Are we doing anything Thursday? — Page 3
#52
Posted: 5/7/10 at 2:18pm
Indeed! I wouldn't want to be Clegg right now, either way he's going to take the hit.
We stayed Labour, thankfully, I've had to put up with massive Tory banners outside my window for weeks (live opposite a Cons club,ugh) persuaded my mother over to the Liberals this year too, for what good it did!
We stayed Labour, thankfully, I've had to put up with massive Tory banners outside my window for weeks (live opposite a Cons club,ugh) persuaded my mother over to the Liberals this year too, for what good it did!
Maybe I'm on nobody's side
http://phdconfessions.blogspot.com/
#53
Posted: 5/7/10 at 2:44pm
I liked what Boris said. To paraphrase...
the British electorate have had their revenge, giving the politicians a decisive knee in the bollocks with the worst possible scenario and the most difficult to make work.
the British electorate have had their revenge, giving the politicians a decisive knee in the bollocks with the worst possible scenario and the most difficult to make work.
#54
Posted: 5/7/10 at 3:12pm
I don't usually agree with Boris, but he's spot on there.
I'm sure Cameron will get in eventually one way or another - a part of me is just glad that we didn't make it quite as easy for him as he obviously thought it was going to be a few months ago.
On a side note, everytime I see that smug tw*t George Osborne I can't help being alarmed by the thought of him as chancellor. He genuinely seems to know nothing!
I'm sure Cameron will get in eventually one way or another - a part of me is just glad that we didn't make it quite as easy for him as he obviously thought it was going to be a few months ago.
On a side note, everytime I see that smug tw*t George Osborne I can't help being alarmed by the thought of him as chancellor. He genuinely seems to know nothing!
Updated On: 5/7/10 at 03:12 PM
#55
Posted: 5/7/10 at 3:27pm
Loved the suggestion, I think I saw it on Twitter, that a Tory/Lib Dem government would be called Con-Dem.
#56
Posted: 5/7/10 at 3:48pm
Seeing Cameron squirm over the last week or so and having to hold out an olive branch to the Lib Dems is the only thing making this more bearable.
Agreed about Osbourne, I've yet to work out the point of him.
Con-Dems tee hee.
Agreed about Osbourne, I've yet to work out the point of him.
Con-Dems tee hee.
Maybe I'm on nobody's side
http://phdconfessions.blogspot.com/
#57
Posted: 5/7/10 at 4:03pm
As a gay man i cant think of anything worse than a blue Goverment
Namo i love u but we get it already....you don't like Madonna
#58
Posted: 5/7/10 at 4:35pm
Me neither (apart from thankfully-impossible situations like the BNP getting in, of course). The worst thing is that Cameron tries and often succeeds in convincing people that he's not just another old-style Tory - so he gets votes that he doesn't deserve from people he doesn't really give a toss about. Like how he tried to get the gay vote just by saying the right things, the right key words (and only the least he could possibly get away with). Thankfully we didn't fall for it!
Then of course if these people he's trying to win over actually asks him to do something - sack Philippa Stroud for instance - he doesn't do anything of the sort, because the Daily Mail would say it's political correctness gone mad.
Then of course if these people he's trying to win over actually asks him to do something - sack Philippa Stroud for instance - he doesn't do anything of the sort, because the Daily Mail would say it's political correctness gone mad.
Updated On: 5/7/10 at 04:35 PM
#59
Posted: 5/7/10 at 4:42pm
I think that the British electorate have spoken. But unfortunately with the current system they have to speak with the equivalent of a 19th century version of two paper cups and a piece of string....
As for Mr Osborne as a Sister George can we stop calling him that name and start using his real birth name of Gideon.
As for Mr Osborne as a Sister George can we stop calling him that name and start using his real birth name of Gideon.
