@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
It would be fitting if we also remembered that poor man slaughtered in France and the victims of the Kuwaiti mosque bomb.
I agree in principle, but in fairness, I'm sure a lot of people in many many other parts of the globe also died in horrible circumstances on the same day and we didn't see it on the news. It's fitting to consider these tragedies together, certainly, but we could so easily just have a moment of silence practically every day for victims somewhere.
I understand. One could be standing in silence forever. Too many victims. Too much evil. And I see why we focus on the UK citizens murdered. But I was just expressing a personal view that on that day - and it did feel more than simply coincidental - the same evil which led to Tunisia led to these two other atrocities and I would be thinking of those grieving families as well.
I'm one person. You can call me Phil, Philip or Mr Thompson but I'm not "the Tories". Anyway, if UKIP had been more popular they'd have won more seats. It is not the exact same argument - the Tories were popular enough to win the seats, UKIP weren't. It is simple really.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you did wrong.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you (@Indigo)UKIP lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you (@Indigo) UKIP did wrong.
As I said to isam (not Indigo) who I started replying to, it is UKIP's party policy to change the voting system - and it's supported not just by PB Kippers but 100% of Kipper MPs, the Kipper leader and top Kippers too. I'm not conflating anything.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
I'm not sure what I think about that.
30 Uk citizens are dead - it's the very least that should be done.
Did we have a minute's silence for the victims of Harold Shipman?
Sorry to bang on again - well, actually not bloody sorry at all - about Edmund Burke:-
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little."
It's one of the greatest fallacies around that because we did not do X when Y happened in the past, we should not do X now when Y happens again. As if consistency were a virtue - as opposed to something that's desirable when you make a sauce or apply paint. Or that because we can't deal with all instances of Y we must do nothing about any instance of Y.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
It would be fitting if we also remembered that poor man slaughtered in France and the victims of the Kuwaiti mosque bomb.
I agree in principle, but in fairness, I'm sure a lot of people in many many other parts of the globe also died in horrible circumstances on the same day and we didn't see it on the news. It's fitting to consider these tragedies together, certainly, but we could so easily just have a moment of silence practically every day for victims somewhere.
I understand. One could be standing in silence forever. Too many victims. Too much evil. And I see why we focus on the UK citizens murdered. But I was just expressing a personal view that on that day - and it did feel more than simply coincidental - the same evil which led to Tunisia led to these two other atrocities and I would be thinking of those grieving families as well.
Oh I think the confluence of events is significant and the wider context needs to be considered - it's just bloody depressing to think how wide that context could be.
I'm one person. You can call me Phil, Philip or Mr Thompson but I'm not "the Tories". Anyway, if UKIP had been more popular they'd have won more seats. It is not the exact same argument - the Tories were popular enough to win the seats, UKIP weren't. It is simple really.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you did wrong.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you (@Indigo)UKIP lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you (@Indigo) UKIP did wrong.
As I said to isam (not Indigo) who I started replying to, it is UKIP's party policy to change the voting system - and it's supported not just by PB Kippers but 100% of Kipper MPs, the Kipper leader and top Kippers too. I'm not conflating anything.
Well yes you could say there would be two classes of MP. I thought about the two MPs for one constituency idea and I agree that it wouldn't be democratic.
I think they should get paid slightly less than a constituency MP but have the same voting rights... Maybe wages topped up by 'short money'?
I'd just say they were the 'representative member for 'party name' '
I said votes if the constituencies were equal size as I thought that's what the reduction to 600 was trying to achieve... If not then % of vote yes
Some musings:
If they're not representing a constituency, then they are only doing a small part of the work, and the pay should be much less IMHO. In fact, I'd say it would have to be under half. It would be interesting to see if such MPs, without a nominal link to the constituency, would be mavericks or more party-bound (which would depend on their chances of re-election).
And what about re-election? If they got a high vote the previous time, they were probably nearly elected and would want to stand in that constituency again (unless a better option came up). It would end up with them being a 'shadow' MP for that constituency. Not that that helped Nick Palmer much ...
I think my main issue is that it might give parties more power in the HoC, as there would be members who are subservient to the party solely and not constituents. As someone who wants parties to have less power in parliament, not more, I really do not like that.
As an aside, a problem with saying 'representative member for 'party name' is that it might refer to several people if a party has a number of people voted in under the system (which some parties would). There would have to be a unique way of naming them. However it is a trivial 'problem' that I mentioned half-jokingly.
The current proposals for constituency size have get-out clauses for IoW and the Scottish Isles for different reasons. As ever, voting systems and reforms are really messy...
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
I'm not sure what I think about that.
30 Uk citizens are dead - it's the very least that should be done.
Did we have a minute's silence for the victims of Harold Shipman?
I can't defend every instance of "WHATABOUTERY" that your mind can conceive - sorry.
Is it right in this instance? Y/N.
Yes
Correct .
Re Shipman - blame whoever was PM at the time. Cam doing the right thing here IMHO.
Cammo seems to have got the bit between the teeth re Islamic extremism - listen to his Radio 4 interview this morning, for instance. And about bloody time. I wonder whether he felt held back earlier or whether someone or something has put fire in his belly on this. I hope he sticks at it.
I'm one person. You can call me Phil, Philip or Mr Thompson but I'm not "the Tories". Anyway, if UKIP had been more popular they'd have won more seats. It is not the exact same argument - the Tories were popular enough to win the seats, UKIP weren't. It is simple really.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you did wrong.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you (@Indigo)UKIP lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you (@Indigo) UKIP did wrong.
As I said to isam (not Indigo) who I started replying to, it is UKIP's party policy to change the voting system - and it's supported not just by PB Kippers but 100% of Kipper MPs, the Kipper leader and top Kippers too. I'm not conflating anything.
