Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New adventures in electoral systems. Approval voting

SystemSystem Posts: 12,586
edited November 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New adventures in electoral systems. Approval voting

This is an intriguing experiment. The winner should be the candidate who most voters approve of. So it encourages centrism and hardliners to be flexible.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,625
    In the spirit of the header: First, second, and fourth.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    The header begs the question, is centrism invariably good? In the past two decades alone, centrism has brought us war and Brexit. Centrism almost broke up the United Kingdom and may yet do so.

    It begs another question too, in assuming the highest approval ratings accrue to centrists. Isn't Jeremy Corbyn the most popular Labour figure, while Boris and JRM are prominent in the Tory lists?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    The header begs the question, is centrism invariably good? In the past two decades alone, centrism has brought us war and Brexit. Centrism almost broke up the United Kingdom and may yet do so.

    It begs another question too, in assuming the highest approval ratings accrue to centrists. Isn't Jeremy Corbyn the most popular Labour figure, while Boris and JRM are prominent in the Tory lists?

    I think the trick is they can get it just by being less disliked. So say for example Corbyn, Boris and some generic Lib Dem candidate the Lib Dem candidate could come first by getting the approval of some voters from the Tories and Labour.

    Although in a very red or blue constituency this presumably would also have the effect of forcing the people representing that area to move left or right if they are more centrist than their electorate.

    The problem is when people say centrist they are often imagine a set of policies and particular people that don't necessarily represent the centre ground of politics or what the voters actually want, just what some people imagine to be a moderate middle path between competing options.

    So whilst a system like this could produce representation closer to what the centre of opinion is within individual constituencies it might not produce what a lot of people talk of as centrism.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,060
    A very brief delinking to say good morning to PB on this very poignant day.

    Whatever our political differences, and whatever our personal view on war, we should all take a moment today to remember the stories of those who went to serve their country and didn’t make it home. They made the ultimate sacrifice so that we could be free. Lest we forget.

    Requiescat in pace.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,965
    It will be interesting to see how this plays out in Fargo - though I know little about their politics.

    If they decide to vote only for the ideologically pure, they could well see their vote rendered irrelevant by more flexible citizens. So they might need to hold their noses and give the nod to other candidates in order to try to exclude the really unacceptable choices.

    I suspect it's the opposite of what Alastair suggests. Let's suppose the candidates were as follows:

    Left
    Centre
    Centre
    Centre
    Centre
    Right

    Very simplistic, I know, but it's the centrists who will have to compromise. It's the centrists who have unacceptable choices. To the Left and Right, the Centrists are just as unacceptable.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,495
    A system that gives you the bland leading the bland.....

    I can't see it going far, Fargo.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    edited November 2018
    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    It’s an interesting idea and one that might well leave us with an abstract - Don’t Know - as PM.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,082
    Theresa May fails to block court case that could allow the UK to reverse Brexit

    Europe's highest court will decide this month whether the UK has the power to reverse Article 50, its notice of intention to leave the EU.

    Theresa May could be handed the power to unilaterally reverse Brexit after a court refused an appeal by her government to block a landmark case on the issue being referred to European courts.

    "The government must now focus on meeting the promises made to voters in the Referendum campaign. If it cannot deliver that deal the people must be asked again because it has no mandate to drive the country off a cliff."
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-fails-block-case-allow-uk-to-stop-brexit-50-article-2018-11?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral&r=US&IR=T
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,756
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. JohnL, quite.

    F1: will check shortly to see what penalties have been dished out.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    edited November 2018
    logical_song said:

    Theresa May fails to block court case that could allow the UK to reverse Brexit

    Europe's highest court will decide this month whether the UK has the power to reverse Article 50, its notice of intention to leave the EU.

    Theresa May could be handed the power to unilaterally reverse Brexit after a court refused an appeal by her government to block a landmark case on the issue being referred to European courts.

    "The government must now focus on meeting the promises made to voters in the Referendum campaign. If it cannot deliver that deal the people must be asked again because it has no mandate to drive the country off a cliff."
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-fails-block-case-allow-uk-to-stop-brexit-50-article-2018-11?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral&r=US&IR=T

    Why would May want to deny herself that power? If you can revoke A50 at any time, then you can essentially control he negotiation process. Need a couple more years? bang, done!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,559
    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    cuckoo
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    This is not the first time that this approach to voting has been aired on PB. Some years ago when we used to run an annual poster of the year ballot we adopted this method and I thought it proved to be successful
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,410
    edited November 2018
    An interesting lead and a refreshing change from articles about Trump; one almost pines for more Brexit.

