The Politics Thread

[William the White]

Internet fiver says Libdems told Labour that if Brown fecked off, and they gave them PR, they would have discussions about coalition. Thye further this goes on, the less likely I feel a Tory/Lib pact is gonna come off.

the libdems are using an alternate vote issue (which possibly could be why they [the libdems] got less votes/seats than last time- pushing for PR put folk off 'em) as a bargaining chip.

and the tories and labour may see this as "being played for chumps" while the libdems whore themselves about using a vote loser.

the libs are going all in with ace high. and are gonna be only a bit better off when the other two start messing with AV+ .

stop it - you'll have fatshaft on here very soon explaining to you once more...

[Worthy4England]

Internet fiver says Libdems told Labour that if Brown fecked off, and they gave them PR, they would have discussions about coalition.

Internet fiver - for the fecking obvious?

Although I was fairly sure something had gone on along these lines, I became convinced absolutely when Brown not only said it's my intention to resign, but also added very publically, that he wouldn't stand for re-election and wouldn't support any other candidates. Most people would probably have just stuck to I will resign. He seemed to be making clear as a bargaining position that not only was he resigning, but there was no route back.

[Lord Kangana]

Hmmm, anyway, if the present system is so good, why don't the "winners" stop f*cking about and just get on with the job of government?

[Worthy4England]

Internet fiver says Libdems told Labour that if Brown fecked off, and they gave them PR, they would have discussions about coalition. Thye further this goes on, the less likely I feel a Tory/Lib pact is gonna come off.

the libdems are using an alternate vote issue (which possibly could be why they [the libdems] got less votes/seats than last time- pushing for PR put folk off 'em) as a bargaining chip.

and the tories and labour may see this as "being played for chumps" while the libdems whore themselves about using a vote loser.

the libs are going all in with ace high. and are gonna be only a bit better off when the other two start messing with AV+ .

stop it - you'll have fatshaft on here very soon explaining to you once more...

I'll help Fatty out here.

The Lib Dems got nearly 1m more votes this time than last time (although their share wasn't hugely larger as there was a higher turnout)

Last election - Lib Dems polled 5.981m votes, 22.1% of the total and got 62 seats.

This election - Lib Dems polled 6.8m votes, 23% of the total and got less seats.

I'm afraid you're still talking tosh A1.

[William the White]

AV+ is AV for the constituencies and then some extra seats not linked to a constituency filled up by a PR list system right?

I seem to remember London Mayoral elections being AV

London Assembly elected by Additional Member System - don't see how mayor could be since it's a single post...

[Worthy4England]

Hmmm, anyway, if the present system is so good, why don't the "winners" stop f*cking about and just get on with the job of government?

That would be fine.

[a1]

I'm afraid you're still talking tosh A1.

total ? we dont all vote like its one town.

if folk have two votes, i can see that.

[William the White]

Internet fiver says Libdems told Labour that if Brown fecked off, and they gave them PR, they would have discussions about coalition. Thye further this goes on, the less likely I feel a Tory/Lib pact is gonna come off.

the libdems are using an alternate vote issue (which possibly could be why they [the libdems] got less votes/seats than last time- pushing for PR put folk off 'em) as a bargaining chip.

and the tories and labour may see this as "being played for chumps" while the libdems whore themselves about using a vote loser.

the libs are going all in with ace high. and are gonna be only a bit better off when the other two start messing with AV+ .

stop it - you'll have fatshaft on here very soon explaining to you once more...

I'll help Fatty out here.

The Lib Dems got nearly 1m more votes this time than last time (although their share wasn't hugely larger as there was a higher turnout)

Last election - Lib Dems polled 5.981m votes, 22.1% of the total and got 62 seats.

This election - Lib Dems polled 6.8m votes, 23% of the total and got less seats.

I'm afraid you're still talking tosh A1.

Stop encouraging him, Worthy... He'll have you back on 'wards and pies' soon...

[Worthy4England]

I'm afraid you're still talking tosh A1.

total ? we dont all vote like its one town.

if they have two votes, i can see that.

Why not - there's only one country, with one government running it...

[William the White]

I'm afraid you're still talking tosh A1.

total ? we dont all vote like its one town.

if folk have two votes, i can see that.

Told you worthy...

[Worthy4England]

I'm afraid you're still talking tosh A1.

total ? we dont all vote like its one town.

if folk have two votes, i can see that.

