The Labour Party - Part 2

[Anna B 1,414]

1 hour ago, El Cid said:

This puts it in a different way.

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/how-would-parliament-look-under-proportional-representation

 

Labour would have won if the election was fought under the single transferable vote system, which is interesting, but irrelevant.

I wouldn't call it irrelevant when there have been persistent calls for change to a voting system which was put in place when there were only 2 parties.

[Tony 10]

There are no circumstances that I can see why Labour should want to change the UK's voting system.

 

Apart from the fact that the population don't want it, Labour still, quite rightly, fancies itself as a party of influence and power, not one that needs to commit itself to a future of permanent compromise, unfulfilled manifesto promises and obscurity. 

[sheffbag 229]

3 hours ago, Anna B said:

This is true, I believe Corbyn lost the 2019 election by less than 3,000 votes which compared to the voting population is a small number, but the way the voting system operates nevertheless gave Johnson his large majority of seats.

 

 

Anna

 

You know that is complete and utter rubbish.  Please evidence it and show how it would be a victory that would put Labour in power and JC as PM

 

If you want to go down that route of "3000 votes from victory" (whatever you count "victory" as) then the Conservatives needed 9 seats for an outright majority. They could have got those by winning the following seats (based on the Tories finishing 2nd in that consituency)

 

Kensington - 20 votes (or 11 Labour votes to swing)

Perth and North Perthshire - 21 Votes (or 11 from SNP)

Dudley North - 22 votes (or 12 from Labour)

Newcastle Under Lyme - 30 votes (16 from Labour)

Crewe - 48 votes (25 from Labour)

Cantebury - 187 votes (94 form Labour)

Barrow - 209 (105 from Labour)

Keighley - 237 (119 from Labour)

Lanark - 266 (134 from SNP)

 

So for the Tories to get an outright majority they needed an extra 1040 votes or take 521 votes from the winning party. That was for an outright majority

 

Want to know how many labour seats would have been won by them gaining the "3000 votes" in seats where they came 2nd? - 14 of which 6 were SNP and 1 PC . so it would read

 

Conservative - 310

Labour - 276 

 

Explain to me how thats a "victory"?

 

If they got the same number of extra votes that the Tories needed for an outright majority (1040) then they would have gained 7 seats and only 1 of those was a Tory seat so it would be 

Conservative - 316

Labour - 269

 

Those are your facts not some hypothetical reasoning. Anyway you read it, he was nowhere near a "victory"

 

[El Cid 220]

3 hours ago, Anna B said:

I wouldn't call it irrelevant when there have been persistent calls for change to a voting system which was put in place when there were only 2 parties.

We can all see the failings of the 2016 referendum, but we need to accept and move on.

[ECCOnoob 1,043]

4 hours ago, Anna B said:

I wouldn't call it irrelevant when there have been persistent calls for change to a voting system which was put in place when there were only 2 parties.

Haha. Nice quick change of subject there. Here we go with the latest round of excuses....

 

We have all the old flaanel about Corbyn being misunderstood, Corbyn being bullied, the electorate being misled, the media being totally right wing totally biased...... now let's try and do some desperate submissions about the electoral system itself working against them.

 

It is totally irrelevant. The only substantial vote regarding any sort of electoral reform was back in 2011 where a massive 67% rejected it. Since then there has been absolutely nothing but talk with not a single party or politician prepared to put their money where their mouth is and seriously push for it. If it is such a hot Topic which was completely prejudicial to the non dominant parties where the hell are they all. Why are they not literally screaming it at the top of their lungs every time a debate is happening.

 

Could it be that in reality there is absolutely no appetite for it. Could it be that it only becomes an issue when the losers conveniently decide the want to use it as an excuse for their failures.  After all, I didn't hear Labour belly aching about the voting system when they had their victories in 2001 and 2005.

 

They seemed more than content with the system back in them days but suddenly now, 4 defeats later the words voting reform are being muted again. Funny that.

 

The Party has a problem. It fails to win over sufficient electorate. Until the Party pulls its head out of the sand and faces up to solving that primary issue, everything else is irrelevant.

[Tony 10]

Imagine being Keir Starmer and waking up to see this in the morning paper. A banner on a Manchester bridge while the Conservative Party Conference is in town. 

 

 

Or this

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iain-duncan-smith-conservative-conference-b1932149.html

Quote

 

Five people have been arrested after former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith was allegedly assaulted by being hit on the head with a traffic cone in Manchester.

Sir Iain said he was struck by the object after he was pursued by a group calling him “Tory scum” while on his way to a Brexit talk on the fringe of the Conservative Party conference.

 

 

 

If there is a way to get passionate and emotional and get your message over in a way that resonates, this fella nails it. 

 

 

But that's all undone by all the no-marks that Starmer is trying to clear out. 

[melthebell 863]

3 hours ago, Tony said:

Imagine being Keir Starmer and waking up to see this in the morning paper. A banner on a Manchester bridge while the Conservative Party Conference is in town. 

 

 

Or this

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iain-duncan-smith-conservative-conference-b1932149.html

 

If there is a way to get passionate and emotional and get your message over in a way that resonates, this fella nails it. 

 

 

But that's all undone by all the no-marks that Starmer is trying to clear out. 

are any of those to do with labour?

[alchresearch 214]

Interestingly the guy above, Dominic Hutchins, ran for Labour as a councillor but said he recently left the party because he felt leader Sir Keir Starmer “isn’t challenging the Government enough regarding disability rights”.

[Caswall 7]

23 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

After all, I didn't hear Labour belly aching about the voting system when they had their victories in 2001 and 2005.

 

They seemed more than content with the system back in them days but suddenly now, 4 defeats later the words voting reform are being muted again. Funny that.

 

The Party has a problem. It fails to win over sufficient electorate. Until the Party pulls its head out of the sand and faces up to solving that primary issue, everything else is irrelevant.

The socialists who still think they 'won the argument' in 2019 fail to learn from recent history.  In the last 46 years, only one Labour PM has been voted into power by the British public - and he did so by leading a centrist manifesto.  

 

I thank the left wing for their inability to  either accept or understand this (or both).

[The_DADDY 3,475]

https://fb.watch/8trDUJiiFx/

 

😂

Edited October 6, 2021 by The_DADDY

[Tony 10]

47 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

https://fb.watch/8trDUJiiFx/

 

😂

Lining up another half century on the sidelines

 

Had to wait right until the end for Dawn Butler to speak the truth.

[sheffbag 229]

1 hour ago, The_DADDY said:

https://fb.watch/8trDUJiiFx/

 

😂

its like Paul Hardcastle did a labour remix of 19