    All-parish elections where the whole council is elected at once are closest to operating this way - often there is only one or two more candidates than places (such as ten candidates for eight places), and voters have eight votes. Although it's FPTP, voters aren't obliged to use all eight votes and often don't, if they don't know all the individuals. Indeed if you want a particular person elected the optimum strategy is to use just one of your votes.

    I guess you could also have disapproval voting, where voters mark anyone they don't want, and those with the least disapproval are elected?

    The point about the party machine doesn't really make sense - popular local candidates can stand as independents against their party now; what stops them is the tendency of voters to use the party label as a substitute in the absence of knowing the individual. The same could happen in approval voting.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    edited November 2018
    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    I'm disappointed though, I was expecting an AV thread.

    I'm also surprised after Alistair's comments on the last thread that he went with a Superheros voting page. Or was that the good Mr Eagles' contribution?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,756
    F1: still checking, but no penalty for Vettel.

    .....

    ?

    !?

    My gast is flabbered.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,410
    MarqueeMark said:

    A system that gives you the bland leading the bland.....

    I can't see it going far, Fargo.

    We are hardly on the high ground when it comes to the quality of representatives thrown up by our current system, though, are we? The party machine picks some wazzock and then voters in the many areas of the country full of strong supporters of that party are forced to vote for that idiot or change their party allegiance. It's the only way some of our conspicuously moronic MPs get in.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
    IMO, the EU is the front behind which the Germans can dominate Europe without appearing (to the gullible) to do so. That is why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,646
    Jonathan said:



    Why would May want to deny herself that power?

    Wrong sort of sovereignty. Since Brexit is turning into a shit show in a fuck factory its inevitability is its only remaining strength. If she shows any sign of wanting even the possibility on an A50 reversal Rees Mogg and his troop of gammony yeomen will have her put in jougs. Possibly literally.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,495
    Jonathan said:

    logical_song said:

    Theresa May fails to block court case that could allow the UK to reverse Brexit

    Europe's highest court will decide this month whether the UK has the power to reverse Article 50, its notice of intention to leave the EU.

    Theresa May could be handed the power to unilaterally reverse Brexit after a court refused an appeal by her government to block a landmark case on the issue being referred to European courts.

    "The government must now focus on meeting the promises made to voters in the Referendum campaign. If it cannot deliver that deal the people must be asked again because it has no mandate to drive the country off a cliff."
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-fails-block-case-allow-uk-to-stop-brexit-50-article-2018-11?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral&r=US&IR=T

    Why would May want to deny herself that power? If you can revoke A50 at any time, then you can essentially control he negotiation process. Need a couple more years? bang, done!
    Don't like what's on offer? Bingo - restart the clock. With a Brexiteer at the helm this time, please?

    Which is why I suspect the Eurojudges will decide it is a one-off notice that cannot be universally withdrawn.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    Morris_Dancer said:

    F1: still checking, but no penalty for Vettel.

    .....

    ?

    !?

    My gast is flabbered.

    I thought they gave him a finger wagging and a small fine.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,756
    Mr. Doethur, aye, 25,000 currency units of some variety. Vettel won't even notice.

    Nothing at all for Hamilton either.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,410
    edited November 2018
    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Ignoring your silly first para, the suggestion in the second was what the Soviets wanted - keep four separate occupation zones focused on agricultural production. They objected strongly to the creation of the FDR and the DDR was only set up as a state in reaction to the western allies' unilateral action. Nevertheless it is hard to see such an arrangement having been sustainable into the modern world; it would be like a province out of the Hunger Games.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
    IMO, the EU is the front behind which the Germans can dominate Europe without appearing (to the gullible) to do so. That is why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.
    The Germans have clearly managed to dominate your imagination.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
    IMO, the EU is the front behind which the Germans can dominate Europe without appearing (to the gullible) to do so. That is why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.