"I tend to think if god wanted us to believe in him, he'd exist" Linda Smith
#60
Posted: 5/7/10 at 4:47pm
Evan Harris is amazing. And FPTP voting is RIDICULOUS. Have you noticed that Oxford, overall, had 41,087 votes for Lib Dem, 33,633 for Conservative, and 27,937 for Labour? And yet, due to being split into two constituencies and thanks to this ridiculous lack of proportional representation, Oxford has come away with a Tory MP and a Labour MP. Absolutely disgusting. I may not like that Wycombe has a Tory MP, but at least he has been elected honestly (by 23,423 people who I guess must earn enough that the Tories make perfect sense, while the other 24,728 are really not that into elitism and... well, Conservatism).
Electoral reform starts here, y'all. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ Start writing to your brand-spanking new MPs now, and let's not let up until we have a voting system that allows our votes to COUNT.
Electoral reform starts here, y'all. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ Start writing to your brand-spanking new MPs now, and let's not let up until we have a voting system that allows our votes to COUNT.
Updated On: 5/7/10 at 04:47 PM
#61
Posted: 5/7/10 at 5:04pm
And the Lib Dems had a bad evening because their share of the vote went up to 23% but their number of MPs went down by 6....
And 23% of the vote = less than 10% of the seats...
(and gutted about Evan Harris - Lembit Opek I could take but Evan.....)
And 23% of the vote = less than 10% of the seats...
(and gutted about Evan Harris - Lembit Opek I could take but Evan.....)
"I tend to think if god wanted us to believe in him, he'd exist" Linda Smith
#62
Posted: 5/7/10 at 5:58pm
Gideon! I didn't know about that. I will try and remember to call him that.
Those statistics about the voting in Oxford are astonishing - perfect evidence of how grossly unfair the current system is. Whatever else happens, that needs to change.
On a much lighter note, there was a Tory voter interviewed on Channel 4 earlier today with the fabulous name of Gay Power.
Those statistics about the voting in Oxford are astonishing - perfect evidence of how grossly unfair the current system is. Whatever else happens, that needs to change.
On a much lighter note, there was a Tory voter interviewed on Channel 4 earlier today with the fabulous name of Gay Power.
#63
Posted: 5/8/10 at 4:25am
Each Conservative seat equated to approx 35,000 votes. Each Lib Dem seat equates to approx 122,000 votes.
And we accuse other countries of un-democratic behaviour!
And we accuse other countries of un-democratic behaviour!
#64
Posted: 5/8/10 at 5:09am
"I think that the British electorate have spoken."
I do as well but I'm becoming increasingly angry that the pundits are now saying but the message isn't clear when it's as clear as crystal:
the British electorate have moved on but the political system and those within it have not.
I'm livid that Cameron's so-called generous offer to the LibDems is virtually nothing.
And, yes, 23% of the vote = 57 LibDem seats whilst 29% of the vote = 258 Labour seats is ridiculous beyond belief.
I do as well but I'm becoming increasingly angry that the pundits are now saying but the message isn't clear when it's as clear as crystal:
the British electorate have moved on but the political system and those within it have not.
I'm livid that Cameron's so-called generous offer to the LibDems is virtually nothing.
And, yes, 23% of the vote = 57 LibDem seats whilst 29% of the vote = 258 Labour seats is ridiculous beyond belief.
#65
Posted: 5/8/10 at 6:27am
If I was Nick Clegg I would be furious that his share of the votes went up, but ended up losing seats, the alternative for first across the line is 'PR' a complex system that is hard to understand and could let smaller parties like 'UKIP' or the evil 'BNP' in.
Although first across the line is not perfect as normally about 35% - 40% of people say who they want to run the country, which means 60% - 65% of people do not want a given party to run the country, this is not democratic? Also unless you vote for the winning party your vote is wasted, like me I voted but I knew my vote was a waste of time as I did not back the winning MP and knew this when I voted.
Both systems have there floors.
Although first across the line is not perfect as normally about 35% - 40% of people say who they want to run the country, which means 60% - 65% of people do not want a given party to run the country, this is not democratic? Also unless you vote for the winning party your vote is wasted, like me I voted but I knew my vote was a waste of time as I did not back the winning MP and knew this when I voted.