I'm one person. You can call me Phil, Philip or Mr Thompson but I'm not "the Tories". Anyway, if UKIP had been more popular they'd have won more seats. It is not the exact same argument - the Tories were popular enough to win the seats, UKIP weren't. It is simple really.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you did wrong.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you (@Indigo)UKIP lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you (@Indigo) UKIP did wrong.
As I said to isam (not Indigo) who I started replying to, it is UKIP's party policy to change the voting system - and it's supported not just by PB Kippers but 100% of Kipper MPs, the Kipper leader and top Kippers too. I'm not conflating anything.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
I'm not sure what I think about that.
30 Uk citizens are dead - it's the very least that should be done.
Did we have a minute's silence for the victims of Harold Shipman?
Sorry to bang on again - well, actually not bloody sorry at all - about Edmund Burke:-
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little."
It's one of the greatest fallacies around that because we did not do X when Y happened in the past, we should not do X now when Y happens again. As if consistency were a virtue - as opposed to something that's desirable when you make a sauce or apply paint. Or that because we can't deal with all instances of Y we must do nothing about any instance of Y.
I agree in regard to Burke's quote.
But I would rather have concrete action and changes to politician's attitudes in addressing these problems, than just a group hug that changes nothing.
Not past its sell-by date at all, Mr Indigo. It cannot be said often enough that the Conservatives received the support of only 24% of the electorate at the last election. Worse than that, many people were manipulated into voting for the Tory candidate by the machinations of two foreigners, Crosby and Messina.
So Tories who think they are popular and enjoy the support of the country had better start thinking again.
.
So speaks the bitter, nasty and xenophobic LD. And your contempt for the apparently 'manipulated' voters is risible.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
It would be fitting if we also remembered that poor man slaughtered in France and the victims of the Kuwaiti mosque bomb.
I agree in principle, but in fairness, I'm sure a lot of people in many many other parts of the globe also died in horrible circumstances on the same day and we didn't see it on the news. It's fitting to consider these tragedies together, certainly, but we could so easily just have a moment of silence practically every day for victims somewhere.
I understand. One could be standing in silence forever. Too many victims. Too much evil. And I see why we focus on the UK citizens murdered. But I was just expressing a personal view that on that day - and it did feel more than simply coincidental - the same evil which led to Tunisia led to these two other atrocities and I would be thinking of those grieving families as well.
Oh I think the confluence of events is significant and the wider context needs to be considered - it's just bloody depressing to think how wide that context could be.
It makes me furious. I simply refuse to accept that the West should be so supine in the face of something so manifestly wicked and inferior and see no reason why I should accept it as just one of those things.
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
I'm one person. You can call me Phil, Philip or Mr Thompson but I'm not "the Tories". Anyway, if UKIP had been more popular they'd have won more seats. It is not the exact same argument - the Tories were popular enough to win the seats, UKIP weren't. It is simple really.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you did wrong.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you (@Indigo)UKIP lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you (@Indigo) UKIP did wrong.
As I said to isam (not Indigo) who I started replying to, it is UKIP's party policy to change the voting system - and it's supported not just by PB Kippers but 100% of Kipper MPs, the Kipper leader and top Kippers too. I'm not conflating anything.
Kipper MPs?
Sorry you're right. 100% of Kipper MP.
Makes no sense to apply a percentage to something indivisible
Supporters of the status quo (Con and Lab) and opponents (UKIP, Green, Lib Dem) are neither more nor less partisan than the other in their reasons for supporting, or opposing, the status quo.
Under my system the Tories and labour wouldn't really lose many seats anyway as they'd get 18 and 15 back due to their vote percentages
They'd lose 6 and 3
be detrimental to the nationalist parties, especially if the percentage was taken over the whole of the UK.
Also, would it be highest second-place in terms of votes, or percentage? The former means some smaller constituencies would rarely get a look-in, even if the boundary review goes through.
I'm dead-set against party-list systems, but this is an interesting idea that might get around some of the issues that party-lists have.
I don't have the time, but it should be possible to run the results of the last few general elections through such a scheme to see what they would have produced. It'd be interesting to see how it may have slightly changed things, seat reductions aside.
Well yes you could say there would be two classes of MP. I thought about the two MPs for one constituency idea and I agree that it wouldn't be democratic.
I think they should get paid slightly less than a constituency MP but have the same voting rights... Maybe wages topped up by 'short money'?
I'd just say they were the 'representative member for 'party name' '
I said votes if the constituencies were equal size as I thought that's what the reduction to 600 was trying to achieve... If not then % of vote yes
Seems a lot of extra complication and hassle just to placate Kippers who can't come to terms with their leader being so toxic nationwide that they can't win seats.
Not at all and I'm not bothered to argue partisan points anymore on here, it is what it is and , honestly a month or so without posting makes you realise how utterly cringeworthy and pathetic that is. I'd say the same no matter which party I voted for
Parliament exists to represent the people. I am not arguing that ukip should get 12.6% of the seats in parliament but 1% hardly an outrageous appeal. Other parties that I completely disagree with would benefit too
I'm one person. You can call me Phil, Philip or Mr Thompson but I'm not "the Tories". Anyway, if UKIP had been more popular they'd have won more seats. It is not the exact same argument - the Tories were popular enough to win the seats, UKIP weren't. It is simple really.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you did wrong.
Its far easier to cry foul and blame the system than accept that you (@Indigo)UKIP lost fair and square, or show some proper introspection into what you (@Indigo) UKIP did wrong.
As I said to isam (not Indigo) who I started replying to, it is UKIP's party policy to change the voting system - and it's supported not just by PB Kippers but 100% of Kipper MPs, the Kipper leader and top Kippers too. I'm not conflating anything.
Kipper MPs?
Sorry you're right. 100% of Kipper MP.
