the turret-tossing vids on Twidder. Delenda est Rossia.
  • What do people make of the goings on in Oxford Street in recent days?

    What goings on?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkfnD6oFElE
    A bunch of kids jumping on cars and looting a sweet shop. It's annoying; it's a bit scary; but from at least that report, no-one was stabbed which is something of a relief in London these past few weeks.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 49,020
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    If you want to be bound by your own preconceptions, then I can't help you.

    What's the point of being in a United Kingdom with political parties such as yours, then
    I don't think it's a baseless preconception; it's the entire raison d'être of that party.

    Your argument is essentially the same as those used to test for witchcraft in medieval times.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
    What a Shem.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,357
    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    HYUFD said:

    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences

    AOC pretty moderate these days
  • IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
    What a Shem.
    Has this punfest been Ham-mered into the ground enough yet?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,357

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
    Gordon Brown was very pro more powers for Holyrood and would likely lead Starmer's commission on the future of the Union. If Sir Keir becomes PM
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,357

    HYUFD said:

    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences

    AOC pretty moderate these days
    She isn't, she is well to the left of Biden and Starmer and Woke as anything
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,232
    edited August 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
    Gordon Brown was very pro more powers for Holyrood and would likely lead Starmer's commission on the future of the Union. If Sir Keir becomes PM
    Gordon Brown may be stupid enough to believe that "more powers" is going to solve this problem when it hasn't on the previous umpteen occasions, though to be kind he's a Scottish Unionist thrashing around in desperation for the means to rescue Scotland's position in the UK, and thus may be very prone to indulge in wishful thinking.

    I doubt that Starmer buys the same theory, but a commission would be a convenient way to boot the entire problem into the long grass for another few years, whilst we all wait to see if the independence movement runs out of steam. If it does, fine. If it doesn't, then at least the next Government will hope to get the half-dozen crises it already has to firefight under some measure of control before the bitterest divorce since Catherine of Aragon gets added to the to-do list.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,268
    edited August 2022
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
    deleted - beaten to it.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,506

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
    I quite agree. In time of war, it is quite reasonable to rejoice at the death of an enemy. It's no different to all the turret-tossing vids on Twidder. Delenda est Rossia.
    I don't really think that's true. I think you can even be a soldier and kill the enemy without rejoicing at their deaths.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,947
    Must be quiet if AV is the subject...
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences

    AOC pretty moderate these days
    She isn't, she is well to the left of Biden and Starmer and Woke as anything
    Woke is mainstream fam
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,357

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences

    AOC pretty moderate these days
    She isn't, she is well to the left of Biden and Starmer and Woke as anything
    Woke is mainstream fam
    Tell that to Leon, Truss, Badenoch and DeSantis. It is mainstream in the left not the right and the centre is divided on it
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences

    AOC pretty moderate these days
    She isn't, she is well to the left of Biden and Starmer and Woke as anything
    Woke is mainstream fam
    Tell that to Leon, Truss, Badenoch and DeSantis. It is mainstream in the left not the right and the centre is divided on it
    The oldies haven’t realised yet
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
    iirc Dugin believes in Traditionism, an obscure right wing philosophy that, in part, views the history of the world in cycles, of which we are currently in the dark cycle, and the end of which is a cleansing with fire and death and burning.

    Perhaps he wanted the cleansing of fire a little too much?
    He should probably read Popper's The Poverty of Historicism.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423
    edited August 2022
    People who voted against AV in the 2011 referendum because they disliked it more than FPTP were idiots.

    If we'd had AV 10 years ago we might have moved to STV by now.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,879
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
    Gordon Brown was very pro more powers for Holyrood and would likely lead Starmer's commission on the future of the Union. If Sir Keir becomes PM
    You mean he chatted all sorts of vow related crap at the time and didn’t follow through at all for the subsequent 8 years?
  • Partly on topic: The 2006 Senate election in Connecticut was won by Joe Lieberman, after he lost the first two contests. He lost the convention endorsement of the Democratic Party by a large margin to Ned Lamont, lost the primary to Lamont, narrowly (48.21-51.79%), and then, running as a third party candidate, defeated Lamont 49.71-39.73%. (The Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger, received 9.62% of the vote. As I recall, he did not campaign vigorously.)
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_history_of_Joe_Lieberman

    So centrists can win, even without ranked-choice voting systems.

    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman )

    It wasn't the first time Lieberman defeated a liberal with the aid of conservative votes.

    His first Senate win in 1988 was against one of the last of the liberal GOPers.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
    Gordon Brown was very pro more powers for Holyrood and would likely lead Starmer's commission on the future of the Union. If Sir Keir becomes PM
    You mean he chatted all sorts of vow related crap at the time and didn’t follow through at all for the subsequent 8 years?
    I am no fan of Gordon, but there is the slight problem that for those 8 years he wasn't in government, indeed not in Parliament for most of it.
  • Andy_JS said:

    People who voted against AV in the 2011 referendum because they disliked it more than FPTP were idiots.

