User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 153

  1. #91
    The Unwieldy Clawed One Falcarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    COOL
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    Dino None
    Posts
    2,565

    Default

    @ tcda

    In general it is not the fact I disagree with you philosophy on politics in general, but rather I don't agree with your belief the Labour Party under Brown and Blair has been any better than under Major and Thatcher. It is in the interest of anyone who is socially and economically progressive to reject any government coalition with the Labour party while it continues to betray them. British politics is ridiculously tribal, which it why the Liberals did not get the support the opinion poll suggested they would.

    Hence, it would be in the interest of progressives for a David Cameron minority government, his government would certainly fail and Labour would be forced to go back to its traditional values. Cameron would have his hands tied and would find it near impossible to carry out any of his proposed savage spending cuts.



    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    1.) Britain would retain single-member districts, thereby not diluting political accountability, while the representatives would represent a majority of the voting public rather than a slight plurality. This, in my opinion, is an accomplishment in itself, even if it hurts the Conservatives (the party I favor).

    2.) Fewer people tend to vote in run-offs, so this method would minimize the future electoral costs to the Conservatives (who have a more active voting base than other parties) of scrapping the FPTP system-which will probably happen in any event, so the Conservatives may as well cut their losses and propose a run-off system. If the Conservatives present the issue correctly, the Liberal Democrats may look like they are seeking crass political advantage rather than the good of the country if they refuse.
    Interesting opinion, but I don't think the Liberal Democrats could accept it because it encourages a two party system. It would still over-represents the two biggest parties at the Liberal Democrats and other smaller parties expense.
    Quote Originally Posted by Thalassa View Post
    Oh our 3rd person reference to ourselves denotes nothing more than we realize we are epic characters on the forum.

    Narcissism, plain and simple.

  2. #92
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    A) If people don't bother to vote, then why should their opinions count for electoral purposes?
    My argument is this:

    1.)They wouldn't count anyway because those were safe Labour seats.

    2.)The popular vote is therefore not only constituionally irrelevant - what matters is seats - but also morally irrelevant, because the way the electoral system is organized means that the popular vote doesn't necessarilly represent popular opinion, because people in "safe seats" have no reason to vote.

    3.) Therefore the Tories "moral" argument, that regardless of the constitution, they have a "moral" right to rule because of their plurality to rule, is not only legally irrelevant, but also morally irrelevant.


    B) How could a party be so "radically right-wing" if they receive more than 30% of the vote and 40% of the seats in Parliament? Are you saying the plurality of voters in England are radical right-wingers?[/
    I am saying that of a 65% turnout, only 36% voted for their agenda, and 64% rejected it, mostly voting precisely to defeat that agenda.

    I think we shouldn't be too statistical, legal and technical. I am trying to base myself on the actual situation - the Tories represent an agenda which a large majority are opposed to, unlike previous governments, who although they may have won similair amoutns of the popular vote, represented a broad "consensus" which allowed them to govern with stability. the Tories do not have that advantage.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  3. #93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Falcarius View Post
    Hence, it would be in the interest of progressives for a David Cameron minority government, his government would certainly fail and Labour would be forced to go back to its traditional values. Cameron would have his hands tied and would find it near impossible to carry out any of his proposed savage spending cuts.
    You could be presuming too much, they could decide since they are a minority government, unlikely to be re-elected, that they've nothing to lose and be the most radical government the British have seen.

  4. #94
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    I wonder if their morality extends as far as conceding that they have no mandate whatsoever to govern north of the border then?
    Somehow I doubt it.
    Freedom for Tooting.

    [YOUTUBE="fMKsR_wUSfA"]Freedom for Tooting![/YOUTUBE]

  5. #95
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bananatrombones View Post
    Freedom for Tooting.

    [YOUTUBE="fMKsR_wUSfA"]Freedom for Tooting![/YOUTUBE]
    Your going back a few years with Citizen Smith....

  6. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    Your going back a few years with Citizen Smith....
    I loved that show, I had the episode with the tank in it on DVD for a while, when I was a teenager or slightly younger it was rerun on TV and I watched it I think between Rise and Fall of Reginald Pering and the man from UNCLE or Crystal Maze.

    I kind of wanted to be Citizen Smith and I kind of think that its a good characterisation of the "young lefty" or someone who adopts a Robin Hood political identity.