Makes no sense to apply a percentage to something indivisible
You'd think it was indivisible, but then again they've already had a backbench rebellion ...
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
I'm not sure what I think about that.
30 Uk citizens are dead - it's the very least that should be done.
Did we have a minute's silence for the victims of Harold Shipman?
Sorry to bang on again - well, actually not bloody sorry at all - about Edmund Burke:-
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little."
It's one of the greatest fallacies around that because we did not do X when Y happened in the past, we should not do X now when Y happens again. As if consistency were a virtue - as opposed to something that's desirable when you make a sauce or apply paint. Or that because we can't deal with all instances of Y we must do nothing about any instance of Y.
I agree in regard to Burke's quote.
But I would rather have concrete action and changes to politician's attitudes in addressing these problems, than just a group hug that changes nothing.
Agreed on the group hug point. Let's see if Cameron follows up his speeches with action - not just by him and other politicians - but by other institutions in society who need to change their attitude and be a lot more robust about countering what we face.
And by action I don't mean more laws but actually facing down the ideology: in schools, in local authorities, in universities, in the media, amongst MPs etc. A law is meaningless unless enforced. And it can be a blunt instrument. A much more nuanced and feline approach is needed than just the use of the criminal law. You cannot, after all, reason people out of a position they have not reasoned themselves into - also attributed to the great Mr Burke.
Miss Cyclefree, there's lots in play. Combat fatigue (still) after Afghanistan and Iraq, mistrust created by Blair's 45 minutes of bullshit, fear that we'll make things worse by being more aggressive, a desire by some to acquiesce to the insane Islamic fundamentalism, a fear of upsetting voting blocks, and a general lack of backbone.
I agree with you entirely, by the way, but just as the Western Empire declined due to stupidly wasting its manpower fighting itself, we've got clowns over here like Ed Miliband, who would by now be on the way to making it a criminal offence to be mean about a religion. Except he lost the election, huzzah, huzzah and thrice huzzah!
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
Since you insist this dishonest comparison of "percentage of electorate" rather than actual votes to the voting system, please name any voting system anywhere that is proportional to the percentage of the electorate (rather than votes).
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
Why is it discredited ? Crap governments get thrown out- good governments get re elected.
Watching the Prime Minister's statement on Tunisia, there is no doubt he is head and shoulders above anyone else in parliament. I think the Labour leadership contest is a contest of mediocracy. They are nothing more than a bunch of 'second raters'.
Incidentally, a cunning thought occurred to me the other day, regarding the idea of poor ikkle lambs being radicalised online.
I research sometimes odd stuff, and often stuff I'm not personally interested in, for my writing. I wouldn't know applejack existed if I hadn't gone searching for more obscure alcoholic drinks.
I've never seen an ISIS recruitment or propaganda video. Because I've never looked for one. Propaganda doesn't search for you, you search for it.
But this argument about how many people didn't vote for someone is long past it's sell by date, and just encourages the Toynbee Tendency to go on pointless protests around Westminster (and these forums) trying to argue the government doesn't have a mandate because of who didn't vote for them, and getting all uptight when we mention how many people didn't vote for Blair's larger majority in 2005!
Not past its sell-by date at all, Mr Indigo. It cannot be said often enough that the Conservatives received the support of only 24% of the electorate at the last election. Worse than that, many people were manipulated into voting for the Tory candidate by the machinations of two foreigners, Crosby and Messina.
Your LibDems got slaughtered. Get over it.
The 24% thing only has any validity if you ignore that people have a right not to vote for anybody. Would you take that right away from them? Is it LibDem policy to make voting compulsory?
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
Why is it discredited ? Crap governments get thrown out- good governments get re elected.
It works.
The Tories won therefore in the eyes of the left its discredited.
Nevermind that under the result put through PR the Tories would have still won but been in coalition with UKIP.
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
Labour only got the support of 20% of the total electorate - was that a "clear-cut" loss?
Watching the Prime Minister's statement on Tunisia, there is no doubt he is head and shoulders above anyone else in parliament. I think the Labour leadership contest is a contest of mediocracy. They are nothing more than a bunch of 'second raters'.
Yes I was surprised to read @stodge post earlier that said the conservatives were wrong to think they had strength in depth... I wouldn't vote Tory or labour, but it seems obvious the Tories have many more MPs capable of leading the party
and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
The Tories won therefore in the eyes of the left its discredited. Nevermind that under the result put through PR the Tories would have still won but been in coalition with UKIP.
Probably not, Mr Thompson, since Lib Dem voters (under STV) would not have been panicked into voting Conservative. They could have voted, first, for the party that they really wanted.
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
A discredited voting system that the public have shown no appetite to wanting to change - so while we can argue it should be changed, I don't understand the anger and contempt at those who are content with the system...being content with the system. And that includes the majority.
Honestly, it's overdone reactions like that that almost make me reconsider wanting things when I agree with the basic point but its so overblown.
Probably not, Mr Thompson, since Lib Dem voters (under STV) would not have been panicked into voting Conservative. They could have voted, first, for the party that they really wanted.
'It is interesting to see what has happened to Iceland since the crisis there. That would be a good model for Greece to follow in my view.'
I was in Iceland in June last year and certainly no sign of economic gloom,just loads of tourists. There was a large delegation from Maine at the hotel I was staying in, one of the delegates advised that they were looking at the feasibility of direct flights from Portland to Keflavik due to the increase in US tourists.
Miss Cyclefree, there's lots in play. Combat fatigue (still) after Afghanistan and Iraq, mistrust created by Blair's 45 minutes of bullshit, fear that we'll make things worse by being more aggressive, a desire by some to acquiesce to the insane Islamic fundamentalism, a fear of upsetting voting blocks, and a general lack of backbone.
I agree with you entirely, by the way, but just as the Western Empire declined due to stupidly wasting its manpower fighting itself, we've got clowns over here like Ed Miliband, who would by now be on the way to making it a criminal offence to be mean about a religion. Except he lost the election, huzzah, huzzah and thrice huzzah!
Agree re the conclusion re EdM. And agree that the first 3 items you list are valid matters to be concerned about - I am not at all sure that an all out war is necessarily the right answer - though if we do nothing I think it likely.
As to the last 3:-
1. A desire by some to acquiesce to the insane Islamic fundamentalism: these people are part of the problem and need to be dealt with. They are like the appeasers in the 30's, the fellow travellers of Communism etc. They need to be shunned, shown up for the moral nitwits they are and generally ignored so that they play no part in public life. That does not require weapons: it requires people with b*lls prepared to speak the truth and keep on speaking it.
2. A fear of upsetting voting blocks: tough. Respectable political parties didn't go round adopting BNP policies in order not to upset the BNP voting block. We need to make it equally inconceivable to benefit from a voting block which tacitly or otherwise is unwilling to stand up to Islamic extremism. That means breaking up those blocks and making it impossible for people to deliver block votes, by prosecuting those who undermine our voting system, by - you know - strengthening the "one man, one vote" system we fought so hard for.
3. A general lack of backbone. These extremists won't go away. So we'd better grow that backbone and sooner rather than later.
With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.
No it's not clear, though it would need a law change for a different number. As I hint at the end, I don't see this as a done deal by any means.
Given the normal number of retirements and given the likely drift towards the Conservatives as a result of the boundary review, it should be possible for the Conservatives to find a seat for every current MP that wants one, but they may not be as safe as existing seats, of course.
'I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system'
Stop whinging,in 2005 Labour won a much bigger majority with a lower percentage of the vote than the Tories in 2015
You had a referendum on voting reform in 2011 which was massively rejected by the electorate.Even the Lib Dems have now done a u-turn on their love of coalitions not that it matters any more.
I do wonder about what sort of advice was given by The Foreign Office re intervention in Libya & the consequences of a regime change.
The minute's silence is a gesture, one which I don't like. Cameron morphing into Blair, copying his master's foreign policy mistakes without learning from them.
Watching the Prime Minister's statement on Tunisia, there is no doubt he is head and shoulders above anyone else in parliament. I think the Labour leadership contest is a contest of mediocracy. They are nothing more than a bunch of 'second raters'.
Actually my MP is head and shoulders above most MPs as he is 6ft 7"
Watching the Prime Minister's statement on Tunisia, there is no doubt he is head and shoulders above anyone else in parliament. I think the Labour leadership contest is a contest of mediocracy. They are nothing more than a bunch of 'second raters'.
Actually my MP is head and shoulders above most MPs as he is 6ft 7"
BJO - so glad you made it back home safe and sound!
Not past its sell-by date at all, Mr Indigo. It cannot be said often enough that the Conservatives received the support of only 24% of the electorate at the last election. Worse than that, many people were manipulated into voting for the Tory candidate by the machinations of two foreigners, Crosby and Messina. So Tories who think they are popular and enjoy the support of the country had better start thinking again..
So speaks the bitter, nasty and xenophobic LD. And your contempt for the apparently 'manipulated' voters is risible.
Not xenophobic at all, Mr Felix, but I do dislike the idea of foreigners being bought over to this country to rig the election result.
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
Since you insist this dishonest comparison of "percentage of electorate" rather than actual votes to the voting system, please name any voting system anywhere that is proportional to the percentage of the electorate (rather than votes).
I've not been involved in this discussion and I'm merely providing a point of information, but the Netherlands has a fairly pure form of PR, where the entire country is one constituency and seats are allocated using a quota system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_Netherlands#Election
We really need a PR thread to help understand this complex subject.
Not past its sell-by date at all, Mr Indigo. It cannot be said often enough that the Conservatives received the support of only 24% of the electorate at the last election. Worse than that, many people were manipulated into voting for the Tory candidate by the machinations of two foreigners, Crosby and Messina. So Tories who think they are popular and enjoy the support of the country had better start thinking again..
So speaks the bitter, nasty and xenophobic LD. And your contempt for the apparently 'manipulated' voters is risible.
Not xenophobic at all, Mr Felix, but I do dislike the idea of foreigners being bought over to this country to rig the election result.
Utterly ridiculous. Unless you are saying they have broken the law, how have they 'rigged' anything? By developing strategies by which a political party tried to convince people to vote for that party? Oh the horror.
I voted LD, btw, in case my lack of horror at such rigging matters.
Not xenophobic at all, Mr Felix, but I do dislike the idea of foreigners being bought over to this country to rig the election result.
I love it when left wingers believe that everyone is so easily duped. Apart from themselves, of course. You @PClipp managed to see through it. Oh that the rest of the electorate had such acuity.
Not past its sell-by date at all, Mr Indigo. It cannot be said often enough that the Conservatives received the support of only 24% of thessVxmtiKuytn79TWXrxg electorate at the last election. Worse than that, many people were manipulated into voting for the Tory candidate by the machinations of two foreigners, Crosby and Messina. So Tories who think they are popular and enjoy the support of the country had better start thinking again..
So speaks the bitter, nasty and xenophobic LD. And your contempt for the apparently 'manipulated' voters is risible.
Not xenophobic at all, Mr Felix, but I do dislike the idea of foreigners being bought over to this country to rig the election result.
Utterly ridiculous. Unless you are saying they have broken the law, how have they 'rigged' anything? By developing strategies by which a political party tried to convince people to vote for that party? Oh the horror.
I voted LD, btw, in case my lack of horror at such rigging matters.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
But retiring MPs might not be in the right places and so begins the so-called 'chicken run', the scramble to move seat. There's no guarantees. I can't see Dave getting this through in the end, although there will still be a boundary review.
