|
a pipe smoking dog posted:I've been thinking more about the right wing argument that labour can't be in charge if they're not the largest party, wouldn't a better attack be to point out that Labour-SNP government is going to be undemocratic because they're going to get well less than 40% of the vote? What's special about 40%?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 14:57 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 13:37 |
|
Pissflaps posted:What's special about 40%? It's just not a great mandate is all, the SNP are going to end up with a disproportionately large numbers of seats and I'm surprised that's not being used against them.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 14:58 |
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:It's just not a great mandate is all, the SNP are going to end up with a disproportionately large numbers of seats and I'm surprised that's not being used against them. Be pretty rich for the Conservatives or Labour to argue that our current system leads to unfair weighting in representation
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 14:59 |
|
Cerv posted:but it's still a nonsense stunt. Yeah that's what I don't get, parliament can do whatever it wants, including contradict itself and repeal laws it just passed, and if they can pass the law in the first place they don't need to pass it, and if the law was in a position to affect an opposing party they could repeal it. Weirdest way of phrasing it I've heard.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:00 |
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:It's just not a great mandate is all, the SNP are going to end up with a disproportionately large numbers of seats and I'm surprised that's not being used against them. Maybe because it also draws attention to the fact Scotland is over represented at Westminster, and it wouldn't go down well north of the border to bring it up? Hard to see why the Conservatives haven't bothered though, it's not like they've been trying to win friends and influence people in Scotland as it is.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:01 |
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:It's just not a great mandate is all, the SNP are going to end up with a disproportionately large numbers of seats and I'm surprised that's not being used against them. Labour won a majority with just 35.2% of the vote in 2005. The SNP's Scottish localisation is already being used heavily by the Tories.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:02 |
|
Party Boat posted:Developers from Tel Aviv illegally bulldozing buildings? Well I never. V. Illych L. posted:well, yes, it does. do you think it's necessarily bad, though? He's a bit unsubtle about it though, I mean, it's way more fun to adopt the image of respectability and then break it when people don't expect it. Plays hell with people's expectations and causes minor mental trauma to some. It's ace.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:08 |
|
Prince John posted:Maybe because it also draws attention to the fact Scotland is over represented at Westminster, and it wouldn't go down well north of the border to bring it up? Hard to see why the Conservatives haven't bothered though, it's not like they've been trying to win friends and influence people in Scotland as it is. They're not overrepresented, Scotland has just under 10% of the populace and just under 10% of the MPs. It's the SNP that would be overrepresented and that's due to their dominance of Scotland turning 55% of the vote into 100% of the seats. For that you can blame FPTP, of course. Noxville fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:08 |
|
Prince John posted:Maybe because it also draws attention to the fact Scotland is over represented at Westminster, and it wouldn't go down well north of the border to bring it up? Hard to see why the Conservatives haven't bothered though, it's not like they've been trying to win friends and influence people in Scotland as it is. Scotland is no more over represented relative to variation of other regions in the UK. Edit: The actual number is about 8.3% of population to about 9.1% of MPs. We can sort the constituency list by population here. Lord of the Llamas fucked around with this message at 15:34 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:31 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Labour won a majority with just 35.2% of the vote in 2005. But going back to at least the late 80s the government of the day has commanded a vote share of about 40%, which seems a fair measure of the nations mind under fptp
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:33 |
|
notaspy posted:But going back to at least the late 80s the government of the day has commanded a vote share of about 40%, which seems a fair measure of the nations mind under fptp It's precisely because we have FPTP that the vote share is irrelevant.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:35 |
|
Yeah exactly, FTFP is the most 'ah gently caress it, that'll do' voting system you can think of
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:38 |
|
Poor old Nick Clegg
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 15:59 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Poor old Nick Clegg thanet south is where Farage is standing, yeah?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:03 |
|
V. Illych L. posted:thanet south is where Farage is standing, yeah? Yeah.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:03 |
|
This election is turning out to be far more enjoyable than I would have ever expected.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:07 |
|
what's South Swindon signify and why have all the lib dem voters seemingly gone over to UKIP there?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:08 |
|
V. Illych L. posted:
No matter how anti-establishment you are, you can never be anti-establishment enough for some people Also what does "The Trews" mean. If it's a portmanteau of "true news" I'm going to go to walk to Camden and personally kill and eat Russell Brand. It's possible to be anti-establishment and not a preening cock.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:15 |
|
winegums posted:
Get your knife and fork ready!