Both systems have there floors.
#66
Posted: 5/8/10 at 7:15am
Well, let the smaller parties in! Yes, even UKIP and the BNP! If you support a fairer system of voting, then you have to support it when it comes to parties you don't approve of as well, otherwise you're a part of the problem. Racists and xenophobes are part of our population and deserve representation too, whether we like it or not. Some of them - dare I say it - might even have some valuable ideas or suggestions hidden away under all the shouting and rhetoric.
Besides, I rather suspect that the BNP are so busy shouting racist things that they wouldn't know what to do with a seat in parliament if it hit them round the face; they wouldn't last long in parliament once their constituents saw how ineffectual they were, and a handful of BNP MPs (if we had proportional representation, then with these voting figures, the BNP would have been lucky to scrape twelve seats, out of a possible 650 :P) is not going to undermine the entire country. There are 650 seats, y'know; UKIP and the BNP don't have *that* many supporters (1.48 million between them, less than a quarter who voted for the Lib Dems and a mere 5% of the turnout; and just think how many more votes the Lib Dems could have got if the voting system were fairer and people knew that voting for the party they liked best would actually have an effect!). It would also be nice to have the possibility of more than ONE Green party representative, or more than fifty-seven Lib Dems. :P
And how is proportional representation hard to understand? Sure, ranking candidates from "preferred" to "don't mind that much" to "HELL TO THE NAW" is slightly more involved than simply marking a big black X, and the maths involved in working out the answer does take a few minutes to wrap your head around, but it's not insurmountable. First, which of us has never ranked a list of things in order of preference? Five year olds can do that. Second, there are people employed to do the hard maths part for us, if you can't or won't wrap your head around how it works. :P There are plenty of places - the BBC News website for one - that have successfully and in the simplest terms explained the rather more complicated aspects of the current system, such as what a hung parliament is and why it's not ideal, and how FPTP voting can end up in MPs being elected without actually getting the most votes (as most unfortunately illustrated for us by Oxford). Both of these concepts went WAY over my head for the longest time, but the BBC sorted that out for me, and they're not the only useful source out there. There are people out there who can make this information easy for us to understand, and it's not a one-way street! Just because proportional representation takes a little more understanding is no excuse to not try and understand it!
Read this blog entry: http://www.challengerappears.com/blog/2010/05/vote-for-a-change/
It is long, but it is stunning. It may be too late to try influencing your votes, but the knowledge it imparts is invaluable.
If you ever want your vote to count as more than a mere "this many people voted for the losers" statistic, then we need electoral reform.
http://www.voteforachange.co.uk/ - write to the Lib Dems, don't let them back down now!
http://www.takebackparliament.com/ - parliament is for US. Don't let the politicians continue to make it all about THEM. 2pm in Trafalgar Square today, wear purple!
http://www.theyworkforyou.com - write to your MP; let them know you are unhappy that your vote counted for nothing and you are counting on THEM, as YOUR REPRESENTATIVE, to help make things right.
Please please PLEASE don't just sit back and whine about this. This is OUR country goddammit, and we need this!
