| Boris 07:49 - Oct 5 with 5776 views | blueislander |
Utter shambles from Boris this morning . He is blaming all the current economic problems that the country and the population are suffering on the fact that our economy is recovering very quickly. He totally failed to recognize the reality that many people are having difficulties in getting enough food to feed their families. |  | | |  |
| Boris on 22:49 - Oct 7 with 669 views | Herbivore |
| Boris on 22:35 - Oct 7 by tractordownsouth |
That’s another reason I’m unsure - the Tory Party has always been better at putting its differences aside so would be less likely to split than Labour, therefore further increasing the chances of a Tory win. |
Not convinced, they'd need to win a majority of the vote under PR and I can't see that happening, the prospect of electoral victory under FTPT is what keeps them together. [Post edited 8 Oct 2021 9:48]
|  |
| |
| Boris on 00:13 - Oct 8 with 654 views | HARRY10 |
| Boris on 19:18 - Oct 5 by Herbivore |
Couldn't be arsed to read all that but using 2010 as an example is nonsense given that it happened within a FTPT system. If you want voters to engage with the political system not throwing away half the votes (more in many constituencies) would probably be a good way to start. The majority of people on here live in East Anglia where a couple of seats aside your vote is utterly pointless. That doesn't foster a healthy political culture. And the ridiculous winner takes all mentality of FTPT isn't healthy either. |
Had you been arsed you might have educated yourself, and not spouted the guff you have.
The Brexit vote was the ultimate FPTP, yet it did not lead to voter disengagement.
I have yet to hear any of the PR cranks give a reasoned argument for voters not being able to vote for a candidate as presented - rather than having one being imposed on them after the vote
Neither do I see any great democratic process in the 2010 election, it being decided by a handful, if that, of LibDem grandees. That is what happens with PR. Those appointed by the various parties - not elected by voters, but appointed by a select few, then do not make the decision of who forms the government.
Watch how long it takes to form the next German government.
MPs are NOT elected by voters in their constituencies, but are appointed AFTER the vote. Totally unaccountable, and no link locally.
I prefer to know who I am voting for, not hand over my vote to a privileged few to decide for me.
What next ? PR in jury service ?
Instead of a majority vote we have a PR vote whereby an 8-4 split means the person is either two thirds guilty or two thirds innocent. Utter nonsense.
As said, there is no evidence that any executive decisions were changed or influenced by a minority party/parties. And with the legislative it just means more back stairs deals.
The idea that anyone claims that FPTP is anywhere near perfect is merely nonsense peddled by PR nuts to distract from the real problem - lack of voter participation. Something that may well decrease even further when they find have no idea/control who they are voting for. | | | |
| Boris on 07:58 - Oct 8 with 603 views | Herbivore |
| Boris on 00:13 - Oct 8 by HARRY10 |
Had you been arsed you might have educated yourself, and not spouted the guff you have.
The Brexit vote was the ultimate FPTP, yet it did not lead to voter disengagement.
I have yet to hear any of the PR cranks give a reasoned argument for voters not being able to vote for a candidate as presented - rather than having one being imposed on them after the vote
Neither do I see any great democratic process in the 2010 election, it being decided by a handful, if that, of LibDem grandees. That is what happens with PR. Those appointed by the various parties - not elected by voters, but appointed by a select few, then do not make the decision of who forms the government.
Watch how long it takes to form the next German government.
MPs are NOT elected by voters in their constituencies, but are appointed AFTER the vote. Totally unaccountable, and no link locally.
I prefer to know who I am voting for, not hand over my vote to a privileged few to decide for me.
What next ? PR in jury service ?
Instead of a majority vote we have a PR vote whereby an 8-4 split means the person is either two thirds guilty or two thirds innocent. Utter nonsense.
As said, there is no evidence that any executive decisions were changed or influenced by a minority party/parties. And with the legislative it just means more back stairs deals.