    And they fiendishly forced everyone else to go along with it. Once again it is Britain alone standing up to tyranny. We shall fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender. Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    edited November 2018
    williamglenn said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
    IMO, the EU is the front behind which the Germans can dominate Europe without appearing (to the gullible) to do so. That is why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.
    The Germans have clearly managed to dominate your imagination.
    Two days ago I was agreeing with Trump over something, now I'm agreeing with William over something to do with the EU!!!!

    What's going on? Is the Illumanti involved?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,410
    edited November 2018
    MarqueeMark said:

    Jonathan said:

    logical_song said:

    Theresa May fails to block court case that could allow the UK to reverse Brexit

    Europe's highest court will decide this month whether the UK has the power to reverse Article 50, its notice of intention to leave the EU.

    Theresa May could be handed the power to unilaterally reverse Brexit after a court refused an appeal by her government to block a landmark case on the issue being referred to European courts.

    "The government must now focus on meeting the promises made to voters in the Referendum campaign. If it cannot deliver that deal the people must be asked again because it has no mandate to drive the country off a cliff."
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-fails-block-case-allow-uk-to-stop-brexit-50-article-2018-11?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral&r=US&IR=T

    Why would May want to deny herself that power? If you can revoke A50 at any time, then you can essentially control he negotiation process. Need a couple more years? bang, done!
    Don't like what's on offer? Bingo - restart the clock. With a Brexiteer at the helm this time, please?

    Which is why I suspect the Eurojudges will decide it is a one-off notice that cannot be universally withdrawn.
    Tosh. The Brexiters' raison d'etre is carping from the sidelines, because no real world outcome will ever be good enough for them. The last thing they would want, or be capable of doing, is actually implementing something themselves. And if one of them tried they would quickly be branded a sellout and traitor by the others. Or actually take us over the cliff and then run for the hills claiming it wasn't implemented properly.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,714
    SouthamObserver said:

    It’s an interesting idea and one that might well leave us with an abstract - Don’t Know - as PM.

    Or Mrs May as she is usually known.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    If the USA turnout market hasn't been settled yet I'm now seeing 48.9% as the new estimated figure.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Cyclefree said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    It’s an interesting idea and one that might well leave us with an abstract - Don’t Know - as PM.

    Or Mrs May as she is usually known.
    Mrs May has always had Dickensian overtones.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    Cyclefree said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    It’s an interesting idea and one that might well leave us with an abstract - Don’t Know - as PM.

    Or Mrs May as she is usually known.
    Theresa May not know, Jeremy certainly doesn't?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    Jonathan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    It’s an interesting idea and one that might well leave us with an abstract - Don’t Know - as PM.

    Or Mrs May as she is usually known.
    Mrs May has always had Dickensian overtones.
    Didn't Thatcher sometimes refer to 'Maggie May' when there was election fever in the offing?
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    For that poster, the Russian zone doesn’t count. That was legitimate feudal annexation and not occupation.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,714
    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    edited November 2018
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    My suspicion would be that they assume it is this deal, or no deal, and as everyone has said there will be no hard border in Ireland in the event of no deal, no deal suits them just fine and much better than any sort of deal for the mainland.

    They are also probably calculating that it is unlikely an election under such circumstances would see Corbyn come to power.

    These are both - courageous - assumptions, but then we are talking about Arlene Foster here.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited November 2018
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    We, that is the electorate as a whole, get the politicians we deserve. There seem to be no prizes for treating the electorate as adults. The public is infantilised, intellectually and morally, and so peddlers of easy solutions (“tax the rich and all will be well”, “leave the EU and all will be well”, “free stuff for all”) triumph. Perhaps it will change but there’s precious little evidence of that in the short term.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,838
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    The DUP will vote for the government in a confidence vote I think. A crippled govt can keep going, see the FTPA. The govt might also get Labour votes to pass the bill.

    Yes the DUP are rolling the dice but it doesn't necessarily lead to Corbyn
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    There are so many ugly people this would exclude.Churchill wasn't much of a looker but I guess if you want Stacey Solomon as PM it's an excellent way forwards.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,784
    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
    IMO, the EU is the front behind which the Germans can dominate Europe without appearing (to the gullible) to do so. That is why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.

    Economically it manifests itself in huge trade surpluses with the rest of Europe on the back of an artificially devalued German currency for internal EU trading.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,435
    edited November 2018
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    It is still possible the Deal will somehow square the circle enough to ensure DUP support.