Besides, I rather suspect that the BNP are so busy shouting racist things that they wouldn't know what to do with a seat in parliament if it hit them round the face; they wouldn't last long in parliament once their constituents saw how ineffectual they were, and a handful of BNP MPs (if we had proportional representation, then with these voting figures, the BNP would have been lucky to scrape twelve seats, out of a possible 650 :P) is not going to undermine the entire country. There are 650 seats, y'know; UKIP and the BNP don't have *that* many supporters (1.48 million between them, less than a quarter who voted for the Lib Dems and a mere 5% of the turnout; and just think how many more votes the Lib Dems could have got if the voting system were fairer and people knew that voting for the party they liked best would actually have an effect!). It would also be nice to have the possibility of more than ONE Green party representative, or more than fifty-seven Lib Dems. :P
And how is proportional representation hard to understand? Sure, ranking candidates from "preferred" to "don't mind that much" to "HELL TO THE NAW" is slightly more involved than simply marking a big black X, and the maths involved in working out the answer does take a few minutes to wrap your head around, but it's not insurmountable. First, which of us has never ranked a list of things in order of preference? Five year olds can do that. Second, there are people employed to do the hard maths part for us, if you can't or won't wrap your head around how it works. :P There are plenty of places - the BBC News website for one - that have successfully and in the simplest terms explained the rather more complicated aspects of the current system, such as what a hung parliament is and why it's not ideal, and how FPTP voting can end up in MPs being elected without actually getting the most votes (as most unfortunately illustrated for us by Oxford). Both of these concepts went WAY over my head for the longest time, but the BBC sorted that out for me, and they're not the only useful source out there. There are people out there who can make this information easy for us to understand, and it's not a one-way street! Just because proportional representation takes a little more understanding is no excuse to not try and understand it!
Read this blog entry: http://www.challengerappears.com/blog/2010/05/vote-for-a-change/
It is long, but it is stunning. It may be too late to try influencing your votes, but the knowledge it imparts is invaluable.
If you ever want your vote to count as more than a mere "this many people voted for the losers" statistic, then we need electoral reform.
http://www.voteforachange.co.uk/ - write to the Lib Dems, don't let them back down now!
http://www.takebackparliament.com/ - parliament is for US. Don't let the politicians continue to make it all about THEM. 2pm in Trafalgar Square today, wear purple!
http://www.theyworkforyou.com - write to your MP; let them know you are unhappy that your vote counted for nothing and you are counting on THEM, as YOUR REPRESENTATIVE, to help make things right.
Please please PLEASE don't just sit back and whine about this. This is OUR country goddammit, and we need this!
Updated On: 5/8/10 at 07:15 AM
#67
Posted: 5/8/10 at 11:06am
Weez I really enjoyed reading your article and appreciated the thought and time you put into the piece, until you chose to end your message with 'goddammit'. 
#68
Posted: 5/8/10 at 12:39pm
Weez has expressed the political arguments much better than I can. But to add, if I can explain PR to a bunch of 15 year olds using skittles and still have them come to the conclusion it's a fairer system then there's hope for the rest of us.
On a similar note, protesters for PR being spoken to by Clegg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8670068.stm
On a similar note, protesters for PR being spoken to by Clegg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8670068.stm
Maybe I'm on nobody's side
http://phdconfessions.blogspot.com/
#69
Posted: 5/8/10 at 1:56pm
Oh, if only I'd had SKITTLES! That would have been a tasty way to get to grips with things. :3
I apologise for causing offence with my rather irreverent choice of words. Please don't let my one impassioned invective cloud the entire point I was trying to make!
I apologise for causing offence with my rather irreverent choice of words. Please don't let my one impassioned invective cloud the entire point I was trying to make!
#70
Posted: 5/8/10 at 2:46pm
I paid the price for lots of 4- or 5-hour nights, and not getting a wink of sleep Thursday/Friday - I slept through my alarm and woke up at 3 pm today! Whoops.
I'm livid that Cameron's so-called generous offer to the LibDems is virtually nothing.
Absolutely - "Let's team up on the things we already agree on", that is to say the things they're going to do anyway.
The irony is that this deal would really prove what the right-wing press have been saying - that the new support for the Lib Dems is just a flash in the pan - because you can bet that Clegg will lose his new support (lefties who were fed up with Labour) as quickly as he gained it if he does this.
I'm livid that Cameron's so-called generous offer to the LibDems is virtually nothing.
Absolutely - "Let's team up on the things we already agree on", that is to say the things they're going to do anyway.
The irony is that this deal would really prove what the right-wing press have been saying - that the new support for the Lib Dems is just a flash in the pan - because you can bet that Clegg will lose his new support (lefties who were fed up with Labour) as quickly as he gained it if he does this.
