- Joined
- 9 May 2020
- Messages
- 7,395
- Reaction score
- 136
- Country
The PR system that was offered was rejected. There was only one system offered despite there being many different options available.
Rapists 1 Protesters 0 Government votes to curb protesting but not rapists
- Thread starter SirGalahad
- Start date
Sponsored Links
what would happen say if the turn out for voting at any general election was less than 50%
say only 45% of the electorate actually bothered to vote ???
If 55% of the electorate can't be bothered to get off their lazy arses and go to the polling station then it is their fault, and their fault alone if they get a government they do not like. Don't vote? Then don't complain.
To clarify: Under the First Past the Post system, the person receiving the largest number of votes of all the votes cast is deemed to be duly elected. In other words, if only 100 people (in a constituency of 200,000) voted and 51 votes went to candidate A, candidate A would be elected. The fact that 199,900 electors failed to exercise their democratic right to vote is of no consequence whatsoever.
Proportional representation, much loved by the Franco-German Dictatorship (sorry, I meant to write European Union) is a recipe for hung parliaments and the problems they create. Preferential representation, however, where you place "1" against your first choice, "2" against the second "3" against the third etc., will (eventually) give a majority to one candidate, who will be elected and represent (by preference) the majority of the electorate. But, of course, non-voters will not be included.
So should voting be made compulsory? Maybe. If you don't like any of the candidates (or their policies and political persuasions) you can always write ******* across your ballot paper. But you have exercised your democratic right to vote (or not)
Why not?
Why is 55% not a majority?
Perhaps none of candidates is worth voting for.
As I said, MPs frequently abstain. Is that because they can't be bothered to get off their lazy arses ?
Sponsored Links
I really don't see anything wrong with the current system of voting. In 1997 when I voted Labour, I got a Labour Govt, When I changed to Conservative I voted for and got a Conservative Govt. When I voted for Brexit, I got it, and am more than happy with the result and progress so far.
I sympathise with people who don't get what they voted for naturally, but tough ****, if you lost, move on. I'm not a fan of PR, the main cheer leaders are a minority voting for a minority appeal, be careful what you wish for, a Parliament consisting of George Galloways and Nigel Farages is what you'll end up with, or a hung Parliament that can't get anything done.
First past the post works for me, winners and losers, what's not to like.
I sympathise with people who don't get what they voted for naturally, but tough ****, if you lost, move on. I'm not a fan of PR, the main cheer leaders are a minority voting for a minority appeal, be careful what you wish for, a Parliament consisting of George Galloways and Nigel Farages is what you'll end up with, or a hung Parliament that can't get anything done.
First past the post works for me, winners and losers, what's not to like.
No, a simple majority of the votes cast. If idle socialists can't be bothered to drag their sorry arses out of bed to vote, they lose.
Well, we don't actually vote for the Government so there would have been the same results had you not voted or even if you had wanted the reverse.
As for the referendum, you and yours have ensured that there will never be another on anything that really matters.
There's democracy; 'they' only normally allow it when it makes no difference.
Labour and Tories take it in turn - except is this the most socialist government there has ever been?
Fair enough, but -
I have always lived in really safe seats (both sides) so my vote never made any difference.
As for your comment about the unions (or one) funding Labour; they started the party.
Last edited:
Johnson was first given the job of Prime Minister by a very small number of mostly elderly people who were members of the Conservative party. 160 MPs and 92,153 members.
The electorate had for some reason voted for a government led by some Strong and Stable woman. The country had no say in Johnson getting the job.
Some TV debates were arranged but Johnson refused to attend half of them.
In November 2019 Johnson did attend a debate on Question Time, and the audience laughed at him when he referred to honesty. The sycophantic broadcaster shamefully edited out the laughter from the extract broadcast on the News bulletin. Johnson has a habit of hiding from serious questioning, for example by shutting himself in a fridge, and by refusing to appear on news programmes.
The electorate had for some reason voted for a government led by some Strong and Stable woman. The country had no say in Johnson getting the job.
Some TV debates were arranged but Johnson refused to attend half of them.
In November 2019 Johnson did attend a debate on Question Time, and the audience laughed at him when he referred to honesty. The sycophantic broadcaster shamefully edited out the laughter from the extract broadcast on the News bulletin. Johnson has a habit of hiding from serious questioning, for example by shutting himself in a fridge, and by refusing to appear on news programmes.
- Joined
- 9 May 2020
- Messages
- 7,395
- Reaction score
- 136
- Country
The Proportional system discussed in your comment does tend to give rise to more stable, long-term, compromise governments.
Compromise being needed to govern effectively. And politicians in general tend to vote along their own preferences, rather than party lines.
Whereas the FPTP system produces a series of extreme flip-flop style government which not only creates its own problems, but also provides an imaginary enemy on which to lay the blame for successive failures, and convenient diversionary arguments to deflect any criticism, such as is frequently illustrated in this forum, e.g. Corbyn, Abbot, Marxism, racist, greed, power-hungry, etc.
Indeed they did, with the help of Robert Tressle, and what a great achievement that was for the working classes.
Times change though.
Unite reducing their funding to Labour by a million because they haven't got Jeremy Corbyn, when the majority of Unite members aren't even Labour voters?
I can't help feeling the unions have lost their way a little.
either you like failure or you are totally divorced from reality.
brexit is an abject and unbelievable failure.......God knows what "progress" you think there is
nothing if you are a billionaire
Sponsored Links