Agree re the conclusion re EdM. And agree that the first 3 items you list are valid matters to be concerned about - I am not at all sure that an all out war is necessarily the right answer - though if we do nothing I think it likely.
As to the last 3:-
1. snip 2. snip 3. A general lack of backbone. These extremists won't go away. So we'd better grow that backbone and sooner rather than later.
Correct; we have to be dogged in resisting them and that includes taking setbacks in our stride. Actually on the 'correct' front ...they can be made to go away, they are not undefeatable in their homelands and frankly the Western teenage cannon fodder will also dry up. The backbone involves concentrating on intelligence to prevent terrorist attacks and also on not being afraid to support the fighters combating ISIS and the Taliban in the middle east. It does not involve EdM playing petty party pre-election politics with votes.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
Far cheaper for the taxpayer than a Labour government - think of the big picture SO.
Not past its sell-by date at all, Mr Indigo. It cannot be said often enough that the Conservatives received the support of only 24% of the electorate at the last election. Worse than that, many people were manipulated into voting for the Tory candidate by the machinations of two foreigners, Crosby and Messina. So Tories who think they are popular and enjoy the support of the country had better start thinking again..
So speaks the bitter, nasty and xenophobic LD. And your contempt for the apparently 'manipulated' voters is risible.
Not xenophobic at all, Mr Felix, but I do dislike the idea of foreigners being bought over to this country to rig the election result.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
Far cheaper for the taxpayer than a Labour government - think of the big picture SO.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
Far cheaper for the taxpayer than a Labour government - think of the big picture SO.
@JGForsyth: Osborne says Greece shows the need for counties to get their finances in order and that he'll take more steps towards this in the Budget
@JGForsyth: I take Osborne comments on the Budget/Greek situation as an indication that it will be more significant than expected eg more cuts
i support austerity but i wonder if now anyone questioning the government strategy will be met with the refrain 'so you'd rather be Greece' from now on.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
Far cheaper for the taxpayer than a Labour government - think of the big picture SO.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
It would be fitting if we also remembered that poor man slaughtered in France and the victims of the Kuwaiti mosque bomb.
I agree in principle, but in fairness, I'm sure a lot of people in many many other parts of the globe also died in horrible circumstances on the same day and we didn't see it on the news. It's fitting to consider these tragedies together, certainly, but we could so easily just have a moment of silence practically every day for victims somewhere.
I understand. One could be standing in silence forever. Too many victims. Too much evil. And I see why we focus on the UK citizens murdered. But I was just expressing a personal view that on that day - and it did feel more than simply coincidental - the same evil which led to Tunisia led to these two other atrocities and I would be thinking of those grieving families as well.
I agree with you. I also think it is consistent with why Cameron is doing this. He wants to be clear that we are united and determined to address this threat and to get both the threat and the response up the news agenda. Putting our own losses in the context of other losses on that day is completely consistent with that.
I share your frustration at the West's reluctance to stand up and fight for its values. We have paid a terrible price for Blair's lies about Iraq. A terrible price.
Probably not, Mr Thompson, since Lib Dem voters (under STV) would not have been panicked into voting Conservative. They could have voted, first, for the party that they really wanted.
That betrays a woeful understanding of what just happened to the LibDems on so many levels.
They didn't want to vote for your party. They didn't want to vote for your leader. They didn't want to vote for your wanky, standing-in-the-middle-of-a-field policies, being nothing to anyone.
Whatever voting system you chose.
And having spoken to a lot of your former voters, I suspect that if voting had been made compulsory, your drubbing would have been even more comprehensive.
@JGForsyth: Osborne says Greece shows the need for counties to get their finances in order and that he'll take more steps towards this in the Budget
@JGForsyth: I take Osborne comments on the Budget/Greek situation as an indication that it will be more significant than expected eg more cuts
i support austerity but i wonder if now anyone questioning the government strategy will be met with the refrain 'so you'd rather be Greece' from now on.
I'm sure you are right, and it'll be effective despite the fact that it is utter piffle. UK is not Greece and never, ever, remotely likely to be even close. We have a fully functioning tax and contract law system, our own currency, north sea oil, a stable pension system etc etc.
Austerity won't work in Greece, but massive economic reform would. That takes time. Of course it should have been done before joining the EU.
Mr. Calum, leaving aside the ridiculousness of that in itself, it presupposes the Conservatives are somehow villainous. Yet the Lib Dems were in government with them until a few weeks ago.
It's not so much juvenile as infantile.
The situation hasn't really changed since polling day. The Conservatives and SNP are the winners, and must be delighted and confused by how much their adversaries are self-harming.
When I was a boy my father explained to me how important it was to be the undisputed heavy-weight champion of the world. It was so important that you couldn't expect to win it by just edging a points decision from the judges. Every one had to witness a slam-bang clear-cut win. Our method of choosing a government serves the same purpose. It sorts out temporarily popular, superficial parties with narrow political bases. To be the government you have to be solid, reliable and very popular. If the Liberals or Ukip aspire to power they will have to fight on and win far more than their 12 or 14%.
I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system.
Since you insist this dishonest comparison of "percentage of electorate" rather than actual votes to the voting system, please name any voting system anywhere that is proportional to the percentage of the electorate (rather than votes).
I've not been involved in this discussion and I'm merely providing a point of information, but the Netherlands has a fairly pure form of PR, where the entire country is one constituency and seats are allocated using a quota system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_Netherlands#Election
We really need a PR thread to help understand this complex subject.
In the Netherlands the VVD got 27.3% of the seats on 26.6% of the vote. Reasonably proportional. However they only got 19.8% of the electorate which is the ludicrous claim being made about our voting system - that its the proportion of the electorate (not voters) you should look at.
