New Tory Leader

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

An extraordinary opinion poll in Mid Bedfordshire, the seat of Nadine Dorries. It is supposedly one of the safest Tory seats in the country. The Conservative candidate looks like being beaten as a result of an independent candidate and the Reform Party. Dorries won the 2019 election with 60% of the vote

Whilst in this instance I would obviously be delighted to see the Tories kicked out, that poll does highlight how utterly dysfunctional our electoral system is when our representatives can get elected on 28% of the vote and it is quite possible, indeed likely, that the next Government can get elected by a low- mid 30s percentage of the vote, as has happened in the past and is even more likely now by virtue of us having more small but still significant parties splitting off votes from Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee.

[Nuff Said 5,178]

16 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Whilst in this instance I would obviously be delighted to see the Tories kicked out, that poll does highlight how utterly dysfunctional our electoral system is when our representatives can get elected on 28% of the vote and it is quite possible, indeed likely, that the next Government can get elected by a low- mid 30s percentage of the vote, as has happened in the past and is even more likely now by virtue of us having more small but still significant parties splitting off votes from Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee.

The worst system apart from all the others? 

Switching to PR would destroy the regional link MPs have to their constituency, and in the opinion of many, result in parties of yes men, who have to slavishly agree with the current party leadership to get on the list of approved candidates (I’m aware some would argue this is currently happening with the selection of some Labour candidates, but that’s a separate debate).

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

3 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

The worst system apart from all the others? 

Switching to PR would destroy the regional link MPs have to their constituency, and in the opinion of many, result in parties of yes men, who have to slavishly agree with the current party leadership to get on the list of approved candidates (I’m aware some would argue this is currently happening with the selection of some Labour candidates, but that’s a separate debate).

Just the worst system full stop, IMO.

I know the regional link argument is one that is often deployed to defend our current system, probably because its the only positive thing one can say about it, but it is possible to have a system which includes elements of both PR & regional links - one local example  (though not necessarily the best) being the devolved Scottish parliament

[TheGunnShow 6,019]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

The worst system apart from all the others? 

Switching to PR would destroy the regional link MPs have to their constituency, and in the opinion of many, result in parties of yes men, who have to slavishly agree with the current party leadership to get on the list of approved candidates (I’m aware some would argue this is currently happening with the selection of some Labour candidates, but that’s a separate debate).

Not convinced there. Germany and New Zealand get around that by doubling their MPs so one is voted locally, the other is appointed at a party level.

PR is not a panacea by any stretch of the imagination, but even if this is a mild weakness, it pales into insignificance with the issues posed by FPTP and the complete inability for swinging voters to change around, along with the gerrymandering inherent in such a system.

[Yellow Fever 3,839]

1 hour ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Whilst in this instance I would obviously be delighted to see the Tories kicked out, that poll does highlight how utterly dysfunctional our electoral system is when our representatives can get elected on 28% of the vote and it is quite possible, indeed likely, that the next Government can get elected by a low- mid 30s percentage of the vote, as has happened in the past and is even more likely now by virtue of us having more small but still significant parties splitting off votes from Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee.

The Tories have long benefitted from a split more 'progressive' vote.

It will be fun if it comes back to bite them as here - and add some added  'tactical' voting to boot!

If it persists then I guess they'll then quickly come round to thinking it's time for PR. 

Edited July 3, 2023 by Yellow Fever

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

33 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

The Tories have long benefitted from a split more 'progressive' vote.

It will be fun if it comes back to bite them as here - and add some added  'tactical' voting to boot!

If it persists then I guess they'll then quickly come round to thinking it's time for PR. 

Absolutely - the Tories as you say have been by far the biggest benefactors of the FPTP system which up until now has always resulted in a two party system.

But ever since Labour replaced the Liberals (a one off event which has yet to be repeated and probably never will be) as one of the two parties of Government they have also had the consolation that their turn in government will always come around again.

But, and I guess it is still quite a big but, if that mid-Beds poll is anything go by and let's face it by the wider mood in the country and it very well could be then the Tories do look as though they are at a tipping point whereby they cease being one of the 'big' two governing parties and become the largest of the smaller parties.