    If we'd had AV 10 years ago we might have moved to STV by now.

    I thought RodCrosby's PR^2 sounded good.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002

    MrEd said:

    PS Much as Dugin's and Dugina's views were repulsive, don't forget a father saw his daughter die in a car bomb. Regardless of your views of (almost) any individual, no one should have to see that .

    There's a hundred thousand plus in Ukraine who have see that, because that c*** of a man fired up Putin with his repulsive views on Ukrainian "untermenchen". Views his daughter publicly promulgated too.

    Call me a hard-nosed bastard, but I am not sorry he has shared that personal trauma with so many others for which he has responsibility.
    I quite agree. In time of war, it is quite reasonable to rejoice at the death of an enemy. It's no different to all the turret-tossing vids on Twidder. Delenda est Rossia.
    I don't really think that's true. I think you can even be a soldier and kill the enemy without rejoicing at their deaths.
    What about if you kill an Untermensch?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
    We're going to hear this a Lot.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002
    edited August 2022
    Andy_JS said:

    People who voted against AV in the 2011 referendum because they disliked it more than FPTP were idiots.

    If we'd had AV 10 years ago we might have moved to STV by now.

    I voted against AV.

    Personally, my preference is small multi-member constituencies, that make our elections a little more proportional, while still preserving the link between voters and MPs, and allowing for majority governments to be formed regularly, if not all of the time.

    I think three to four MP constituencies would be perfect: it would result in a party who got 42-43% of the vote to get a majority in Parliament, but not an overwhelming one. It would mean that issues like the UK's membership of the EU would be addressed earlier. And it would also encourage the existence of independents.

    Obviously, this would not use party lists, so voters would be able to express their preference for one Conservative (or Liberal or whoever) over another.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002

    Andy_JS said:

    People who voted against AV in the 2011 referendum because they disliked it more than FPTP were idiots.

    If we'd had AV 10 years ago we might have moved to STV by now.

    I thought RodCrosby's PR^2 sounded good.
    PR^2 did a good job of allowing a little more proportionality, while allowing majority government to be formed. But it broke the link between MPs and voters. And it increased the power of political parties, because it was a list type system.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    ydoethur said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
    We're going to hear this a Lot.
    There will be much Ado about it.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423
    edited August 2022
    I've thought of a bizarre solution to the problem of FPTP not being proportional. You have about 20 different sets of boundaries for a FPTP election and when the election is over you use the boundaries which give the most proportional result overall. It might be boundary scheme number 17 for instance.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    That's Labour's problem. If it wishes to basically say that Scottish voters should be ignored en masse, as HYUFD does from the Tory point of view, that IS the end of the Union.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 49,002
    Andy_JS said:

    I've thought of a bizarre solution to the problem of FPTP not being proportional. You have about 20 different sets of boundaries for a FPTP election and when the election is over you use the boundaries which give the most proportional result overall. It might be boundary scheme number 17 for instance.

    That's sightly crazy, but kinda cool.

    There's only one problem with it, and that is that it means that you are increasingly voting for a party, and not a person.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 18,057
    Very late to the topic and sorry if going over old ground, but surely with one Dem and two GOP the Dem would have a better chance under FPTP against a divided opposition? Under AV the GOP votes just end up with their better placed candidate.
  • eekeek Posts: 22,078
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    People who voted against AV in the 2011 referendum because they disliked it more than FPTP were idiots.

    If we'd had AV 10 years ago we might have moved to STV by now.

    I voted against AV.

    Personally, my preference is small multi-member constituencies, that make our elections a little more proportional, while still preserving the link between voters and MPs, and allowing for majority governments to be formed regularly, if not all of the time.

    I think three to four MP constituencies would be perfect: it would result in a party who got 42-43% of the vote to get a majority in Parliament, but not an overwhelming one. It would mean that issues like the UK's membership of the EU would be addressed earlier. And it would also encourage the existence of independents.

    Obviously, this would not use party lists, so voters would be able to express their preference for one Conservative (or Liberal or whoever) over another.
    So basically the NI Assembly's electoral system where the most important task is deciding how many candidates do you field in the constituency to minimise the risk of your candidates splitting the vote so badly all are eliminated early on...

    On the upside / downside Sinn Fein got it so wrong they aren't currently in power in Ireland....
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
    Gordon Brown was very pro more powers for Holyrood and would likely lead Starmer's commission on the future of the Union. If Sir Keir becomes PM
    You mean he chatted all sorts of vow related crap at the time and didn’t follow through at all for the subsequent 8 years?
    I am no fan of Gordon, but there is the slight problem that for those 8 years he wasn't in government, indeed not in Parliament for most of it.
    More to the point: neither Parliament.