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:16 |
|
winegums posted:
you're going to have to walk to camden and personally kill and eat russel brand, i'm afraid hello mi5 this is a joke
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:16 |
|
he lives in shoreditch though
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:21 |
|
South Thanet is UKIP's Achilees heel. Take it away from them, Farage resigns. At least, that's what he said...
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:25 |
|
winegums posted:Also what does "The Trews" mean. If it's a portmanteau of "true news" I'm going to go to walk to Camden and personally kill and eat Russell Brand. It's possible to be anti-establishment and not a preening cock. Don't forget to listen to the little jingle here to really work up an appetite!
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:25 |
|
Ed Miliband likes to say "ordinary" a lot. Tbh I think he's coming across well in this interview, he seems personal and interested and genuine. Still don't buy him saying "ain't" as a natural way of talking.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:28 |
|
What are the odds of Clegg losing his seat and what impact does that have on the LDs?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:28 |
|
shrike82 posted:What are the odds of Clegg losing his seat and what impact does that have on the LDs? Constitutionally he has to resign I think it was posted earlier.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:31 |
|
Prince John posted:Don't forget to listen to the little jingle here to really work up an appetite! Actually I think that's the Rubberbandits who are Cool and Good.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:32 |
|
Russell Brand posted:...if the Tory party are given any longer in charge of this country, could drive it into the ground, the very fabric of society itself being torn apart by them and the vested interests of powerful elites. If only there was some system in place that allowed people like him to register their opinion on matters like that......
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:37 |
|
Junkenstein posted:If only there was some system in place that allowed people like him to register their opinion on matters like that...... by voting in one of Labour's safest seats? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackney_South_and_Shoreditch_%28UK_Parliament_constituency%29 you're unintentionally making his point for him. that his vote has no power to influence the formation of the government.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:47 |
|
shrike82 posted:What are the odds of Clegg losing his seat and what impact does that have on the LDs? In practice he'd almost certainly have to resign as leader.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:48 |
|
Cerv posted:
Doesn't mean he should be encouraging others to not vote.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:51 |
|
Zephro posted:Technically nothing if he loses his seat, there's no law saying a party leader has to be a sitting MP. For instance: Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Nicola Sturgeon (sort of).
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 16:58 |
|
Zephro posted:Technically nothing if he loses his seat, there's no law saying a party leader has to be a sitting MP. Sadly, that's not how the Lib Dems roll: I guess as long as he won the leadership election, he could theoretically survive. Edit: vv Thank you! I feel quite bad about the Lib Dem's implosion actually - I really like the way they run and govern themselves democratically and it's something that other parties could learn from. Prince John fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 17:00 |
|
Zephro posted:Technically nothing if he loses his seat, there's no law saying a party leader has to be a sitting MP. For instance: Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Nicola Sturgeon (sort of). It's different in the Lib Dems' case though, their "Federal Constitution" says that the party leader specifically must be a Commons MP. In addition to Article 10 quoted by Prince John above it's also governed by Article 9: "The Parliamentary Party in the House of Commons shall consist of all Members of that House in receipt of the Party’s whip. Its Leader shall be the Leader of the Party elected as provided in Article 10." kapparomeo fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 17:01 |
Hoops posted:I think the Lib Dem charter specifically says the leader has to be an MP actually, someone linked it the other day. What if they have no MPs. Love when national achieve stuff comes out. Secret Service officials discussed smearing Labour party in 1920s. Papers show top UK intelligence committee, whose members included Winston Churchill, discussed ‘anti-red activities’ following Zinoviev letter incident.
|
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 17:40 |
|
V. Illych L. posted:what's South Swindon signify and why have all the lib dem voters seemingly gone over to UKIP there? It's just a close Tory/Labour marginal and it's more likely that UKIP votes came mostly from the Tories/Labour but the ex Lib Dem votes made up for it, giving the appearance of a Lib Dem UKIP swing.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 17:46 |
|
Cerv posted:by voting in one of Labour's safest seats? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackney_South_and_Shoreditch_%28UK_Parliament_constituency%29 I really feel like Scotland puts paid to the idea that voting in a safe seat is pointless.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 17:54 |
|
As long as turnout remains so low - what was it last time, 55% or something? - you can't really argue that voting in a safe seat is pointless.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 18:16 |
|
Hoops posted:I think the Lib Dem charter specifically says the leader has to be an MP actually, someone linked it the other day.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 18:35 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 13:37 |
|
Assuming a majority is out of reach, does anybody feel Miliband would be better served by not forming a government? It must be difficult to avoid being tarnished as weak/ineffective if you're having to engage in negotiations on a vote-by-vote basis, having ruled out a formal coalition with the SNP. I wonder what they think the impact will be on the 2020 election.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 18:38 |