If they do start to be perceived like that by a chunk of the electorate, even though they will be biggest of the small parties by quite a margin they will start to experience the difficulties and unfairness which the other small parties are very familiar in terms of seats won and could suffer a real meltdown.

Well, we can always hope anyway.........😀

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

Switching to PR would destroy the regional link MPs have to their constituency, and in the opinion of many, result in parties of yes men, who have to slavishly agree with the current party leadership to get on the list of approved candidates (I’m aware some would argue this is currently happening with the selection of some Labour candidates, but that’s a separate debate).

As well as the very good counter points already made, I think you're also overstating the value of the constituency link in FPTP. I'm in Norwich North, and look who I'm reliant upon for that constituency link; Chloe Smith, your archetypal yes man(woman) who slavishly agreed with the current party leadership and continued to do so throughout her entire, mercifully ending, parliamentary career. And in 2019, she got in with a smidge more than 50% of the vote but on a 70% turnout. So she actually only had the support of less than 40% of constituents.

Now, in a PR list situation with wide geographic areas to ensure proportionality, if constituencies remained the same, there would be 58 representatives for the East of England and if I wanted to take an issue to Parliament, I would have a choice of politicians to approach from Labour, Tory, Lib Dem and even one or two Greens. I could select the one most sympathetic to my issue; at the moment I can pick Chloe Smith and regardless of her duty as the Norwich North representative, there are certain topics she won't give a **** about or take seriously because of her political ideology.

That's a pretty **** link and absolutely not something you should be hanging an appalling system of democracy on.

[Nuff Said 5,178]

You all make very valid points, and I’m in no way saying we should stick with FPTP. But I do believe that we need to be careful what we wish for and think very carefully about what we do instead.

 

I can’t remember where I saw it but there was a poll fairly recently where a surprisingly high percentage of respondents stated that it would be worth relinquishing some democratic control for a strong, decisive leader. The very likely outcome of more PR would be more compromise, longer decision making and generally a more muddled political landscape. Those who want simple answers to complicated political situations a la Brexit aren’t going to see that as an improvement.

[TheGunnShow 6,019]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

You all make very valid points, and I’m in no way saying we should stick with FPTP. But I do believe that we need to be careful what we wish for and think very carefully about what we do instead.

 

I can’t remember where I saw it but there was a poll fairly recently where a surprisingly high percentage of respondents stated that it would be worth relinquishing some democratic control for a strong, decisive leader. The very likely outcome of more PR would be more compromise, longer decision making and generally a more muddled political landscape. Those who want simple answers to complicated political situations a la Brexit aren’t going to see that as an improvement.

The bit in bold is precisely what I'd like from a political model. I'd like reform to be properly thought through and not rushed off. I'd like politicians to actually do their damned job, have discussions with those from other parties and genuinely work together to craft legislation that is in the interests of a greater proportion of the population instead of what is practically a "pay-to-play" pseudo-democracy we have now.

The Swiss are generally very happy with their electoral model apart from the influence of big money within it. We probably will never go remotely as far as that regarding citizen empowerment, but this notion that a strong leader is appealing only seems likely as our model doesn't represent us properly at all.

[Well b back 3,281]

3 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Whilst in this instance I would obviously be delighted to see the Tories kicked out, that poll does highlight how utterly dysfunctional our electoral system is when our representatives can get elected on 28% of the vote and it is quite possible, indeed likely, that the next Government can get elected by a low- mid 30s percentage of the vote, as has happened in the past and is even more likely now by virtue of us having more small but still significant parties splitting off votes from Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee.

TheLib Dem should stand down, with an agreement with Labour to do likewise somewhere where it will beinefit the Lib Dem’s 

Edited July 3, 2023 by Well b back

[Barbe bleu 833]

7 hours ago, Well b back said:

TheLib Dem should stand down, with an agreement with Labour to do likewise somewhere where it will beinefit the Lib Dem’s 

Won't happen for a by election.   There is too much to lose and too little to gain. 

I've a bit of a bet on with CM that libs and labs will use the run of votes to make their own case as strongly as they can and put tactics to one side.

[Herman 9,837]

From The Times.

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

Sh!t (lidderaallee) got serious.

 

[Yellow Fever 3,839]

3 hours ago, Herman said:

From The Times.