Told you worthy...

I'm struggling to see the problem here...

It's fairly straightforwards in concept.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

mummy - what you actually said was..

our traditions are not the property of this generation to give away

which seems pretty conclusively to suggest we do not have the right to change them....

and why do you keep suggesting we could not go back to FPTP in the future if we wanted to... why not?

Ha, you can be depressingly literal sometimes, when it suits!

However, might a defence of what I said not go something along these lines:

The wording I used was 'give away', which seems to go to the method of changing, rather than acting as a denial of any right to change.

I also gave my later clarification about a 'presumption' in a situation of doubt.

No, I am reasonably happy with my metaphor that our traditions and constitution are not our property to give away. To continue the legal metaphor a little, I would say that we merely hold them on trust, as trustees with duties and limited powers of distribution etc.

[a1]

Why not - there's only one country, with one government running it...

dunno. sounds too "communist russia" for a start.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Back to leader for the Labour Party - It'll probably be David Milliband or some Balls or other. Which is probably a better long term bet than Alan Johnson (who'd probably get my vote)

Surely Balls couldn't get it - he makes even George Osborne look like a bloke you wouldn't mind having a pint with.

I have a lot of respect for David Miliband and think he would be a formidable opponent.

[Worthy4England]

Why not - there's only one country, with one government running it...

dunno. sounds too "communist russia" for a start.

Now I know you're on a wind-up. Remind me which party came second in Communist Russian elections?

[Prufrock]

Why not - there's only one country, with one government running it...

dunno. sounds too "communist russia" for a start.

Now I know you're on a wind-up. Remind me which party came second in Communist Russian elections?

In Communist Russia elections write you.

[fatshaft]

Internet fiver says Libdems told Labour that if Brown fecked off, and they gave them PR, they would have discussions about coalition. Thye further this goes on, the less likely I feel a Tory/Lib pact is gonna come off.

the libdems are using an alternate vote issue (which possibly could be why they [the libdems] got less votes/seats than last time- pushing for PR put folk off 'em) as a bargaining chip.

and the tories and labour may see this as "being played for chumps" while the libdems whore themselves about using a vote loser.

the libs are going all in with ace high. and are gonna be only a bit better off when the other two start messing with AV+ .

Oh god, please stop posting. The Lib-Dems have always advocated PR, it has been at the forefront of their policies forever.

[William the White]

mummy - what you actually said was..

our traditions are not the property of this generation to give away

which seems pretty conclusively to suggest we do not have the right to change them....

and why do you keep suggesting we could not go back to FPTP in the future if we wanted to... why not?

Ha, you can be depressingly literal sometimes, when it suits!

However, might a defence of what I said not go something along these lines:

The wording I used was 'give away', which seems to go to the method of changing, rather than acting as a denial of any right to change.

I also gave my later clarification about a 'presumption' in a situation of doubt.

No, I am reasonably happy with my metaphor that our traditions and constitution are not our property to give away. To continue the legal metaphor a little, I would say that we merely hold them on trust, as trustees with duties and limited powers of distribution etc.

trustees have duties and powers of decision within a framework that is legal.

Our constitutional trustees are in two houses of parliament and, decoratively, a monarch, and, marginally, a judiciary.

I presume you agree?

So if our constitutional trustees operating within a legal framework in line with the range and compass of their tasks - including historically the alteration of our constitution - pass a parliamentary bill to implement a legal act (a referendum) and thus offer the beneficiaries of our constitution a right to determine the way in which their benefits are to be realised are they exceeding their duties and powers of decision? Constitutionally, legally or any other way other than upsetting you and the other members of the Young Fogey Party and Lord Palmerston?

[Prufrock]

AV+ is AV for the constituencies and then some extra seats not linked to a constituency filled up by a PR list system right?

I seem to remember London Mayoral elections being AV

London Assembly elected by Additional Member System - don't see how mayor could be since it's a single post...

AV is alternative voting right though? In straight AV you are still voting for a constituent, there's only one post. I've checked and the mayoral one is very similar to AV. You got two votes. They count the first set of votes, if somebody gets more than 50%, they win if not, the second votes of everyone who didn't vote for the top two are counted to see who wins.

AV would be an improvement, but I'd still prefer at least AV+ if not PR.

[Lord Kangana]

Why are all Tories so very scared by any sort of change?