    However, I can no longer see how May brings the 50-odd hardline ERGers and Determined Remainers on board for the vote.

    So as things stand, May will lose the vote.
    What can she offer to get it through?
    A referendum promise would bring the Determined Remainers on side, peel off some Labour votes (the Chukas), and even the LDs too.

    I can’t see a realistic route to another election, and perhaps the DUP cannot either.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    Selection methods matter a lot. The Law Society had a system for choosing leaders that required any candidate to spend years working their way through the hierarchy. Unsurprisingly it had a succession of time-serving dullards - quite an achievement in a profession stuffed full of lively and clever individualists. Similarly, the current British system gives power to party machines. Unsurprisingly loyalty to the party hierarchy and the willingness to pander to the worst prejudices of the relevant party membership ensures progression. Individuality is not encouraged.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Approval Voting.

    Good - Kills tired old electoral arguments such as "don't split the vote" or "only x can beat y in z-ville". Stops party machines blocking genuinely popular local candidates, or small well-organised sects from seizing control of party machines and imposing their ideology on candidates.

    Bad - System rewards tactical voting. Encourages negative campaigning and divisions. Inaccurately reflects voter preferences.

    Approval isn't a binary metric, but will lie on a scale. So a voter might prefer the Left Party, and then second the Centre Party. If they live in a Left stronghold then they should vote only for the Left Party. Voting for the Left and the Centre gives the Centre a chance to beat the Left with the votes of Right Party voters too. In a constituency that leans Right the Left voter should probably vote Centre to have the greatest chance of beating the Right, but that would also stymie the chance of the Left winning the seat in a strong year for the Left.

    The voter has to guess what other voters will do to make the choice that will result in their preferred outcome.

    I think Approval Voting is one of those rare electoral systems that is worse than the Alternative Vote, where the voter can give their preference vote and so can vote for who they prefer to win any two candidate run-off.

    I'm still a Single Stochastic Vote supporter.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    Gardenwalker said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    It is still possible the Deal will somehow square the circle enough to ensure DUP support.

    However, I can no longer see how May brings the 50-odd hardline ERGers and Determined Remainers on board for the vote.

    So as things stand, May will lose the vote.
    What can she offer to get it through?
    A referendum promise would bring the Determined Remainers on side, peel off some Labour votes (the Chukas), and even the LDs too.

    I can’t see a realistic route to another election, and perhaps the DUP cannot either.
    What would be the point of offering a referendum to win a vote that would make said referendum unnecessary?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,728
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    No, Labour is actually pretty united in wanting a permanent customs union and regulatory alignment, which would suit the DUP very well (no border between GB and NI, and no hindrance to Ireland trade, forever). The EU is also fine with it. The ONLY people who object are the Conservatives, especially the ERG, and ifd the DUP have to choose between the interests of NI unionism and the interests of the Conservative Party and the ERG, they'll throw the Tories under a bus in a millisecond.

    Naturally the DUP is repelled by Corbyn's sympathy for a united Ireland. But that's not currently on the agenda, whereas a potential GB/NI split very much is. I can't see them voting for a Corbyn government, but avoiding it is only a second-order objective for them.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,435
    ydoethur said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    It is still possible the Deal will somehow square the circle enough to ensure DUP support.

    However, I can no longer see how May brings the 50-odd hardline ERGers and Determined Remainers on board for the vote.

    So as things stand, May will lose the vote.
    What can she offer to get it through?
    A referendum promise would bring the Determined Remainers on side, peel off some Labour votes (the Chukas), and even the LDs too.

    I can’t see a realistic route to another election, and perhaps the DUP cannot either.
    What would be the point of offering a referendum to win a vote that would make said referendum unnecessary?
    A vote to proceed to Brexit on May’s Deal, does not preclude a referendum - either before Brexit day, or during transition - on whether the public approves or rather prefers to Remain.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,435
    NickPalmer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    No, Labour is actually pretty united in wanting a permanent customs union and regulatory alignment, which would suit the DUP very well (no border between GB and NI, and no hindrance to Ireland trade, forever). The EU is also fine with it. The ONLY people who object are the Conservatives, especially the ERG, and ifd the DUP have to choose between the interests of NI unionism and the interests of the Conservative Party and the ERG, they'll throw the Tories under a bus in a millisecond.