    And yet Unionists keep saying we should slavishly do what he wants.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,317
    To be fair in the last couple of elections parties have got into the 42-43% vote share again.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    AV would help moderate Republicans see off Trumpites with Democrat preferences. It would also help centrist Democrats see off AOC radicals with Republican preferences

    AOC pretty moderate these days
    She isn't, she is well to the left of Biden and Starmer and Woke as anything
    Yes, but you think Genghiz Khan is rabidly communist anyway.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    I'm still suffering from writer's block so here's an AV thread

    This thread is at the behest of @ydoethur who asked for an AV thread last week on the topology thread.

    I'm never going to live that down, am I?
    It is going to haunt you like the mark of Cain.
    He will never be abel to forget it. Noah way.
    We're going to hear this a Lot.
    There will be much Ado about it.
    Was that an unconvincing attempt to be a Hero?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    If you want to be bound by your own preconceptions, then I can't help you.

    What's the point of being in a United Kingdom with political parties such as yours, then
    I don't think it's a baseless preconception; it's the entire raison d'être of that party.

    Your argument is essentially the same as those used to test for witchcraft in medieval times.
    You're confusing "leave the UK" and "destroy the UK".

    Of course, those stuck in the old British Empire mindset can't tell the difference.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 18,057
    eek said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    People who voted against AV in the 2011 referendum because they disliked it more than FPTP were idiots.

    If we'd had AV 10 years ago we might have moved to STV by now.

    I voted against AV.

    Personally, my preference is small multi-member constituencies, that make our elections a little more proportional, while still preserving the link between voters and MPs, and allowing for majority governments to be formed regularly, if not all of the time.

    I think three to four MP constituencies would be perfect: it would result in a party who got 42-43% of the vote to get a majority in Parliament, but not an overwhelming one. It would mean that issues like the UK's membership of the EU would be addressed earlier. And it would also encourage the existence of independents.

    Obviously, this would not use party lists, so voters would be able to express their preference for one Conservative (or Liberal or whoever) over another.
    So basically the NI Assembly's electoral system where the most important task is deciding how many candidates do you field in the constituency to minimise the risk of your candidates splitting the vote so badly all are eliminated early on...

    On the upside / downside Sinn Fein got it so wrong they aren't currently in power in Ireland....
    One of the main reasons why STV is a shite system.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    This thread has decided that AV is an anti-British Imperial treason.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650
    edited August 2022
    Evening all. Hot on the heels of Sri Lanka, its all goung tittius verticus in Pakistan. Wheels coming off all over the shop
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,879
    edited August 2022
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    We need Labour with C&S from Lib Dems.

    PR is now essential to re-build our broken country

    Why not SNP? They've been consistently in support of voting reform.
    Let's be very clear: the SNP aren't interested in the good governance of the United Kingdom.

    They want one thing and one thing only: the end of the Union. And they couldn't give a scoobies how it's achieved, or what the collateral damage would be.

    It doesn't matter if you're Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative. None of the mainstream British political parties should touch them with a bargepole.
    Yeah, Labour doing a deal with the SNP would be the political equivalent of sticking your head in a lion's mouth. The last thing they want is for a Labour government to be successful, because it means the cause of independence won't be.
    As so very often when it comes to PB Unionists frothing about cooperation with the SNP, you're not thinking things through. The real problem for Labour is England. Think about the sequence of events you are implying. Scotland is a second order issue.
    Ok, so what should a sensible (i.e. not Corbynite) and unionist Labour Party's attitude be towards the SNP in Westminster? How could a relationship between a Labour minority and the SNP be productive and work in both their best interests? It's all well and good to criticise Labour's current stance on the SNP, but I hear very little from SNP supporters what Labour should do instead (which Labour could sell electorally both north and south of the border, and not necessarily lead to the end of the union).
    I see we’ve gone from the SNP seeks to destroy the UK to their supporters should help out Labour with suggestions on how to save the Union! In fact I’ve said tediously over the years that Labour should be the party of Devomax, instead they were eg the party most obstructive to further powers during the Smith Commision.
    Gordon Brown was very pro more powers for Holyrood and would likely lead Starmer's commission on the future of the Union. If Sir Keir becomes PM
    You mean he chatted all sorts of vow related crap at the time and didn’t follow through at all for the subsequent 8 years?
    I am no fan of Gordon, but there is the slight problem that for those 8 years he wasn't in government, indeed not in Parliament for most of it.
    But we’re talking about Labour, and Brown was a, perhaps the, big figure in the party. During that period they were all over the place on devolution, defaulting to obstructive on the whole. Their two principal motivating forces were the rump Unionism of SLab and electoral advantage for themselves, nothing wrong with that per se but they’re having a laugh if they think a significant number of voters are going to turn to them because of their principled position on the issue.
This discussion has been closed.