#71
Posted: 5/8/10 at 4:01pm
It's going to be an interesting few days for Nick Clegg and more importantly the Lib Dems (thanks to the joys of the triple lock).
To gain any future credibility from the electorate when it comes to a PR referendum he has to be seen to be negotiating with the Tories but I can't believe that Cameron's MP's will allow him to give them a referendum on PR nor can I believe that the Lib Dem MP's will allow Clegg to throw away this once in a generation chance and have a deal without one.
So after talks with the Tories break down on this point Nick Clegg will be able to say he has tried and then turn to a Lib-Lab pact based on a Gordon Brown exit.
I could certainly live with a Lib-Lab deal based on David Milliband as Prime Minister, Vince Cable as chancellor, Nick Clegg as Foreign Secretary but most importantly a commitment to voting reform.
Well the above scenario is what I have been busy praying to a non-existent being for (that and a Leeds win/ and or promotion - and they've delivered on that!)
To gain any future credibility from the electorate when it comes to a PR referendum he has to be seen to be negotiating with the Tories but I can't believe that Cameron's MP's will allow him to give them a referendum on PR nor can I believe that the Lib Dem MP's will allow Clegg to throw away this once in a generation chance and have a deal without one.
So after talks with the Tories break down on this point Nick Clegg will be able to say he has tried and then turn to a Lib-Lab pact based on a Gordon Brown exit.
I could certainly live with a Lib-Lab deal based on David Milliband as Prime Minister, Vince Cable as chancellor, Nick Clegg as Foreign Secretary but most importantly a commitment to voting reform.
Well the above scenario is what I have been busy praying to a non-existent being for (that and a Leeds win/ and or promotion - and they've delivered on that!)
"I tend to think if god wanted us to believe in him, he'd exist" Linda Smith
Updated On: 5/8/10 at 04:01 PM
#72
Posted: 5/8/10 at 4:18pm
Weez, take what I said as a big compliment and I agree on most of what you said, take it that I appreciated your message, but commented in a humorous way, that you wrote a passionate piece on a Churchillian proportion and decided to end it with a 'Americanism'.
Anyway the problem I have with 'PR' is that a 'Tory' voter would be very unlikely to second 'Labour' or 'Liberal Democrats' and would opt for a party such as 'UKIP' or 'BNP', where these parties could gain real power via the back door, where a Labour supporter would more than likely back Liberal Democrat and vice versa. I do not want people in parliament representing me on a single issue whether it is Europe or Race.
Anyway the problem I have with 'PR' is that a 'Tory' voter would be very unlikely to second 'Labour' or 'Liberal Democrats' and would opt for a party such as 'UKIP' or 'BNP', where these parties could gain real power via the back door, where a Labour supporter would more than likely back Liberal Democrat and vice versa. I do not want people in parliament representing me on a single issue whether it is Europe or Race.
#73
Posted: 5/9/10 at 5:01am
Paddy Ashdown on The Andrew Marr Show:
(paraphrasing again)
I don't think anyone can now form a government who is deaf to the demands of the British electorate for electoral reform.
(paraphrasing again)
I don't think anyone can now form a government who is deaf to the demands of the British electorate for electoral reform.
#74
Posted: 5/10/10 at 12:24pm
Gordon to go and Lib Dem's to open formal talks with Labour (and still press Conservatives more key details)
Now it's getting exciting!!
Now it's getting exciting!!
"I tend to think if god wanted us to believe in him, he'd exist" Linda Smith
#75
Posted: 5/10/10 at 12:50pm
Probably the best thing Gordon Brown has done as PM, sadly. I think he's a good man, just not a leader.
Come on Nick, do the right thing. Not sure *exactly* what that is, but I hope you can figure it out and do it!
Come on Nick, do the right thing. Not sure *exactly* what that is, but I hope you can figure it out and do it!
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $70
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $101