    Naturally the DUP is repelled by Corbyn's sympathy for a united Ireland. But that's not currently on the agenda, whereas a potential GB/NI split very much is. I can't see them voting for a Corbyn government, but avoiding it is only a second-order objective for them.
    Dream on.

    If Corbyn becomes PM, there will be a border poll in the same term.

    DUP will not countenance a Corbyn-led Labour government.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,728
    edited November 2018
    On topic, thanks to Alastair for pointing out this interesting experiment. I don't think it would necessarily promote centrism as much as amiability and positivity, and in my book those are good things. But as tlg points out, this system - like any system - can be gamed. An extreme candidate with say 40% approval and 60% disapproval can work to build up opposition to all his rival centrists (Trump would be really good at that). The centrists would need to say "Vote for me, not rival centrist X, because...", thereby helping the extremist. In the end, bewildered centrists woulfd vote for one or another of them but not all of them, and the extremist's 40% would carry the day.

    Mind you, I'm not sure it's the job of the electoral system to promote centrism per se. As Alastair points out, this can promote mediocrity disguised as inoffensiveness. Polite radicals can be a good thing.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    The centenary of Liberal Folly will be on TV today,and cowardly Nick Clegg has taken refuge in California which is about 5000 miles from the mainland EU.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    He may have dodged the rain, but he's being snowed under with criticism.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,728
    Gardenwalker said:



    Dream on.

    If Corbyn becomes PM, there will be a border poll in the same term.

    Citation needed. I read lots of left-wing stuff, including some I don't agree with. I have not seen anyone advocate an early border poll for decades. It's simply not on the left-wing agenda - not least because it wouldn't produce a Yes vote. If things change and a Yes vote becomes likely, interest will surge, but that's not going to happen any time soon unless the DUP allows the Tories to create a potential forced choice of United Ireland vs Hard Border.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,225
    Essentially AV handled in a. single pass.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,728
    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    On Trump, this also came out in the last day or so:

    https://twitter.com/jonswaine/status/1061020792618696709?s=21
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,181
    Disappointed that Iron Man, Captain America, Spiderman, etc. aren't on the ballot :)
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,225
    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    I have to think there's something more to this than rain. It doesn't make sense to go all the way over to France for a ceremony and not turn up.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    The_Apocalypse said:

    On Trump, this also came out in the last day or so:

    https://twitter.com/jonswaine/status/1061020792618696709?s=21

    This came out within 4 hours of his appointment. There is just so much stuff, including Trump's denial that he knows him personally after previously talking about multiple meeting and how much he likes him, that the press is taking a long time to filter everything through.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    old_labour said:

    The centenary of Liberal Folly will be on TV today,and cowardly Nick Clegg has taken refuge in California which is about 5000 miles from the mainland EU.

    Okaaaay...

    There are some seriously odd posts on this thread this morning.
  • BudGBudG Posts: 711
    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    He may have dodged the rain, but he's being snowed under with criticism.
    It's water off a duck's back.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    The_Apocalypse said:

    On Trump, this also came out in the last day or so:

    https://twitter.com/jonswaine/status/1061020792618696709?s=21

    Yep, we’ve been covering it ...
    https://www.iam-media.com/law-policy/acting-attorney-general-sat-board-florida-company-ran-patent-filing-scam
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    FF43 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    I have to think there's something more to this than rain. It doesn't make sense to go all the way over to France for a ceremony and not turn up.
    Quite. There was either a legitimate national security issue that needed dealing with or it was a trump personal life drama that came up suddenly.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    BudG said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    He may have dodged the rain, but he's being snowed under with criticism.
    It's water off a duck's back.
    But how does it affect an orangutan?
  • eekeek Posts: 30,757
    FF43 said:

    Essentially AV handled in a. single pass.

    Yep the only advantage is that an acceptable candidate with few first preferences can win.
    Should help the Lib Dems immensely
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,242
    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    Voting against something is not the same as voting for a likely alternative. Irish both North and South can vote against a deal,and assume aggreived victim status as a border is forced on them by their perceived hegemonistic neighbour, the EU or the UK respectively.

