The Politics Thread
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Have to say, I've little idea as to what my reaction would be if someone gobbed in my face, but it wouldn't be rational, I'm sure. Quite how Arjan De Zeeuw kept it together after Diouf spat in his face from all of a foot away a few years back I've no idea, but he earned my total respect for having done so.fatshaft wrote:Bit extreme for a wannabe politician, but the little gobbing bastard deserved a slap right enough.CAPSLOCK wrote:Fire with fire n all thatBruce Rioja wrote:Nice debating skills on show here by the BNP's candidate for Romford![]()
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... 663681.stm
May the bridges I burn light your way
There is an assumption there that the 'non' voters reflect votersLord Kangana wrote:In a constituency based polling system, only major parties can ever hope to have a say in government. Which leads to tactical voting and all its idiocy. I understand exactly why the Tories are running scared from it, despite all the gloss and spin of their argument, its because the majority of this country vote for left of centre and left wing, vaguely social democratic parties. With PR, the Tories would be wiped out as a major force in a heartbeat. Ergo, our present system is unrepresentative of the majority wish of our country.
In case that's not clear, I could argue that the majority of people who don't vote are Tories
Can't prove it, but it could well be the case
Sto ut Serviam
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Well yes, it seems to me a fairly basic matter of logic that the least wealthy 70% of the country is always likely to vote to take money away from the top 30% and divide the proceeds amongst themselves. 
Anyway...

Anyway...
Lord Kangana wrote:In a constituency based polling system, only major parties can ever hope to have a say in government.
I would also say "so what", but not for the same reason. What are the consequences for actual decision-making if the BNP get in? Would it make a blind bit of difference, even (especially?) on matters of immigration? What would the result of their 'having a say in government' actually be?hisroyalgingerness wrote: Read an opinion in a paper today against proportional representation which basically said "6% of voters are BNP and if we adopted proportional representation they'd get 30 seats" or whatever.
Big "so what".
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
The BNP will never have a say in Government under PR. Its the same point as the Tories, theres too many Social Democrat votes for it to happen. Another Red Herring.
Are you interested in Democracy or just the retention of the staus quo? And should money equate to the power of your vote?
Are you interested in Democracy or just the retention of the staus quo? And should money equate to the power of your vote?
You can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Well I think that's a bold statement that's difficult to substantiate, but there you go. Anyway, I'm not trying to introduce a red herring, or scare people away from PR with the BNP... quite the opposite, in fact - I'm saying that even if they 'had a say' to the tune of 6% representation, it's unlikely to have any effect on decision making.Lord Kangana wrote:The BNP will never have a say in Government under PR. Its the same point as the Tories, theres too many Social Democrat votes for it to happen. Another Red Herring.
Even with a capital 'D', democracy is capable of meaning different things to different people. A system of making decisions that relies heavily on deals and backroom negotiations doesn't strike some as being terribly 'democratic'. True democracy would be a referendum on every issue, wouldn't it? I think your sensibilities might be slightly offended with some of the decisions that sort of system would throw up.Lord Kangana wrote:Are you interested in Democracy or just the retention of the staus quo? And should money equate to the power of your vote?
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
No, but you've still missed the point. This isn't about seats or who formed a Government. The majority of people in this country vote for centre-left/left etc parties. This is under-represented under the current system.
You can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Trust me, I haven't missed any pointLord Kangana wrote:No, but you've still missed the point. This isn't about seats or who formed a Government. The majority of people in this country vote for centre-left/left etc parties. This is under-represented under the current system.
I just disagree with your conclusions
Anyway...exit polls in minutes
GTG, my Pomagne is nicely chilled

OVERALL MAJORITY APPROX 12 SEATS
Sto ut Serviam
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
Ditto.CAPSLOCK wrote:Trust me, I haven't missed any pointLord Kangana wrote:No, but you've still missed the point. This isn't about seats or who formed a Government. The majority of people in this country vote for centre-left/left etc parties. This is under-represented under the current system.
I just disagree with your conclusions
Anyway...exit polls in minutes
GTG, my Pomagne is nicely chilled
OVERALL MAJORITY APPROX 12 SEATS
Anyway .... just watching the Makem's trying to get the first result with dozens of teenagers playing pass the parcel with the ballot boxes.
It's like 'Election It's a Knock-Out"
Very funny to watch.
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
OK, here goes. You know, Knopfler had this sussed years ago. "A bottle of whisky and a new set of lies. Blinds on the windows and a pain behind the eyes. Scarred for life No compensation...." is surely about election night. Regardless of any political differences, may you all have a peaceful evening.
May the bridges I burn light your way
Voters disenfranchised
Hundreds of Voters in Sheffield and Manchester have been locked out and prevented from voting because the polling Stations could not cope with the number of people wanting to vote
Banana Republics do better than this
Scandalous
Banana Republics do better than this
Scandalous
What goes around may still come around
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
What's caused all this queuing then I wonder? Nobody's suggesting there's been some kind of unprecedented turnout are they?
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
Indeed, calm down everyonemummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:I think Athers is pleased with his narrow sample of evidence that the group that traditionally has the lowest turnout appears to have been engaged by this election.

Apparently my old man had to help the ladies staffing his polling station shake the box up as it was nearly full to bursting at about 7pm. There was something approaching similar at my station. Spare boxes, anyone..?
http://www.twitter.com/dan_athers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
Re: Voters disenfranchised
The polls close at 10pm. Fact.bw@bw wrote:Hundreds of Voters in Sheffield and Manchester have been locked out and prevented from voting because the polling Stations could not cope with the number of people wanting to vote
Banana Republics do better than this
Scandalous
If they turned up too late they fecked it. End of. Tossers.
... & don't go disagreeing. The moment I posted this I became an "Icon", so there !!
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: malcd1 and 3 guests