Politics

[PaddockLad 17257]

 

[PaddockLad 17257]

 

[Isegrim 9775]

Have the ERG formed a star chamber yet to sort the mess out? They probably need Cash for it.

[ewerk 30610]

How shameless do you have to be to work for the Express?

 

[ewerk 30610]

 

[ewerk 30610]

 

[The Fish 10857]

Can anyone explain to why, like in the world, the Labour party wouldn't be all-in for PR regardless of their current lead in the polls?

[ewerk 30610]

I think Starmer is focussed on not being seen as being radical. It could be painted as ripping up hundreds of years of British tradition.

 

Given the current lead in the polls he'd have to monumentally fuck up to lose the next election. PR of course isn't about one election but about every one going forward. If it isn't in the manifesto then I don't see how Labour can adopt PR without a referendum, if it is in the manifesto then they have a genuine mandate to introduce it.

[Renton 21623]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

Can anyone explain to why, like in the world, the Labour party wouldn't be all-in for PR regardless of their current lead in the polls?

 

It's cos of their lead in the polls they should back it imo. There will never be a better time. 

 

But the answer is because of Starmer. He doesn't want to upset the status quo. The irony is, the bigger the labour win, the more secure his position is and the more PR will be relegated to the bottom of the drawer. 

 

However, the issue is gaining traction with Joe Public. People like Burnham need to keep the pressure on. For me personally, its by far the most important issue now, more important than Europe or the NHS. 

[The Fish 10857]

How beige a man must you be if altering voting methodology would make you radical?

[ewerk 30610]

Just now, The Fish said:

How beige a man must you be if altering voting methodology would make you radical?

 

It is radical though, it's literally the bedrock of our democracy.

[Renton 21623]

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

 

It is radical though, it's literally the bedrock of our democracy.

What democracy?

[ewerk 30610]

1 minute ago, Renton said:

What democracy?

 

We do live in a democracy though. Every five years or less we get to throw out the cunts in charge. Our elections are free and fair. The fact that we have had the Tories for 12 years is down to the fact that the public are cunts. Of course PR is a fairer system but to say we don't live in a democracy is a false accusation.

[The Fish 10857]

5 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

It is radical though, it's literally the bedrock of our democracy.

No, I know that technically it's a dramatic shift in a fundamental part of our democracy, I was making a light hearted shit joke in the face of unrelenting misery and gloom. Jesus Ewerk, could you not let me have it?

 

Radical... like the fucking Turtles use it. Cowabunga and all that.

[Rayvin 5223]

2 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

We do live in a democracy though. Every five years or less we get to throw out the cunts in charge. Our elections are free and fair. The fact that we have had the Tories for 12 years is down to the fact that the public are cunts. Of course PR is a fairer system but to say we don't live in a democracy is a false accusation.

 

IMO we live in a dictatorship with a 5 year reset. We have absolute tyranny for 5 years where politics runs roughshod over everyone who didn't vote for the prevailing party, where leaders and manifestos can be changed and altered without recourse multiple times within that window, and where authoritarian control seeks to bend reality and information as it sees fit.

 

Nothing about the way government has been run since 2016 has felt remotely democratic. It's been a coup d'etat by hardline nutjobs with the right wing press giving them the same sort of cover that Putin relies on in Russia to get his 'electoral victories'.

 

 

[ewerk 30610]

5 minutes ago, The Fish said:

No, I know that technically it's a dramatic shift in a fundamental part of our democracy, I was making a light hearted shit joke in the face of unrelenting misery and gloom. Jesus Ewerk, could you not let me have it?

 

Radical... like the fucking Turtles use it. Cowabunga and all that.

 

Sorry mate, I just don't naturally associate you with humour.

[Renton 21623]

3 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

We do live in a democracy though. Every five years or less we get to throw out the cunts in charge. Our elections are free and fair. The fact that we have had the Tories for 12 years is down to the fact that the public are cunts. Of course PR is a fairer system but to say we don't live in a democracy is a false accusation.

Unelected second house populated by clerics and stooges. Hereditary president. Am I or any of my views represented? No, they're not.

 

FPtP is a shame designed to give the illusion of democracy and to restrict power to two parties. Quasi-democracy at best. 