    I see the anti -German loons are out this morning. If there is one thing that we have learnt in the last 2years it is that German car makers do not pull the strings. The Brexiteers have a rather odd idea of a schrodingers Germany, simultaneously all powerful and united in neocoloniaism, and bitterly divided with no sense of national purpose. The reality is simpler, Germany is merely a successful economy interested only in peace and sound economies.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,714
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I see the DUP are saying they will vote against Mrs May’s deal. Setting aside the fact that there is not yet a deal - and it seems quite possible there won’t be one - I find the DUP’s position a bit odd. If the government falls and Corbyn becomes PM, he will, I imagine, have no hesitation in signing up to a deal which places a border in the Irish sea. Nor with signing up to a permanent CU which would, presumably, infuriate the ERG.

    So their actions seem likely to bring about the very things they claim to detest. I am probably missing something though .........

    A thank you to Mr Meeks for his article. I rather feel though that the method of voting is rather less important than the abysmal quality of politicians we have to vote for.

    Selection methods matter a lot. The Law Society had a system for choosing leaders that required any candidate to spend years working their way through the hierarchy. Unsurprisingly it had a succession of time-serving dullards - quite an achievement in a profession stuffed full of lively and clever individualists. Similarly, the current British system gives power to party machines. Unsurprisingly loyalty to the party hierarchy and the willingness to pander to the worst prejudices of the relevant party membership ensures progression. Individuality is not encouraged.
    OK - I am duly put back in my box......

    Still, I think that the fact that you have to start in politics at about the age of 13 to get on is the political equivalent of the Law Society dullards you describe. Anyone with a bit of liveliness and individualism is doing other things and by the time they have something to offer, they are seen as too old or unbiddable to be put forward as people worth voting for.

  • BudGBudG Posts: 711
    ydoethur said:

    BudG said:

    ydoethur said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    He may have dodged the rain, but he's being snowed under with criticism.
    It's water off a duck's back.
    But how does it affect an orangutan?
    If it's fake orangetan , it will probably wash away.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    The Libs in alliance or coalition with the Tories has not worked out well for the Libs. So sad!
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,082
    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    Is it too suspicious to think "cover up"?

    “It is incredibly unusual for a respondent to make a complete concession on liability as the respondent has here. To wave a white flag to avoid disclosing documents and giving evidence in court is really unusual. They conceded everything. How does an ostensibly private company come to be working with Downing Street? What is their relationship? Who are their funders?
    “If this had been fully ventilated in a public trial we could have found these things out.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    old_labour said:

    The Libs in alliance or coalition with the Tories has not worked out well for the Libs. So sad!

    It only has a 33.3r% success rate for Labour, in fairness. 1945 was a triumph but neither 1931 or 1918 were exactly resounding successes.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    The Libs in alliance or coalition with the Tories has not worked out well for the Libs. So sad!

    It only has a 33.3r% success rate for Labour, in fairness. 1945 was a triumph but neither 1931 or 1918 were exactly resounding successes.
    1906 was the last year the Libs had a majority in a UK general election. Sad!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,756
    Betting Post

    F1: pre-race ramble up:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/11/brazil-pre-race-2018.html

    Nothing caught my eye, really. But I've offered tips on every race since late 2009, so...

    Backed Magnussen at 7.5 to be winner without the top 6 (each way, third the odds top 2). He had the pace for Q3, it was misjudgement to sit in the garage that stopped him reaching it. As it stands, he'll get choice of tyre, in a car that's at the sharp end of the midfield.

    Must admit, I forgot until fairly late on that the Ferraris start on the soft tyres. Might've paid more attention to Raikkonen each way at 13 had I remembered.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    old_labour said:

    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    The Libs in alliance or coalition with the Tories has not worked out well for the Libs. So sad!

    It only has a 33.3r% success rate for Labour, in fairness. 1945 was a triumph but neither 1931 or 1918 were exactly resounding successes.
    1906 was the last year the Libs had a majority in a UK general election. Sad!
    Almost exactly 99 years before the last time Labour got a majority in a UK general election.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    138 days until the UK leaves the EU.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    old_labour said:

    138 days until the UK leaves the EU.

    So at least 139 days before Barnier and Raab can agree on what biscuits to eat, as a preliminary to negotiations?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    The Libs in alliance or coalition with the Tories has not worked out well for the Libs. So sad!

    It only has a 33.3r% success rate for Labour, in fairness. 1945 was a triumph but neither 1931 or 1918 were exactly resounding successes.
    Or indeed, we could look at Wales where coalitions with Labour have proved poisonous to both the LibDems and Plaid Cymru. Or Scotland, when the LibDems coalition with Labour proved toxic for them.