27.3% of seats for 19.8% of electors isn't proportional. But of course they don't count non-voters, nobody does.
LB But Cameron will not be leading the Tories in 2020
Thankfully, parties led by the same leader for more than 15 years and with their leader as head of government for more than 10 years are pushing it. Renewal is part of the process.
Brilliantly flawed. The sole aim of this alliance would be win power and then enact electoral reform. How are the three or more parties involved going to agree on what form electoral reform will take? They've only got five years!
And having spoken to a lot of your former voters, I suspect that if voting had been made compulsory, your drubbing would have been even more comprehensive.
And I suspect that you are right and the drubbing of the LibDems would have been even worse.
But I also believe that if voting had been made compulsory, more "lazy labour" voters would have turned out and deprived Cameron of his majority.
It is not just the blockiness of the Labour seats that counts, it is the overall picture for each county that the boundaries are to be drawn within. Where Labour can push against Tory metropolitan edges with favourable boundary changes, losses from the metropolitan centres could be reduced though I guess not eliminated. Perhaps opportunities in West Midlands, Manchester, West Yorkshire, Notts, London, Glamorgan and NE Wales (are the last two dependent on Welsh Assembly county boundary changes), but less so in Merseyside, South Yorks, Durham, Tyneside. Though I guess Labour would hope some of these would fall to swing anyway, so would not count so well.
Hmm, sounds nuts imho. Paddy has obviously forgotten how the LDs were shafted by Labour the last time they ‘collaborated’ together. - Perhaps he should be reminded of Einstein’s definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
SStClare LDs could benefit from Labour tactical voting in Tory-LD marginals, but Labour already now has got back most of the LD to Labour tactical voters in Tory-Labour marginals
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
Far cheaper for the taxpayer than a Labour government - think of the big picture SO.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
I agree in principle, but in fairness, I'm sure a lot of people in many many other parts of the globe also died in horrible circumstances on the same day and we didn't see it on the news. It's fitting to consider these tragedies together, certainly, but we could so easily just have a moment of silence practically every day for victims somewhere.
I understand. One could be standing in silence forever. Too many victims. Too much evil. And I see why we focus on the UK citizens murdered. But I was just expressing a personal view that on that day - and it did feel more than simply coincidental - the same evil which led to Tunisia led to these two other atrocities and I would be thinking of those grieving families as well.
I agree with you. I also think it is consistent with why Cameron is doing this. He wants to be clear that we are united and determined to address this threat and to get both the threat and the response up the news agenda. Putting our own losses in the context of other losses on that day is completely consistent with that.
I share your frustration at the West's reluctance to stand up and fight for its values. We have paid a terrible price for Blair's lies about Iraq. A terrible price.
We have paid a price for not paying proper attention when the Ayatollahs seized power in Iran in 1979, when we saw book burning on the streets of some of our Northern cities a few years later, for not listening to Ray Honeyford when he warned of segregated communities, for treating Abu Hamza at the Finsbury Park mosque as a bit of a joke. All these were signs to which we should have listened. But we preferred to ignore or believe what we hoped was true and point fingers at those who raised legitimate concerns and shout abuse and then - much later - came 9/11 and Iraq and the rest of it. But the seeds of Islamic extremism - both in the Middle East and within Muslim communities in the West - were sown earlier.
There is a lot of work to be done to unpick the wrong choices made earlier. Hard and difficult as it may be, we have to do it.
BTW I will scream if I hear another British politician talk about "tolerance" as a British virtue. Tolerance as in "live and let live": yes. Tolerance as in tolerating crime and barbarity: no. This is not a virtue. It is cowardice. It has never been a British virtue. Rather we stood up to those - like the book burners and cartoon killers - who tried to bully us. Standing up to bullies is a British virtue I'd like to see resurrected.
The LDs worth listening to are those that were capable of being part of a coalition government. Ashdown wasn't man enough for that.
"Lord Ashdown’s call for ‘progressive forces’ to collaborate before the next election does not go far enough, especially now there is talk about Labour never winning again. He rightly talks about Lib Dem collaboration with Labour and the Greens"
I'm quite confident that I can 'rightly' talk about the LDs being a shower.
Bairstow's highest ever now. 210. Partnership 343 for the 7th wicket.
Don't know if that's a record, either nationally or Yorkshire-wise, but if it isn't I'd be surprised.
It is the highest 7th wicket partnership for Yorkshire beating the 254 of Rhodes and Burton. But still a long way short of the highest ever partnership for Yorkshire - 555 from Holmes and Sutcliffe. Incidentally Tim Bresnan is now a partner in two records - the other is with Jason Gillespie for the 9th wicket.
Watching the Prime Minister's statement on Tunisia, there is no doubt he is head and shoulders above anyone else in parliament. I think the Labour leadership contest is a contest of mediocracy. They are nothing more than a bunch of 'second raters'.
Actually my MP is head and shoulders above most MPs as he is 6ft 7"
BJO, I'd just like to add my voice to the chorus saying that we're glad that you've back home safe and well.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
Marvellous. The Tories get even an even bigger majority for their 37% of the vote and the taxpayer foots the bill for the party's backbench MPs that lose their seats. This is genius stuff!
Far cheaper for the taxpayer than a Labour government - think of the big picture SO.
For the greater good.....
...the greater good.
Bonum commune communitatis Bonum commune communitatis Bonum commune communitatis
Paddy is of course entitled to his view and has "form" on these matters. The response of some on here suggests they recognise the potential of organised tactical anti-Conservative voting in 2020 as the one thing that might bring the Tory house of cards crashing down.