[Renton 21623]

6 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

IMO we live in a dictatorship with a 5 year reset. We have absolute tyranny for 5 years where politics runs roughshod over everyone who didn't vote for the prevailing party, where leaders and manifestos can be changed and altered without recourse multiple times within that window, and where authoritarian control seeks to bend reality and information as it sees fit.

 

Nothing about the way government has been run since 2016 has felt remotely democratic. It's been a coup d'etat by hardline nutjobs with the right wing press giving them the same sort of cover that Putin relies on in Russia to get his 'electoral victories'.

 

 

[The Fish 10857]

3 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

Sorry mate, I just don't naturally associate you with humour.

Well, you should. I'm hilarious.

 

Just wondering, if Kwarteng reverses a lot of the mini-budget to restore some public confidence, couldn't they paint themselves as having listened to the people, while their banker chums pocket the money they made from shorting the pound? Couldn't they turn a reversal into a kind of win for the type of people who need any slither of hope to keep voting for them?

[ewerk 30610]

5 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

IMO we live in a dictatorship with a 5 year reset. We have absolute tyranny for 5 years where politics runs roughshod over everyone who didn't vote for the prevailing party, where leaders and manifestos can be changed and altered without recourse multiple times within that window, and where authoritarian control seeks to bend reality and information as it sees fit.

 

Nothing about the way government has been run since 2016 has felt remotely democratic. It's been a coup d'etat by hardline nutjobs with the right wing press giving them the same sort of cover that Putin relies on in Russia to get his 'electoral victories'.

 

 

 

We have had two opportunities since 2016 to change the ruling party. On both occasions the incumbents 'won'. You may not like their lies but clearly a lot of people do.

 

Of course there's an argument for tightening up our constitution and restricting executive power but in our parliamentary democracy it's a case of winner takes all. That will continue under PR but then it will like be winners plural.

[ewerk 30610]

6 minutes ago, Renton said:

Unelected second house populated by clerics and stooges. Hereditary president. Am I or any of my views represented? No, they're not.

 

FPtP is a shame designed to give the illusion of democracy and to restrict power to two parties. Quasi-democracy at best. 

 

The HoL is largely impotent and I wouldn't be against an elected upper chamber voted for mid term. Having an elected president is largely pointless unless you're going to give them real power and even then it doesn't guarantee any better decision making. We'd probably end up with Johnson as president if we we to vote for one right now. Your views are represented, just by the opposition.

[ewerk 30610]

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Well, you should. I'm hilarious.

 

Just wondering, if Kwarteng reverses a lot of the mini-budget to restore some public confidence, couldn't they paint themselves as having listened to the people, while their banker chums pocket the money they made from shorting the pound? Couldn't they turn a reversal into a kind of win for the type of people who need any slither of hope to keep voting for them?

 

A reversal of his position right now would be an admission that their entire economic ethos is incorrect (which of course it is). I think they'll take the ship down with them.

[Renton 21623]

5 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

We have had two opportunities since 2016 to change the ruling party. On both occasions the incumbents 'won'. You may not like their lies but clearly a lot of people do.

 

Of course there's an argument for tightening up our constitution and restricting executive power but in our parliamentary democracy it's a case of winner takes all. That will continue under PR but then it will like be winners plural.

 

It won't be winners take all under PR, plural or not. It will be leading through consensus with compromises made. Rayvin and yourself also touch on another facet here, about the media and accountability. I don't see how the Brexit referendum was democratic when the campaigners could lie with impunity and had no accountability for their actions. That's a piss poor form of democracy if its democracy at all. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Renton

[ewerk 30610]

1 minute ago, Renton said:

 

It won't be winners take all under PR, plural or not. It will be leading through consensus with compromises made. Rayvin and yourself also touch on another facet here, about the media and accountability. I don't see how the Brexit referendum was deomcratic when the campaigners could lie with impunity and no accountability for their actions. That's a piss poor form of deomcracy if its democracy at all. 

 

Is there any democracy where there are punishments for campaign lies?

[Renton 21623]

3 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

The HoL is largely impotent and I wouldn't be against an elected upper chamber voted for mid term. Having an elected president is largely pointless unless you're going to give them real power and even then it doesn't guarantee any better decision making. We'd probably end up with Johnson as president if we we to vote for one right now. Your views are represented, just by the opposition.

 

The large majority of people in this country live in safe seats and their vote quite literally makes no difference at all. And once a party gets a majority, on a minority of votes, they can do what they please. I'm not represented at any level of decison making.