    The weaker party gets none of the credit and all of the blame in a Coalition.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,728
    edited November 2018
    logical_song said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    Is it too suspicious to think "cover up"?

    “It is incredibly unusual for a respondent to make a complete concession on liability as the respondent has here. To wave a white flag to avoid disclosing documents and giving evidence in court is really unusual. They conceded everything. How does an ostensibly private company come to be working with Downing Street? What is their relationship? Who are their funders?
    “If this had been fully ventilated in a public trial we could have found these things out.
    Yes, that's what I thought. Apparently there is still an action in progress against Downing Street which will perhaps throw some light.

    I'm not a fan of the TPA or the Adam Smith Institute, but have always been willing to give the IEA a hearing. The extent of coordination between these groups was altogether news to me, especially in what seems to have been a very disturbing enterprise.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    On topic - I like the concept of Approval Voting and the thought that it might break the two-party stranglehold. Sadly, that is probably why it will not be allowed to catch on :(
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    logical_song said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    Is it too suspicious to think "cover up"?

    “It is incredibly unusual for a respondent to make a complete concession on liability as the respondent has here. To wave a white flag to avoid disclosing documents and giving evidence in court is really unusual. They conceded everything. How does an ostensibly private company come to be working with Downing Street? What is their relationship? Who are their funders?
    “If this had been fully ventilated in a public trial we could have found these things out.
    I pointed this out last month on here. No one else seemed interested at the time.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    T
    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    Incredible
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    138 days until the UK leaves the EU.

    So at least 139 days before Barnier and Raab can agree on what biscuits to eat, as a preliminary to negotiations?
    That's a Tory/Liberal problem.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    malcolmg said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    cuckoo
    I agree with you Malcolm. Xenophobia at its finest.....
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,736
    I'm hoping for more cabinet resignations on Monday. This is the last realistic chance to stop Brexit in my opinion.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    ydoethur said:

    daodao said:

    On this day of remembrance of those who died in WW1 and WW2, it is sombre to note that if the Western Allies were trying to prevent German domination of Europe, this failed, for here they still are, dominating away, through the medium of the EU. The Drang nach Osten post 1991 could have come from the German Reich of 1911 or 1936, or even earlier epochs.

    The re-unification of Germany was a tragic error, in fact the 3 occupation zones of Germany post WW2 controlled by the Western allies should have been re-constituted as 3 separate states, rather than being amalgamated into the single state of West Germany.

    Even if I accepted the rest of your post, there were four zones of occupation plus Berlin which was divided into 5.
    The 4th occupation zone of Germany was controlled by Russia, not by the Western Allies. Berlin (like Vienna) was separately partitioned, but in effect it was split between the Russian zone and the zones controlled by the Western Allies, like the rest of Germany.
    My misreading, sorry.

    You still have the EU backwards. The Germans are so enthusiastic about it because it means they cannot dominate the continent on their own. This is also why they are adhering to rigid processes and stupid judgements rather than real life and common sense.
    IMO, the EU is the front behind which the Germans can dominate Europe without appearing (to the gullible) to do so. That is why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.
    And we are leaving the field open for them to dominate. The UK and France could have counterbalanced the German influence, the UK moreso if we had wholeheartedly joined in the whole project instead of sniping from the sidelines.

    It has often been remarked that the Germans and the British are squabbling cousins - it is the French who are the real enemy of both ;)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    old_labour said:

    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    138 days until the UK leaves the EU.

    So at least 139 days before Barnier and Raab can agree on what biscuits to eat, as a preliminary to negotiations?
    That's a Tory/Liberal problem.
    Is this an admission that Labour can't win the next election?

    Have a good morning.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,365
    Gallowgate said:

    I'm hoping for more cabinet resignations on Monday. This is the last realistic chance to stop Brexit in my opinion.

    The last realistic chance to stop it was by winning the damn vote. Which we failed to do. All else is just squabbling and denial.