We simply don't know where we will be in five months time let alone five years but it seems reasonable to assume those wishing to see the Conservatives out of office will be seeking to maximise that vote. The problem is of course the diversity of Opposition the Conservatives face but that didn't stop tactical voting in the past and it may just be there will be some people who don't regard the Conservative Government of 2015-20 as the emergent utopia some on here already seem to assume it will be.
The assumption the factors that aided the Conservatives in 2015 will still a) still exist and b) be of similar benefit in 2020 also needs to be tested.
@JGForsyth: UK-wide minute of silence at noon Friday in memory of those killed in Tunisia, Cameron announces
I agree in principle, but in fairness, I'm sure a lot of people in many many other parts of the globe also died in horrible circumstances on the same day and we didn't see it on the news. It's fitting to consider these tragedies together, certainly, but we could so easily just have a moment of silence practically every day for victims somewhere.
I understand. One could be standing in silence forever. Too many victims. Too much evil. And I see why we focus on the be thinking of those grieving families as well.
I agree with you. I also think it is consistent with why Cameron is doing this. He wants to be clear that we are united and determined to address this threat and to get both the threat and the response up the news agenda. Putting our own losses in the context of other losses on that day is completely consistent with that.
I share your frustration at the West's reluctance to stand up and fight for its values. We have paid a terrible price for Blair's lies about Iraq. A terrible price.
We have paid a price for not paying proper attention when the Ayatollahs seized power in Iran in 1979, when we saw book burning on the streets of some of our Northern cities a few years later, for not listening to Ray Honeyford when he warned of segregated communities, for treating Abu Hamza at the Finsbury Park mosque as a bit of a joke. All these were signs to which we should have listened. But we preferred to ignore or believe what we hoped was true and point fingers at those who raised legitimate concerns and shout abuse and then - much later - came 9/11 and Iraq and the rest of it. But the seeds of Islamic extremism - both in the Middle East and within Muslim communities in the West - were sown earlier.
There is a lot of work to be done to unpick the wrong choices made earlier. Hard and difficult as it may be, we have to do it.
BTW I will scream if I hear another British politician talk about "tolerance" as a British virtue. Tolerance as in "live and let live": yes. Tolerance as in tolerating crime and barbarity: no. This is not a virtue. It is cowardice. It has never been a British virtue. Rather we stood up to those - like the book burners and cartoon killers - who tried to bully us. Standing up to bullies is a British virtue I'd like to see resurrected.
Comments
Re Shipman - blame whoever was PM at the time. Cam doing the right thing here IMHO.
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little."
It's one of the greatest fallacies around that because we did not do X when Y happened in the past, we should not do X now when Y happens again. As if consistency were a virtue - as opposed to something that's desirable when you make a sauce or apply paint. Or that because we can't deal with all instances of Y we must do nothing about any instance of Y.
I'm not sure.
A minute's silence won't bring them back.
Nor will it make people more/less concerned about what happened or more/less compassionate to those who lost loved ones.
A minute's thoughtful silence at a memorial - yes.
Otherwise it just feels like a gesture.
If they're not representing a constituency, then they are only doing a small part of the work, and the pay should be much less IMHO. In fact, I'd say it would have to be under half. It would be interesting to see if such MPs, without a nominal link to the constituency, would be mavericks or more party-bound (which would depend on their chances of re-election).
And what about re-election? If they got a high vote the previous time, they were probably nearly elected and would want to stand in that constituency again (unless a better option came up). It would end up with them being a 'shadow' MP for that constituency. Not that that helped Nick Palmer much ...
I think my main issue is that it might give parties more power in the HoC, as there would be members who are subservient to the party solely and not constituents. As someone who wants parties to have less power in parliament, not more, I really do not like that.
As an aside, a problem with saying 'representative member for 'party name' is that it might refer to several people if a party has a number of people voted in under the system (which some parties would). There would have to be a unique way of naming them. However it is a trivial 'problem' that I mentioned half-jokingly.
The current proposals for constituency size have get-out clauses for IoW and the Scottish Isles for different reasons. As ever, voting systems and reforms are really messy...
But as I said, it's an interesting idea.
But I would rather have concrete action and changes to politician's attitudes in addressing these problems, than just a group hug that changes nothing.
Parliament exists to represent the people. I am not arguing that ukip should get 12.6% of the seats in parliament but 1% hardly an outrageous appeal. Other parties that I completely disagree with would benefit too
And by action I don't mean more laws but actually facing down the ideology: in schools, in local authorities, in universities, in the media, amongst MPs etc. A law is meaningless unless enforced. And it can be a blunt instrument. A much more nuanced and feline approach is needed than just the use of the criminal law. You cannot, after all, reason people out of a position they have not reasoned themselves into - also attributed to the great Mr Burke.
I agree with you entirely, by the way, but just as the Western Empire declined due to stupidly wasting its manpower fighting itself, we've got clowns over here like Ed Miliband, who would by now be on the way to making it a criminal offence to be mean about a religion. Except he lost the election, huzzah, huzzah and thrice huzzah!
It works.
I think the Labour leadership contest is a contest of mediocracy. They are nothing more than a bunch of 'second raters'.
I research sometimes odd stuff, and often stuff I'm not personally interested in, for my writing. I wouldn't know applejack existed if I hadn't gone searching for more obscure alcoholic drinks.
I've never seen an ISIS recruitment or propaganda video. Because I've never looked for one. Propaganda doesn't search for you, you search for it.
The 24% thing only has any validity if you ignore that people have a right not to vote for anybody. Would you take that right away from them? Is it LibDem policy to make voting compulsory?
Nevermind that under the result put through PR the Tories would have still won but been in coalition with UKIP.
Honestly, it's overdone reactions like that that almost make me reconsider wanting things when I agree with the basic point but its so overblown.
Though Lib Dems were pro-austerity anyway.
'It is interesting to see what has happened to Iceland since the crisis there. That would be a good model for Greece to follow in my view.'
