Sir Jim

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 25 minutes ago
The incumbent Executive in the HofC has the same power to legislate with a slim majority as much as they do with a 'massive' majority.

All this talk of stoping Labour wiinning their huge majority is part of the the desperate death throes of the dying Tory party and it's Press machine trying to scaremonger their traditional voters to think about not abandoning them. I'd be very happy with a Tory wipeout in the GE and its nothing more than they Tories deserve for the way they have governed the UK in the last decade.

What is undemocratic in my opinion is a 48/52% winner-takes-all, yes or no, popular vote, with not concessions paid watsoever to the 48%... who get absolutely nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bollox. If it was 52% win with the outcome you wanted you wouldn't care about the 48% of losers.

If Boris, Farage et al were saying "yes we lost but we got 48% so we want some concessions" you would be directing them to the democratic process in which they just lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like I dont care if Tories get whiped out.

comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 25 minutes ago
The incumbent Executive in the HofC has the same power to legislate with a slim majority as much as they do with a 'massive' majority.

All this talk of stoping Labour wiinning their huge majority is part of the the desperate death throes of the dying Tory party and it's Press machine trying to scaremonger their traditional voters to think about not abandoning them. I'd be very happy with a Tory wipeout in the GE and its nothing more than they Tories deserve for the way they have governed the UK in the last decade.

What is undemocratic in my opinion is a 48/52% winner-takes-all, yes or no, popular vote, with not concessions paid watsoever to the 48%... who get absolutely nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bollox. If it was 52% win with the outcome you wanted you wouldn't care about the 48% of losers.

If Boris, Farage et al were saying "yes we lost but we got 48% so we want some concessions" you would be directing them to the democratic process in which they just lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like I dont care if Tories get whiped out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well exactly. You and others don't really care about the process and what, in your opinion, is undemocratic. It's just noise from a disgruntled "loser".

If this undemocratic system kept the Tories in power then it's a busted flush.

If the same system destroys them, then youll be rejoicing, not calling for systemic change.

You are so wed to your allegiances, that is all that truly matters to you and the effectiveness or fairness of the process within which they operate is spun depending on whether it suits you or works against you.

I look forward to hearing you bang the electoral reform drum once Labour romp to victory.... but I wont be holding my breathe.

*breath

Can’t speak for RBW, but I can definitely speak for myself, RR and rosso and there’s not a facking chance we’ll stay quiet on PR when Labour win a landslide.

comment by Darren The String Fletcher (U10026)
posted 1 hour ago
Can’t speak for RBW, but I can definitely speak for myself, RR and rosso and there’s not a facking chance we’ll stay quiet on PR when Labour win a landslide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

And you'll be voting Lib Dem then?

Sir Jim Ratcliffe: “The net spend since the departure of Sir Alex Ferguson and David Gill is £1.1billion”.

“Real Madrid’s is £200m and today they have 6 or 7 players valued at over £100m. United have none. And they have made the new Bernabeu…”, told
@Bloomberg
.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 36 minutes ago
comment by Darren The String Fletcher (U10026)
posted 1 hour ago
Can’t speak for RBW, but I can definitely speak for myself, RR and rosso and there’s not a facking chance we’ll stay quiet on PR when Labour win a landslide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

And you'll be voting Lib Dem then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. And this is a typically trivial from you again.

You’ve made a strawman regarding the arguments over PR, accusing people of only saving that criticism for the Tories and won’t for Labour.

I’m pointing out this won’t happen, and there’s facking millions of people that vote Labour, or used to, that have been criticising Labour’s attitude to PR for years.

Periodical reminder that the Labour Party membership voted in favour of the introduction of PR at conference in 2022, only to be effectively overruled (again) by the party executive.

Even the unions are now overwhelmingly supportive of a shift to PR.

Which won’t change with a Labour majority of any given size.

Party unable to wrestle power from Tories despite the Tories making it easy for them vote in favour of PR system which will favour them. It's hardly a surprising stance from the membership and goes to my point that the motivation is primarily self serving. As is the party's response to their memberships demand

It's like all the chasing clubs wanting financial restrictions which impact the dominant city, while citychallenge what they consider harms them. Fans and party membership alike totally partisan

I see the pros and cons of PR.

Many who have written here want it under a banner of democracy and some of the strong wording given, like "our undemoctratic FPTP system" more than implies that it should be a top priority to first instal a more democratic voting system because without it large majority Govts can be undemocratic in pushing through whatever they want.

Yet despite the fundamental importance of the issue, people do not hold their party to account. As some have highlighted the membership want it but even Corbyn wasn't prepared to make it even an aspiration let alone a pledge.

And once Labour are in power it won't be meaningful conversation being held, and why would any ruling party bring in something that will weaken their hand and dilute their support.

You can call me a cynic but a lot of what I say comes from decades of observation. I am not an activist. I don't go on marches etc, i observe and form a view. Others are more informed active and passionate and I respect views of these people. What I often push back against is those who talk big but actually do nothing. PR is an issue where talk is cheap. An issue that goes to the very heart of the 'democratic health' of our system.
People speak strongly against our undemocratic 2 party system but nothing changes and despite their party sitting on their hands their allegiance remains unwavering. While the system favours the big 2 their supporters are never going to truly force the issue to the top of any agenda. That is why my view is that people's motivations are not as pure as they suggest (or believe in their own minds) and there will be an element of self serving in forming an opinion. If it was backed up by real action then I'd see my view was wrong.