Jump to content

The Labour Party - Part 2

Vaati

People who get personal with any further attacks in the thread will be suspended. As will any individuals using wording like Smarmer instead of Starmer etc.

Message added by Vaati

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Hotmale 1954 said:

I think what I, and many others are really saying is, there are only two Parties.

Enviromental and Socially minded Party  - Labour, Lib Dem and Green etc,  with profit, power and Dictatorship at the very bottom of their priorities and the other Party where money, the making of money, the keeping of money and the hiding of (their) money is the only real consideration.

Whether people are happy, content or suicidal matters not to the latter.

If any of the said parties got into power, I suspect they'd be falling over themselves to grasp from us as much of this 'sordid' money as possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CaptainSwing said:

Not 100% sure I've understood you there, but in my preferred version of PR you'd have several members in each constituency, so there'd be several winning candidates, none of whom would probably get as many as half the votes.  Or first preference votes - there'd need to be some kind of transferable vote system, partly to deal with the issue of proliferation of small parties.  I think that this kind of system is used in places like Denmark and Finland, but don't quote me on that.

I was just making the point that our current system discourages people from voting for smaller parties and the proportion of people voting for them is likely to increase under PR since people are more likely to gain a representative in parliament when they do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Did you have a problem with Blair having 157 seats more than the Tories despite only 800,000 votes (2.8% of total votes) more or just 35.2 of the votes in 2005?

 

Lib dems suffer the most out of not having PR, the regularly polled over 20% of the vote but always end up with small number of seats 

On the other hand the Lib Dems are the king makers in a hung parliament, as has been the case several times. Now though they have to share the vote with several other parties which diminishes their power still further. 

 

Our adversarial system is built for conflict and dissent. I'd like to see all parties working together in the spirit of cooperation to achieve goals in the best interests of the country, however I can't see that ever happening in Great Britain. Does it happen anywhere in the world? Serious question as I haven't time for a serious investigation.  I would think it might happen in some of the Scandinavian countries  which seem to have a handle on most things.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CaptainSwing said:

Hundreds of years?  We've only had (more or less) universal suffrage since 1928, or 1969 if you want to include 18-21 year olds (which I'm sure you wouldn't).  Can't really call it a democracy before then, in any current sense of the word.

 

Sad bunch of anti-Tory cry babies?  You mean the (on average since 1945) 59% of voters who don't vote Tory?  Or just the 56.4% at the last election?

 

And ... "cry babies"?  How old are you again?

 

 

Of cause it's democracy.  I never had a problem with the Labour party winning three successive general elections under Tony Blair. I never had a problem with the Labour party being the sole rulers of our country for over thirteen years.  Similarly just like the Labour party did the Tories have won the recent general elections fair and square and increased their seat count the last time to win an eighty seat majority which is unprecedented for a fourth term in office.  

 

And yes "cry babies"   Cry babies is a fair description for the anti Tory mob who want the voting system changed in order to prevent the Tory party being the sole independent government of our great country.  Cry babies is also a fair description for the anti Brexit mob who still don't accept and support a democratic choice their own people made.

Edited by West 77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

You don't know what democracy is. Embarrassing.

Aha, I see that you're a fan of introducing an Ekklesia too! I'd start with local authorities and the HoLs and see how it goes before hitting the button for the Commons.

 

 

17 hours ago, sibon said:

They [LibDems] might poll higher if people thought they had a chance of forming a government.

They [LibDems] would poll higher if people thought they could trust them.

 

On topic, the same goes for Labour

Edited by Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, altus said:

I was just making the point that our current system discourages people from voting for smaller parties and the proportion of people voting for them is likely to increase under PR since people are more likely to gain a representative in parliament when they do so.

Ah, I'm with you.  Yes, PR would very likely have that effect - or, put another way, the smaller parties would get bigger.  People could vote for parties with policies they actually approved of, rather than having to choose the least worst option that might win in their constituency (or abstain, or vote for an also-ran, which amounts to the same thing under the current system).

