Let's Get Political!

[Sir red ken]

put the beer down SRK

yeah OK

[Reg Smeeton]

 At the start of this thread.... the question was asked for I think 2015 election what were the main issues.... I suggested climate change.   

 So in my book it's good to see young school students in a variety of countries being prepared to take strike action to raise awareness, of what after all is what they are going to inherit, or not if the predicted disasters hit.

 What say you TEF political threaders? 

[RobertT]

Trump saw some snow on TV, Climate Change is off.

[Wobbly Bob]

 So in my book it's good to see young school students in a variety of countries being prepared to take strike action to raise awareness, of what after all is what they are going to inherit, or not if the predicted disasters hit.

 

Anything that earns disapproval in a Sun editorial can only be a good thing.

[Sir red ken]

With only a matter of weeks to go "this shit just got real" we all need to be taking this advice. 

A special weekend to be held at the government-backed Emergency Planning College, in North Yorkshire, will teach attendees how to cope with Brexit.
Dealing with prolonged food shortages, surviving mass blackouts, and emergency first aid will all be taught by a team of eight field-specific experts. So too will unarmed combat, self-defence and urban foraging – just in case law and order breaks down. Among the advice to be dished out on the course – set to include a combination of classroom and outdoor lessons – is that dog food is actually edible for human consumption in emergencies; and a candle and a ceramic plant pot can be turned into an effective makeshift heater.
Dark days ahead my STFC friends. Start stocking up with Dog food and Candles now! Article from The Independent today.

[pauld]

Another gobshite billionaire Brexiteer hypocrite makes sure his fortune's safe from the impact of Brexit or from having to pay tax to the Britain he was oh so patriotic about during the Leave campaign:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/17/brexiter-jim-ratcliffe-uk-richest-man-plans-save-4bn-pounds-tax-monaco-move

[Reg Smeeton]

   So as predicted somewhere back in this thread, a split in the Labour Party as 7 MP's quit.  A shame, but always likely.  In the words of Alexei Sayle... "what d'ya think of Shirley Williams.... I want to go to the toilet."

[Nemo]

   So as predicted somewhere back in this thread, a split in the Labour Party as 7 MP's quit.  A shame, but always likely.  In the words of Alexei Sayle... "what d'ya think of Shirley Williams.... I want to go to the toilet."

Without getting into a discussion about the electoral system that makes this unlikely, it would seem like the best possible result for British politics is both major parties splitting to leave a left wing Corbynite Labour, a Social Democratic Blairite party, a One Nation Tory party and a hard right Brexiteer's Alliance. Then at least people could actually vote for something resembling what they want rather than just the big tent they hate least.

[Ardiles]

More than ever, this highlights the failure of the First Past the Post electoral system, which encourages political groupings or parties to stay together when, in fact, it would be better for all concerned if they fragmented.  All that has happened today is that one particular political grouping has reached breaking point.  It would have happened long ago under a proportional system of voting, because the perverse incentive to remain together would not have existed.

The Tories, of course, will profit from this under the present system, so will fight any move towards PR.  But if the process of fragmentation continues, it will become increasingly apparent that the current system - which can only work fairly or effectively in a two party system - is not fit for purpose.

[Reg Smeeton]

More than ever, this highlights the failure of the First Past the Post electoral system, which encourages political groupings or parties to stay together when, in fact, it would be better for all concerned if they fragmented.  All that has happened today is that one particular political grouping has reached breaking point.  It would have happened long ago under a proportional system of voting, because the perverse incentive to remain together would not have existed.

The Tories, of course, will profit from this under the present system, so will fight any move towards PR.  But if the process of fragmentation continues, it will become increasingly apparent that the current system - which can only work fairly or effectively in a two party system - is not fit for purpose.

Although logically you're correct... if you think about how things might work with coalition governments, it kind of amounts to the same, people with some different ideas under a broader tent,  united by being in it for their own ends.

A classic example was 2010 to 2015... when your lot, were happy to prop up a Tory government, in contravention of the mandate they'd been elected on.  The reason.... ministerial cars, and nice juicy jobs in banking, PR, media etc, when getting ditched by the voters.  Failing that.... a nice wedge of expenses in the House of Lords.

These 7 know they'll be de-selected, so may as well quit, if they had integrity.... they'd put their platform immediately to the electorate.

[Ardiles]

Agree to a point, but (a) they were my lot, but weren't last time around.  (They might become my lot again one day.)  And (b) comment on the Lib Dems' participation in the coalition is very black & white, in my view.  They did all the things you mention above, and a lot of good things as well.  I won't try to list them all here, but compare the coalition government (2010-15) with the ones that followed (2015-).  The Lib Dem influence on that coalition government is far too easily overlooked.  Of course they were always going to be the junior partner, but they did exert influence.

The traditional argument against PR is that it leads to weak government.  I don't think I need to develop that point any further, do I?

[Reg Smeeton]

Agree to a point, but (a) they were my lot, but weren't last time around.  (They might become my lot again one day.)  And (b) comment on the Lib Dems' participation in the coalition is very black & white, in my view.  They did all the things you mention above, and a lot of good things as well.  I won't try to list them all here, but compare the coalition government (2010-15) with the ones that followed (2015-).  The Lib Dem influence on that coalition government is far too easily overlooked.  Of course they were always going to be the junior partner, but they did exert influence.

The traditional argument against PR is that it leads to weak government.  I don't think I need to develop that point any further, do I?

I'm pro PR, but see that it can lead to coalitions, which are in effect what you get under FPTP.... for example, the Tory Party has been riven for years by its war between Europhiles and Europhobes.... so under PR you could well get a Tory/UKIP type coaltion, which is more or less what the Tory Party is today.

Further, the reason why Cameron called the ref, was an attempt to defeat the UKIP wing, and prevent more defections to the right.

[Ardiles]

Under FPTP, the coalitions are more rigid and inflexible.  FPTP disenfranchises millions of voters.  It's had its day.

[Reg Smeeton]

Under FPTP, the coalitions are more rigid and inflexible.  FPTP disenfranchises millions of voters.  It's had its day.

I wouldn't be so sure in the 2011 referendum on the subject, if we take Swindon as a barometer, something psephologists often do,  we find only 39% of people could be bothered to vote and 70% of those wanted to keep FPTP.

[Nemo]

I wouldn't be so sure in the 2011 referendum on the subject, if we take Swindon as a barometer, something psephologists often do,  we find only 39% of people could be bothered to vote and 70% of those wanted to keep FPTP.

Did anyone think that referendum was anything other than a vote on whether or not people liked Nick Clegg?