    Some of the jokes about Wolfy Smith's put upon best friend and neglected girlfriend havent aged too badly but the dynamics between Wolfy and the crooks in the pub or his girlfriend's parents are a little dated. There's some of the content that makes me laugh too, the stuff about trips to London or the country being a big deal, smaller world these days.

    I reckon if it where to be remade today it'd be hard to find a political archetype, eco-warrior? Libertarian?

  7. #97
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    hey lark, yea the eco warrier even in the beardy weirdy community are now more main stream and trying to be more responcible.

    I was never a big fan, perfer his later work, he did a great dr jekle and mr hide thing recenty i think

  8. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    hey lark, yea the eco warrier even in the beardy weirdy community are now more main stream and trying to be more responcible.

    I was never a big fan, perfer his later work, he did a great dr jekle and mr hide thing recenty i think
    I've got to say I liked the show but I like his later work too, My Family was a good show I reckoned, although not many people agree.

  9. #99
    Senior Member Feops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INTx
    Posts
    829

    Default

    Without one party clearly in power politics can get very slimey and unstable. Parties will do things that go against their agenda if it'll get their measures passed, and smaller groups put in positions to make or break a bill based on their vote can exert political power highly disproportionate to their size.

    In Canada we've had a pretty stupid last few years with minority governments. The opposing parties basically ganged up on the largest group, which is perfectly within their rights, but they did it with such rabid favor that it was obvious they were placing a power grab above their own core values as a party. In the end their alliance failed as the emotional steam ran out and cooler heads considered, but it was a bloody circus.

  10. #100
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feops View Post
    Without one party clearly in power politics can get very slimey and unstable. Parties will do things that go against their agenda if it'll get their measures passed, and smaller groups put in positions to make or break a bill based on their vote can exert political power highly disproportionate to their size.

    In Canada we've had a pretty stupid last few years with minority governments. The opposing parties basically ganged up on the largest group, which is perfectly within their rights, but they did it with such rabid favor that it was obvious they were placing a power grab above their own core values as a party. In the end their alliance failed as the emotional steam ran out and cooler heads considered, but it was a bloody circus.
    Nice example. The motley crew that may form an alliance against the Tories include a small number of disparate parties, none of whom have any great affinity to the Labour Party. The Tories biggest stumbling block is - as ragashree has pointed out - the hubris that extends from the top down to the bottom of the party. The only "ally" they might possibly count on, the DUP, are canny Ulstermen who'd probably strike a deal with Labour if the price was right. A fairweather chum, in other words.

    The Tory grassroots will never accept PR, although it is fascinating that George Osborne has offered AV (the terms of which are unclear) tonight. If Clegg strikes a deal with the Tories without a guarantee of electoral reform, he's finished; if Cameron gives the Lib Dems PR, he's finished sooner, rather than later; Brown is finished as of September, whereupon the Labour Party will have picked a new leader. If Cameron plays a wrecking game, he's out; if he doesn't, Labour are in with the Lib Dems and he's as good as out. Brown has a number of clear sucessors, but with the Tories it's not so obvious who'd replace Cameron.

    An election in Winter would probably suit Labour nicely. It's amazing what a party can achieve in 3 days with Campell & Mandelson pulling the strings.

    It's been a fascinating period - and the show's not over, yet. A game theorist would have a hoot with this bunch - especially Cameron, who is in an impossible position, but still has to play they role of the moral victor until the game's up. It should have been a cakewalk: generous financing, unqualified support from the popular press and an opponent widely recognised as the most unpopular PM since Thatcher. If you can't win an election with those variables you're a dead duck. Only the Tories haven't realised that yet.

    Cast your minds back to the last five minutes of Reservoir Dogs... British politics is doing a remake.

    Karma.


Similar Threads

  1. Taliban Attack Afghan Parliament Building in Kabul
    By Olm the Water King in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-22-2015, 05:24 AM
  2. Violent Attack on Canadian Parliament
    By Mole in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-26-2014, 08:07 AM
  3. Darth Vader is Running for Parliament in the Ukraine
    By Mal12345 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-25-2014, 05:20 PM
  4. Parliament and Congress
    By Mole in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-30-2012, 10:01 AM
  5. European Parliament election -2009-
    By Blackmail! in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-13-2009, 08:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO