The Politics Thread

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:25 am

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
ratbert wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009 ... endum-plan

Let's chat about changing the voting system. The latest polls are showing signs of movement towards a hung parliament, which would give a great opportunity to finally stop viewing the country's problems and potential solutions through the left-or-right-only spectrum.

Or... could a new voting system cause confusion, fudge and instability?

Personally I'm for change, what do others think?
First comment is that anything that is contingent on a Labour majority, as the referendum in this story is, is a complete waste of time.

Second comment is that a hung parliament would be a very bad thing for the UK in the short term. See, for example: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/b ... tr=1185799

But the problem Worthy mentions is the biggest one - the idea of throwing out the Westminster system and replacing it with a load of coalition building with minority interest groups churns my stomach.

Over the last 50-60 years, the party coming second could always beat the party winning it by teaming up with some flavour of the Liberal Party (on share of the vote as opposed to seats won). You have to go all the way back to 1955 when the Tories won where it would have taken a three party coalition (Lab, Libs and the next biggest - Sinn Fein) and 1951 when Labour won which could have been beaten by a three party coalition of Tory, Nat Libs and Libs. A coalition of Lab, Nat Libs and Libs could have won with a coalition in 1935.

Only once in the last 100 years has a party polled enough votes to ensure that any coalition couldn't beat them - although some coalitions that could be formed are extremely unlikely.

That however doesn't minimise the problems with the current system. 1 in 5 people elegible to vote wanted Blair's last Government, yet it won 55% of the seats. Before Mummy smirks too hard at that

, Thatcher's landslide in 1983, 1.5 out of 5 people elegible to vote wanted her and she won 61% of the seats.

Also when parties get elected, they play with boundaries etc. to allow themselves a better chance of being re-elected.

In 1979, 43% of the votes got 53% of the seats but by 1983 42% or the vote got 61% of the seats - good work by the Tories. However. Labour's second term, 41% got 63% of the seats.

superjohnmcginlay · Post by **superjohnmcginlay** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:06 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8404942.stm

I didn't think anything could top the moat cleaning but I reckon this does it.

Good work.

Hoboh · Post by **Hoboh** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:18 am

superjohnmcginlay wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8404942.stm

I didn't think anything could top the moat cleaning but I reckon this does it.

Good work.

Rename it the "Bell end tower"!

superjohnmcginlay · Post by **superjohnmcginlay** » Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:48 pm

Brown in bother?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8443461.stm

Oh just get on with it and call the general election you dithering f*ckwits.

Puskas · Post by **Puskas** » Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:51 pm

superjohnmcginlay wrote:Brown in bother?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8443461.stm

Oh just get on with it and call the general election you dithering f*ckwits.

They want a new leader?

What if they nip in and steal Owen Coyle at the last minute?

And we have to take Gordon Brown? I'm thinking, if Coyle isn't signed up quick, we need to be making a move for the Jeff Chandler/Gary Henshaw Dream Team.

Bruce Rioja · Post by **Bruce Rioja** » Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:11 pm

Puskas wrote:
superjohnmcginlay wrote:Brown in bother?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8443461.stm

Oh just get on with it and call the general election you dithering f*ckwits.
They want a new leader?

What if they nip in and steal Owen Coyle at the last minute?

And we have to take Gordon Brown? I'm thinking, if Coyle isn't signed up quick, we need to be making a move for the Jeff Chandler/Gary Henshaw Dream Team.

Quick, prepare songs. "One eye in Brownie, there's only one eye in Brownie.... etc etc"

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:17 am

I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?

bobo the clown · Post by **bobo the clown** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:00 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?

It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Meanwhile, Obama has Hillary Rodham Clinton playing the great balancing act of wanting him to crash & burn, whilst appearing to support him.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:02 pm

bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...

superjohnmcginlay · Post by **superjohnmcginlay** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:08 pm

Verbal wrote:
bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...

Aye but Massachusetts? Hasn't that place been bedwetter central for years?