 

I see that about 42% of people in the UK are currently in favour of PR, with 30% against and 28% not having an opinion.  The proportions have remained pretty stable since they started collecting the data a couple of years ago:

 

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/should-we-change-our-current-british-voting-system

 

If you drill down into that, you'll see that people are more likely to favour PR if they're under 50 years of age, of higher socioeconomic status, and don't live in the Midlands.  [Or, in the latest poll, Wales, but I suspect that's just noise.]

 

For comparison, the Brexit referendum was 37.5% Leave vs. 34.7% Remain, with 27.8% of people not expressing an opinion.

Edited by CaptainSwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, West 77 said:

Of cause it's democracy.  I never had a problem with the Labour party winning three successive general elections under Tony Blair. I never had a problem with the Labour party being the sole rulers of our country for over thirteen years.  Similarly just like the Labour party did the Tories have won the recent general elections fair and square and increased their seat count the last time to win an eighty seat majority which is unprecedented for a fourth term in office.  

 

And yes "cry babies"   Cry babies is a fair description for the anti Tory mob who want the voting system changed in order to prevent the Tory party being the sole independent government of our great country.  Cry babies is also a fair description for the anti Brexit mob who still don't accept and support a democratic choice their own people made.

No, my point was more that I've never heard anybody over the age of 10 use the phrase "cry baby" in the expectation of being taken seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CaptainSwing said:

No, my point was more that I've never heard anybody over the age of 10 use the phrase "cry baby" in the expectation of being taken seriously.

yawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CaptainSwing said:

I see that about 42% of people in the UK are currently in favour of PR, with 30% against and 28% not having an opinion.  The proportions have remained pretty stable since they started collecting the data a couple of years ago:

 

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/should-we-change-our-current-british-voting-system

 

If you drill down into that, you'll see that people are more likely to favour PR if they're under 50 years of age, of higher socioeconomic status, and don't live in the Midlands.  [Or, in the latest poll, Wales, but I suspect that's just noise.]

New polling shows 83% of Labour members believe the party should support changing the UK's electoral system to proportional representation.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-party-proportional-representation-corbyn-leader-polls-a9249196.html

 

Two separate polls showing 76% and 83% in favour, that is Labour voters. Perhaps the number in favour might be fewer amonst right wing voters, but if the media were in favour, I believe it would sway 60%+ in favour of PR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, El Cid said:

New polling shows 83% of Labour members believe the party should support changing the UK's electoral system to proportional representation.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-party-proportional-representation-corbyn-leader-polls-a9249196.html

 

Two separate polls showing 76% and 83% in favour, that is Labour voters. Perhaps the number in favour might be fewer amonst right wing voters, but if the media were in favour, I believe it would sway 60%+ in favour of PR

Hilarious contribution. Even Labour party members acknowledge there is very little chance of the Labour party having any influence in the Westminster Parliament anytime soon.  We had a referendum in this country in 2011 and the majority of the electorate voted not  in favour of any change. It's only cry babies who are mostly anti Tory who want to change the voting system in our great country. Enough said.

Edited by West 77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, El Cid said:

New polling shows 83% of Labour members believe the party should support changing the UK's electoral system to proportional representation.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-party-proportional-representation-corbyn-leader-polls-a9249196.html

 

Two separate polls showing 76% and 83% in favour, that is Labour voters. Perhaps the number in favour might be fewer amonst right wing voters, but if the media were in favour, I believe it would sway 60%+ in favour of PR

The 3,881,099 people (12.%) who voted for UKIP in 2015 and only got 1 MP for it will have a better understanding of why PR is necessary than at the time of the AV referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, altus said:

The 3,881,099 people (12.%) who voted for UKIP in 2015 and only got 1 MP for it will have a better understanding of why PR is necessary than at the time of the AV referendum.

Whilst having some leaning towards PR,perhaps our current system does have some benefits😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.