    I have an eight foot horn with my name on it. TTFN.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,559
    FF43 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    I have to think there's something more to this than rain. It doesn't make sense to go all the way over to France for a ceremony and not turn up.
    He would have had to go 50 miles by car, too much for the oompa loompa.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    My own preference would be two rounds of voting. First time everyone can stand and then a run off between the top two candidates. No chance of it happening as it will cost more money.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,918
    FrankBooth said:

    My own preference would be two rounds of voting. First time everyone can stand and then a run off between the top two candidates. No chance of it happening as it will cost more money.

    Doesn't that sort of go half way to solving the problem, but still allow anomalies. Eg 2 or more moderate parties, 2 extremists at either end of the spectrum and you could end up with the 2 extremists in the run off even though they may constitute a much smaller number of votes than the moderates.

    For example Fascist, Conservative, Liberal, Social Democrat, Socialist, Communist
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Fenman said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    T
    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    Incredible
    Good grief. That is an amazing story.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,951
    logical_song said:

    Theresa May fails to block court case that could allow the UK to reverse Brexit

    Europe's highest court will decide this month whether the UK has the power to reverse Article 50, its notice of intention to leave the EU.

    Theresa May could be handed the power to unilaterally reverse Brexit after a court refused an appeal by her government to block a landmark case on the issue being referred to European courts.

    "The government must now focus on meeting the promises made to voters in the Referendum campaign. If it cannot deliver that deal the people must be asked again because it has no mandate to drive the country off a cliff."
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-fails-block-case-allow-uk-to-stop-brexit-50-article-2018-11?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral&r=US&IR=T

    The government can still ask the Supreme Court to hear the appeal notwithstanding the refusal by the Court of Session but to be honest the government screwed up by not seeking leave to appeal until the remit had already been sent to the CJEU. They really should have sought leave to appeal much earlier. I expect the government will apply to the Supreme Court but they will have lost a lot of sympathy for waiting to the second last day before seeking leave.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,311
    old_labour said:

    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    138 days until the UK leaves the EU.

    So at least 139 days before Barnier and Raab can agree on what biscuits to eat, as a preliminary to negotiations?
    That's a Tory/Liberal problem.
    Nothing to do with the LibDems. Mrs May has made it’s her and the Tories issue, and theirs alone.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,225
    edited November 2018
    Summary of the political issue at the heart of Brexit. I think the real problem is that Leave voters aren't prepared to accept they voted to make things worse in the UK and that any Brexit negotiations are necessarily a damage limitation exercise. Which in turn leads to questions about why are we going ahead with this to make things worse.

    The government won't challenge voters' on this. Hence the unrealistic negotiating position. This will go to a crisis IMO.

    https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1061557213918060544
    https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1061557601241124864
    https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1061558166742274050

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,033
    edited November 2018
    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    I have to think there's something more to this than rain. It doesn't make sense to go all the way over to France for a ceremony and not turn up.
    He would have had to go 50 miles by car, too much for the oompa loompa.
    Trump is attending the ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Paris this morning.


    In fact Sky News has just showed him arriving by the Arc de Triomphe
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,033
    FrankBooth said:

    My own preference would be two rounds of voting. First time everyone can stand and then a run off between the top two candidates. No chance of it happening as it will cost more money.

    That is exactly the French system for both Presidential and legislative elections
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,918
    FF43 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Trump better hope that voters in the US are not getting much coverage of his rain-induced snub of America’s Great War dead yesterday. It’s not been a great week for the man our Bucanneers so worship.
    https://twitter.com/johnsimpsonnews/status/1061312163703328768?s=21

    I have to think there's something more to this than rain. It doesn't make sense to go all the way over to France for a ceremony and not turn up.
    I agree that is bizarre, but if that were the case why not announce he was feeling unwell, 24 hour bug or such like. Easily covers all sorts of reasons.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,051
    Fenman said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    T
    NickPalmer said:

    Quite remarkable story here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/11/brexit-whistleblower-shahmir-sanni-taxpayers-alliance-concedes-it-launched-smears

    Incredible
    I think we are going to hear a lot more about this. If the Guardian article is accurate and it would appear to be given the TPA's capitulation then the ramifications are quite far reaching.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,033
    old_labour said:

    ydoethur said:

    old_labour said:

    138 days until the UK leaves the EU.

    So at least 139 days before Barnier and Raab can agree on what biscuits to eat, as a preliminary to negotiations?
    That's a Tory/Liberal problem.
    On current polls more likely a Labour/SNP/Liberal problem
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025