I was in Iceland in June last year and certainly no sign of economic gloom,just loads of tourists.
There was a large delegation from Maine at the hotel I was staying in, one of the delegates advised that they were looking at the feasibility of direct flights from Portland to Keflavik due to the increase in US tourists.
There are still some disputed debts.
As to the last 3:-
1. A desire by some to acquiesce to the insane Islamic fundamentalism: these people are part of the problem and need to be dealt with. They are like the appeasers in the 30's, the fellow travellers of Communism etc. They need to be shunned, shown up for the moral nitwits they are and generally ignored so that they play no part in public life. That does not require weapons: it requires people with b*lls prepared to speak the truth and keep on speaking it.
2. A fear of upsetting voting blocks: tough. Respectable political parties didn't go round adopting BNP policies in order not to upset the BNP voting block. We need to make it equally inconceivable to benefit from a voting block which tacitly or otherwise is unwilling to stand up to Islamic extremism. That means breaking up those blocks and making it impossible for people to deliver block votes, by prosecuting those who undermine our voting system, by - you know - strengthening the "one man, one vote" system we fought so hard for.
3. A general lack of backbone. These extremists won't go away. So we'd better grow that backbone and sooner rather than later.
Given the normal number of retirements and given the likely drift towards the Conservatives as a result of the boundary review, it should be possible for the Conservatives to find a seat for every current MP that wants one, but they may not be as safe as existing seats, of course.
'I wouldn´t have said that 24% of the electorate was a "slam-bang clear-cut win". Only in Tory-land, and with an outmoded and discredited voting system'
Stop whinging,in 2005 Labour won a much bigger majority with a lower percentage of the vote than the Tories in 2015
You had a referendum on voting reform in 2011 which was massively rejected by the electorate.Even the Lib Dems have now done a u-turn on their love of coalitions not that it matters any more.
The minute's silence is a gesture, one which I don't like. Cameron morphing into Blair, copying his master's foreign policy mistakes without learning from them.
'With respect to the thread: is it clear that Tory backbenchers have accepted the reduction to 600 seats? Jobs will go.'
20-30 jobs can easily be found in seats where MP's are retiring, Quangos & HoL.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_Netherlands#Election
We really need a PR thread to help understand this complex subject.
Actually on the 'correct' front ...they can be made to go away, they are not undefeatable in their homelands and frankly the Western teenage cannon fodder will also dry up. The backbone involves concentrating on intelligence to prevent terrorist attacks and also on not being afraid to support the fighters combating ISIS and the Taliban in the middle east. It does not involve EdM playing petty party pre-election politics with votes.
@JGForsyth: I take Osborne comments on the Budget/Greek situation as an indication that it will be more significant than expected eg more cuts
I share your frustration at the West's reluctance to stand up and fight for its values. We have paid a terrible price for Blair's lies about Iraq. A terrible price.
They didn't want to vote for your party. They didn't want to vote for your leader. They didn't want to vote for your wanky, standing-in-the-middle-of-a-field policies, being nothing to anyone.
Whatever voting system you chose.
And having spoken to a lot of your former voters, I suspect that if voting had been made compulsory, your drubbing would have been even more comprehensive.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/opinion-paddy-ashdowns-appeal-to-green-and-labour-46596.html#utm_source=tweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
Austerity won't work in Greece, but massive economic reform would. That takes time. Of course it should have been done before joining the EU.
It's not so much juvenile as infantile.
The situation hasn't really changed since polling day. The Conservatives and SNP are the winners, and must be delighted and confused by how much their adversaries are self-harming.
27.3% of seats for 19.8% of electors isn't proportional. But of course they don't count non-voters, nobody does.
But I also believe that if voting had been made compulsory, more "lazy labour" voters would have turned out and deprived Cameron of his majority.
There is a lot of work to be done to unpick the wrong choices made earlier. Hard and difficult as it may be, we have to do it.
BTW I will scream if I hear another British politician talk about "tolerance" as a British virtue. Tolerance as in "live and let live": yes. Tolerance as in tolerating crime and barbarity: no. This is not a virtue. It is cowardice. It has never been a British virtue. Rather we stood up to those - like the book burners and cartoon killers - who tried to bully us. Standing up to bullies is a British virtue I'd like to see resurrected.
The LDs worth listening to are those that were capable of being part of a coalition government. Ashdown wasn't man enough for that.
"Lord Ashdown’s call for ‘progressive forces’ to collaborate before the next election does not go far enough, especially now there is talk about Labour never winning again. He rightly talks about Lib Dem collaboration with Labour and the Greens"
I'm quite confident that I can 'rightly' talk about the LDs being a shower.
Bonum commune communitatis
Bonum commune communitatis
Ian Allan died today, aged 93.
The man who virtually single-handedly invented trainspotting.
RIP.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-man-who-invented-trainspotting-it-has-become-a-dirty-word-but-why-1505845.html
http://www.libdemvoice.org/should-we-sack-60-of-our-own-peers-46576.html
Paddy is of course entitled to his view and has "form" on these matters. The response of some on here suggests they recognise the potential of organised tactical anti-Conservative voting in 2020 as the one thing that might bring the Tory house of cards crashing down.
We simply don't know where we will be in five months time let alone five years but it seems reasonable to assume those wishing to see the Conservatives out of office will be seeking to maximise that vote. The problem is of course the diversity of Opposition the Conservatives face but that didn't stop tactical voting in the past and it may just be there will be some people who don't regard the Conservative Government of 2015-20 as the emergent utopia some on here already seem to assume it will be.
The assumption the factors that aided the Conservatives in 2015 will still a) still exist and b) be of similar benefit in 2020 also needs to be tested.
How can anyone argue against it?
http://youtu.be/LyKZt0Vs-Gs