This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
2024 General Election
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 silvertop  Portishead 05 Jul 24 1.38pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Vectis
The average turnout was 60%. Labour got 35% of the votes. So only 21% of those who were eligible to vote in fact voted for Labour (60% x 35%). That enables them to have total control of Parliament even though 79% of those eligible to vote did not choose them. Then add in a party getting half a million more votes than another and getting only 4 seats against 71 and the question needs asking is this effective democracy in action? The other question to ask is have you voted Tory in the past where they enjoyed a similar unearned beano, and did you complain then?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| silvertop Portishead 05 Jul 24 1.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
For all it's faults I still prefer FTTP even though I voted Reform. PR may be "fairer" but often leads to minority parties holding the balance of power, err no thanks. I accept that Labour have won and have the right to govern, that wont stop me moaning about their policies though, which is my right. What if it is Reform who hold the balance of power?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 05 Jul 24 2.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
What if it is Reform who hold the balance of power? I've already answered that question in my post.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 05 Jul 24 2.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
The stalemate and political horse trading that often follows PR could also be described as a necessary compromise between differing views. Surely that means that more people are being included in the decision making? So more are engaged in the process. Having governments able to dominate with less than 35% of the votes isn’t healthy. Although it produces modified programmes it also ensures extremes are kept at bay.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 05 Jul 24 2.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The stalemate and political horse trading that often follows PR could also be described as a necessary compromise between differing views. Surely that means that more people are being included in the decision making? So more are engaged in the process. Having governments able to dominate with less than 35% of the votes isn’t healthy. Although it produces modified programmes it also ensures extremes are kept at bay. And backroom deals isn't healthy either. Just ask the Lib Dems voters in 2010 who thought they were voting for scrapping tuition fees. Then ask the Remainers about the Tory DUP coalition a lot of them thought that was wrong. The only way coalition government can work is if the parties involved set out their key conditions for coalition before the election. Even then I have very little faith they will keep them.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 05 Jul 24 2.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The stalemate and political horse trading that often follows PR could also be described as a necessary compromise between differing views. Surely that means that more people are being included in the decision making? So more are engaged in the process. Having governments able to dominate with less than 35% of the votes isn’t healthy. Although it produces modified programmes it also ensures extremes are kept at bay. It might also produce the most useless centrist inertia challenged disaster. What is needed is MPs fear of losing their jobs. Farage might not have many seats, but he has a significant chunk of support from voters. Along with what is left of the Tories, they can pressure Labour to tackle the issues that people really care about instead of being their usual identity driven, over spending, ideological selves. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (05 Jul 2024 3.30pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 05 Jul 24 3.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
It might also produce the most useless centrist inertia challenged disaster. What is needed is MPs fear of losing their jobs. Farage might not have many seats, but he has a significant chunk of support from voters. Along with what is left of the Tories, they can pressure Labour to tackle the issues that people really care about instead of being their usual identity driven, over spending, ideological selves. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (05 Jul 2024 2.43pm) What it actually delivers is stability with only minor divergencies each Parliament. Which might be boring but actually can deliver progress as less time is spent undoing what the “last lot” did. We already have unofficial coalitions within Parties with the horse trading done in private. Surely better to have more smaller parties that are genuine and honest and then ensure the level of support for each is fairly represented.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 05 Jul 24 3.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
What it actually delivers is stability with only minor divergencies each Parliament. Which might be boring but actually can deliver progress as less time is spent undoing what the “last lot” did. We already have unofficial coalitions within Parties with the horse trading done in private. Surely better to have more smaller parties that are genuine and honest and then ensure the level of support for each is fairly represented. Well, it's not going to happen. Neither main party will encourage it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Vectis 05 Jul 24 3.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
The other question to ask is have you voted Tory in the past where they enjoyed a similar unearned beano, and did you complain then? Yes and yes to each question and I voted for PR when there was some kind of referendum on it a few years ago
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| eaglesdare 05 Jul 24 4.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Funny that those on the "right" accept the democratic decision. But if it went the other way those looney lefties would be out rioting by now.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rob1969 Banstead Surrey 05 Jul 24 5.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The stalemate and political horse trading that often follows PR could also be described as a necessary compromise between differing views. Surely that means that more people are being included in the decision making? So more are engaged in the process. Having governments able to dominate with less than 35% of the votes isn’t healthy. Although it produces modified programmes it also ensures extremes are kept at bay. The only time in recent decades that a UK government represented 50%+% of the votes cast was 2010 with the coalition government,
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rob1969 Banstead Surrey 05 Jul 24 5.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Palace Old Geezer
Yes Stirling, this is one of the most depressing facts from this election. It's interesting that there isn't the air of excitement around this morning like there was when Blair got in. Let's see how quickly the country turns on Starmer if he doesn't fulfil his manifesto on time. It was so vague we probably wont know - unless/when it hits our pockets.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.