The idea that anyone claims that FPTP is anywhere near perfect is merely nonsense peddled by PR nuts to distract from the real problem - lack of voter participation. Something that may well decrease even further when they find have no idea/control who they are voting for. |
Again, not arsed to read all that. I got as far as "Brexit was the ultimate FTPT" and that in itself shows you are, as usual, brining an intellectual peashooter to a gun fight. Brexit was a referendum in which EVERY vote coutned. The vote wasn't broken down by constituency with the result being decided by the number of constituencies voting leave or remain. It was an example of direct democracy where every vote mattered. That you acknowledge that it engaged people is far more an argument for PR - where every vote counts - than it is for FTPT, where many votes are pointless from the outset and many more end up in the bin. And a brief glance highlights you again using the example of 2010, which was a FTPT election in a FTPT system, ffs. | |
| |
| Boris on 09:57 - Oct 8 with 562 views | marchy |
| Boris on 07:58 - Oct 8 by Herbivore |
Again, not arsed to read all that. I got as far as "Brexit was the ultimate FTPT" and that in itself shows you are, as usual, brining an intellectual peashooter to a gun fight. Brexit was a referendum in which EVERY vote coutned. The vote wasn't broken down by constituency with the result being decided by the number of constituencies voting leave or remain. It was an example of direct democracy where every vote mattered. That you acknowledge that it engaged people is far more an argument for PR - where every vote counts - than it is for FTPT, where many votes are pointless from the outset and many more end up in the bin. And a brief glance highlights you again using the example of 2010, which was a FTPT election in a FTPT system, ffs. |
Notwithstanding those are all good points well made, you might want to make sure you're not spelling the same set of initials wrongly four times in the same post if you're going to be talking about intellectual heft. | | | |
| Boris on 09:58 - Oct 8 with 555 views | Herbivore |
| Boris on 09:57 - Oct 8 by marchy |
Notwithstanding those are all good points well made, you might want to make sure you're not spelling the same set of initials wrongly four times in the same post if you're going to be talking about intellectual heft. |
Ha! Fair point, well made. I have a blind spot for acronyms. | |
| |
| Boris on 10:22 - Oct 8 with 531 views | HARRY10 |
| Boris on 07:58 - Oct 8 by Herbivore |
Again, not arsed to read all that. I got as far as "Brexit was the ultimate FTPT" and that in itself shows you are, as usual, brining an intellectual peashooter to a gun fight. Brexit was a referendum in which EVERY vote coutned. The vote wasn't broken down by constituency with the result being decided by the number of constituencies voting leave or remain. It was an example of direct democracy where every vote mattered. That you acknowledge that it engaged people is far more an argument for PR - where every vote counts - than it is for FTPT, where many votes are pointless from the outset and many more end up in the bin. And a brief glance highlights you again using the example of 2010, which was a FTPT election in a FTPT system, ffs. |
Aha, a very convenient way of avoiding answering 'tricky' questions - claim you have not read them
The main thrust of your squeaks has been that votes under FPRP do not count, and so they have no representation.
So please explain what representation over 48% of voters had after the referendum.
Or why it is more democratic to have an unknown MP imposed on you AFTER the vote, rather than one elected as candidate by the local constituency party ?
The 2010 election is a perfect example of what happens with PR. ie the decision about who forms a government comes down to a few 'big wigs' from a few parties.
You seem to be under some bizarre notion that decisions can be made proportional to the vote ie the Greens with 10% of the vote, get 10% of the number of MPs so say.......... the UC cut would be !0% less severe if they voted against.
Until you can offer up some way of making government, or legislative decision proportionate to voting numbers all you are doing is peddling some flawed myth, that distracts from the real problem. | | | |
| Boris on 10:28 - Oct 8 with 524 views | Herbivore |
| Boris on 10:22 - Oct 8 by HARRY10 |
Aha, a very convenient way of avoiding answering 'tricky' questions - claim you have not read them
The main thrust of your squeaks has been that votes under FPRP do not count, and so they have no representation.
So please explain what representation over 48% of voters had after the referendum.
Or why it is more democratic to have an unknown MP imposed on you AFTER the vote, rather than one elected as candidate by the local constituency party ?
The 2010 election is a perfect example of what happens with PR. ie the decision about who forms a government comes down to a few 'big wigs' from a few parties.
You seem to be under some bizarre notion that decisions can be made proportional to the vote ie the Greens with 10% of the vote, get 10% of the number of MPs so say.......... the UC cut would be !0% less severe if they voted against.