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:32 pm

superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Verbal wrote:
bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...
Aye but Massachusetts? Hasn't that place been bedwetter central for years?

Probably fairer to say it's been Kennedy central for years - I mean, it'd been the same senator for 37 years. By elections here have produced mixed results in terms of labour losses and consolidations of 'safe' seats.

bobo the clown · Post by **bobo the clown** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:50 pm

Verbal wrote:
bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...

... which will be some improvement over someone with neither substance NOR style !

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:58 pm

Verbal wrote:
superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Verbal wrote:
bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...
Aye but Massachusetts? Hasn't that place been bedwetter central for years?
Probably fairer to say it's been Kennedy central for years - I mean, it'd been the same senator for 37 years. By elections here have produced mixed results in terms of labour losses and consolidations of 'safe' seats.

I have particularly enjoyed the betwetters' sneering at 'Captain Centrefold'... all seems a bit rich really, given his predecessor's history of alcoholism, misogyny, philandering, and homicide!

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:30 pm

bobo the clown wrote:
Verbal wrote:
bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...
... which will be some improvement over someone with neither substance NOR style !

I was referring to Cameron, and therefore kidding. Note to self: use

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:38 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Verbal wrote:
superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Verbal wrote:
bobo the clown wrote:It took Britain almost 10 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Economic crises tend to have a bad effect on governments whatever their political leaning.

Still, at least we're going to elect someone who is all substance over style come May...
Aye but Massachusetts? Hasn't that place been bedwetter central for years?
Probably fairer to say it's been Kennedy central for years - I mean, it'd been the same senator for 37 years. By elections here have produced mixed results in terms of labour losses and consolidations of 'safe' seats.

I have particularly enjoyed the betwetters' sneering at 'Captain Centrefold'... all seems a bit rich really, given his predecessor's history of alcoholism, misogyny, philandering, and homicide!

Chappaquiddick? Less homocide, more what-an-absolute-f*cking-tool-ocide. But yeah, point taken; TK wasn't exactly the greatest person in history.

Either way, gonna cause some problems for 'Bama with the health care bill. Gonna be some loooooooooooooooooong debates, fo sure.

Be interesting to see if this is a precedent for the gubernationals in autumn.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:42 pm

Verbal wrote: Chappaquiddick? Less homocide, more what-an-absolute-f*cking-tool-ocide. But yeah, point taken; TK wasn't exactly the greatest person in history.

No, I did mean homicide.

Making that sort of thing 'go away'.... THAT is influence.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:49 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Verbal wrote: Chappaquiddick? Less homocide, more what-an-absolute-f*cking-tool-ocide. But yeah, point taken; TK wasn't exactly the greatest person in history.
No, I did mean homicide.

Making that sort of thing 'go away'.... THAT is influence.

well, I guess he ain't going to complain about being labelled a murdered now is he.

I shall read up on the incident more.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:05 pm

Verbal wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Verbal wrote: Chappaquiddick? Less homocide, more what-an-absolute-f*cking-tool-ocide. But yeah, point taken; TK wasn't exactly the greatest person in history.
No, I did mean homicide.

Making that sort of thing 'go away'.... THAT is influence.
well, I guess he ain't going to complain about being labelled a murdered now is he.

I shall read up on the incident more.

Ah, I see the problem here...

'Homicide' includes all unlawful killing, including manslaughter by gross negligence, and is not restricted to murder.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:49 pm

Ah reet, ta for clarifying

been watching too many American cop shows and muddling the meaning.

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:55 pm

bobo the clown wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I am entertained by Massachusetts' manner of celebrating the anniversary of The Big O's inauguration. Buyer's remorse, anyone?
It took Britain almost 30 years to realise that we were viewing style over substance. The US appear to have done it in one.

Meanwhile, Obama has Hillary Rodham Clinton playing the great balancing act of wanting him to crash & burn, whilst appearing to support him.

I've helped you out some. It was a rather obvious typo.

The Politics Thread

Who will you be voting for?

Who is online

Connect with your social network account

The Politics Thread

Who will you be voting for?

Who is online