Like it Herman - The long room @ Lords. A few members to be barred I think.

As to the 'New' Conservatives certifiable I think. I guess we'll just have to make compulsory bottom wiping and care home training for all pensioners so they can look after each other - they'll be nobody else.

Did cross my mind if we could deport this rabble element back to the 1960s and 70s (with of course the low level of benefits of those days) it would significantly help net migration and improve the quality of the remaining workforce.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

Sh!t (lidderaallee) got serious.

 

Oh No. Henley ruined? Can't have that. the Bollingers won't cool off properly in water that is not clean. Divert it toward the peasants further up the river.

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

Mhairi wins PMQ's.

 

Edited July 5, 2023 by A Load of Squit

[canarydan23 4,060]

On 03/07/2023 at 15:00, Well b back said:

TheLib Dem should stand down, with an agreement with Labour to do likewise somewhere where it will beinefit the Lib Dem’s 

They should. But Labour won't go for it. Because Starmer.

[Yellow Fever 3,839]

I see the Jingle and Mingle Christmas party is back, as are Johnson's WhatsApp messages!

For Sunak, I'm afraid Johnson and his parties are the ghost of Christmas past that just won't go away.

Heaven help him when ghost of Christmas present makes an appearance (the New Conservatives), let alone that of Christmas 'Yet to Come'. The funeral scene of the Tory party..... 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Yellow Fever

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I see the Jingle and Mingle Christmas party is back, as are Johnson's WhatsApp messages!

For Sunak, I'm afraid Johnson and his parties are the ghost of Christmas past that just won't go away.

Heaven help him when ghost of Christmas present makes an appearance (the New Conservatives), let alone that of Christmas 'Yet to Come'. The funeral scene of the Tory party..... 

Jingle and Mingle may well become Wakey Wakey and Wake.

[Yellow Fever 3,839]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

I see the Jingle and Mingle Christmas party is back, as are Johnson's WhatsApp messages!

For Sunak, I'm afraid Johnson and his parties are the ghost of Christmas past that just won't go away.

Heaven help him when ghost of Christmas present makes an appearance (the New Conservatives), let alone that of Christmas 'Yet to Come'. The funeral scene of the Tory party..... 

 

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Jingle and Mingle may well become Wakey Wakey and Wake.

Looking at the markets just now factoring in UK BoE base rates expected of 6.5% at Christmas/early Spring (let alone mortgage rates) - I'm thinking the Ghost of Christmas (present) 2023 is going to be terrible to behold for Sunak, the Tories and the economy in general.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Edited July 6, 2023 by Yellow Fever

[Herman 9,837]

👀👀👀

This is a real tweet.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 minutes ago, Herman said:

👀👀👀

This is a real tweet.

It was your Government closed the schools during the pandemic missus.

 

[Well b back 3,281]

I see the government have lost the Johnson watts app case. Yet more taxpayers money down the drain.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66123656

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

11 hours ago, Well b back said:

I see the government have lost the Johnson watts app case. Yet more taxpayers money down the drain.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66123656

Who is Johnson going to take down with him? Hancock has gone. Raab has gone. Gove is fireproof. Eustice has gone as has Javid. Shapps and Dowden remain.

[dylanisabaddog 5,013]

18 hours ago, Herman said:

👀👀👀

This is a real tweet.

Interesting tweet on the subject by RS Archer 

[Yellow Fever 3,839]

48 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Who is Johnson going to take down with him? Hancock has gone. Raab has gone. Gove is fireproof. Eustice has gone as has Javid. Shapps and Dowden remain.

He's taken the old Tory party lock stock and barrel. That's what happens when you do a deal with the populist devil! Going down.

Edited July 7, 2023 by Yellow Fever

[TheGunnShow 6,019]

Dowden will probably go, as Mhairi Black hilariously nailed him in - I think - PMQs.

[Well b back 3,281]

6 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Who is Johnson going to take down with him? Hancock has gone. Raab has gone. Gove is fireproof. Eustice has gone as has Javid. Shapps and Dowden remain.

Sunak

[Daz Sparks 1,186]

Jug ears squirming copiously!

(Morally bankrupt and corrupt b'stard BTW)

Edited July 8, 2023 by Daz Sparks

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

So she didn't die in vain.