Until you can offer up some way of making government, or legislative decision proportionate to voting numbers all you are doing is peddling some flawed myth, that distracts from the real problem. |
I didn't see any tricky questions to be honest, I saw and continue to see a misunderstanding of what PR is and how it operates. Plenty of democracies that function far better than our own use PR and seem to do just fine. If you're happy with a system where only 40% (less even) of the electorate voting for you is enough to give you a huge majority and where most votes are pointless or go in the bin then that's fine, but you're not going to convince me it leads to a healthy democracy. | |
| |
| Boris on 11:00 - Oct 8 with 501 views | HARRY10 |
| Boris on 10:28 - Oct 8 by Herbivore |
I didn't see any tricky questions to be honest, I saw and continue to see a misunderstanding of what PR is and how it operates. Plenty of democracies that function far better than our own use PR and seem to do just fine. If you're happy with a system where only 40% (less even) of the electorate voting for you is enough to give you a huge majority and where most votes are pointless or go in the bin then that's fine, but you're not going to convince me it leads to a healthy democracy. |
So it's down to making up stuff now
There is NO evidence that PR is healthier
I have not said I am happy with FPTP, in fact if you bothered to read you would know that. What I have said is that introducing a less democratic system to a bad system is not the answer.
Now why not explain why is it better to have an MP imposed AFTER a vote, rather than voters knowing who they are voting for (or even against)
Why a handful of party members get to decide the government not the voters
Do you actually understand how PR works, or how either the executive or the legislative make decisions/pass law ? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Boris on 11:43 - Oct 8 with 463 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Boris on 09:57 - Oct 8 by marchy |
Notwithstanding those are all good points well made, you might want to make sure you're not spelling the same set of initials wrongly four times in the same post if you're going to be talking about intellectual heft. |
While we are being pedantic I would point out that Dyslexia does not equate to intelligence. |  | | |
| Boris on 13:36 - Oct 8 with 425 views | Herbivore |
| Boris on 11:00 - Oct 8 by HARRY10 |
So it's down to making up stuff now
There is NO evidence that PR is healthier
I have not said I am happy with FPTP, in fact if you bothered to read you would know that. What I have said is that introducing a less democratic system to a bad system is not the answer.
Now why not explain why is it better to have an MP imposed AFTER a vote, rather than voters knowing who they are voting for (or even against)
Why a handful of party members get to decide the government not the voters
Do you actually understand how PR works, or how either the executive or the legislative make decisions/pass law ? |
You can have PR and know who you are voting for. That's what list systems are for. That's how most of the 30+ countries in Europe with PR work and they seem to be doing okay. The notion that PR is less democratic than FPTP is just nonsense.
I understand politics well, thanks. I'm not so sure you do. You see politics through a narrow lens of a two party, FPTP system that clearly isn't working. | |
| |
| Boris on 14:24 - Oct 8 with 391 views | You_Bloo_Right |
| Boris on 13:36 - Oct 8 by Herbivore |
You can have PR and know who you are voting for. That's what list systems are for. That's how most of the 30+ countries in Europe with PR work and they seem to be doing okay. The notion that PR is less democratic than FPTP is just nonsense.
I understand politics well, thanks. I'm not so sure you do. You see politics through a narrow lens of a two party, FPTP system that clearly isn't working. |
He has a point Harry. There are many different proportional systems (and that, in itself, is a problem as witness the last time the electors were given a say on replacing FPTP), some delivering more proportionality than others, and you seem to be focusing your criticism of all of them on an identified potential issue with one. |  |
| |
| Boris on 14:30 - Oct 8 with 385 views | blueislander |
| Boris on 14:24 - Oct 8 by You_Bloo_Right |
He has a point Harry. There are many different proportional systems (and that, in itself, is a problem as witness the last time the electors were given a say on replacing FPTP), some delivering more proportionality than others, and you seem to be focusing your criticism of all of them on an identified potential issue with one. |
The PR vote held in the UK a few years ago was an absolute dog's breakfast. It was very obtuse , and unclear as to what people were actually voting for . If I remember rightly the turn-out was very low. | | | |
| Boris on 14:44 - Oct 8 with 373 views | DanTheMan |
| Boris on 14:30 - Oct 8 by blueislander |
The PR vote held in the UK a few years ago was an absolute dog's breakfast. It was very obtuse , and unclear as to what people were actually voting for . If I remember rightly the turn-out was very low. |
And, you know, this was how the against campaign was run.
 |  |
| |
| Boris on 14:48 - Oct 8 with 370 views | blueislander |
| Boris on 14:44 - Oct 8 by DanTheMan |
And, you know, this was how the against campaign was run.
|
Classy! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
