Your voting intentions

[turbobloke]

MC Bodge said:

Kermit power said:

turbobloke said:

It looks very much as though you're seekng excuses for impostition, essentially totalitarianism. I'm not ignoring paradoxes or timeloops or anything else. If neither of the two parties will put PR as a front-line aspect of their manifesto, or otherwise be willing to impose PR, it's not going to happen, so as I posted previously, it's not going to happen.

If a referendum was called, and I mentioned AV not because I thought it was PR but because there's been a referendum on it, the chances of PR winning out are also remote, given AV was roundly rejected.

These two points together are why I also posted previously that it's fine to look at such things in theory, but it's not going to happen. Like brexit, this means those who want something else will need to accept reality.

When PR supporters have enough backing from an electable third Party (e.g, LibDems in a previous life before they imploded on brexit) then it'll become a realistic possibility. Until then things will carry on as now.

Might I suggest you go and Google the meaning of Totalitarianism?

By your definition of the word, the fall of the Berlin wall was a Totalitarian imposition because the government of the GDR never held a referendum on it!

Yes, completely bonkers. There are some crazy posts on PH aren't there?

No need to look up anything, your suggestion / assertion is a transparent smear and, ,with the metoo gallery response, make for poor substitutes for anything relevant. If those in power impose change on the electorate outside of the normal democratic means, it's a totalitarian act.

We don't need to be in China to see this in action. There were examples when we were in the EU including their role in the imposition of an unelected leader in Italy - the cabinet proposed had no elected representatives - see also Rigor Montis. Also their active pursuit of seditious libel, a monstrous concept with criticism of the EU deemed unlawful and the worst crime being committed when the criticism is completely true. Look that up.

The Berlin Wall falling wasn't anything to do with government diktat, quite the opposite, so use of totalitarian in this context is bizarre and inverts reality. It was an act by citizens opposing a totalitarian regime. It's hilarious to see anybody agreeing with such an absurd notion - desperate knee jerk stuff.

There has been rising support for PR in polls as the parliamentary constipation of Bercow's time during brexit has faded. Even so, surveys didn't match well with the actual vote in the AV referendum. Tthat's about surveys, not a claim that AV is PR, which was more desperation in action. In a similar vein we see this:
Labour must learn from its old mistakes and commit to fairer elections (comment: fairer, subjective / vague waffle)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/proportional-repr...
and this:
Proportional representation would spell disaster for Labour. Party members should reject it.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep...

The "many philosophical arguments that can be made against PR" section is worth a read.Politicians won't sign their own Party's death warrant and politics is a good approximation to the art of the possible.. As a result, PR won't arrive any time soon democratically, and I for one don't want PR any other way.

[CivicDuties]

turbobloke said:

Politicians won't sign their own Party's death warrant

Well I'm sorry to break it to you but it looks like that's exactly what the Tory party did over the last 5 years with its various batst crazy policies, ludicrous balloons in Ministerial posts, and, of course, the crowning turd in the sewage pipe, Brexit.

[Kermit power]

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Sure, I accept there's no equivalence and didn't clam it existed. I wasn't caught by an apples and oranges line as my point is that there was no appetite to replace FPTP.

There was no appetite to replace FPTP with AV.

Is replacing with AV not replacing?

If you were wearing horsehair underpants and I offered to replace them with underpants made of silk, I suspect you would view that differently to an offer to replace them with underpants made with stinging nettles and duct tape? Replacing would still be replacing!

You've seen the map showing how many countries use PR vs FPTP. I tried to find you one that shows where AV (more correctly called IRV, apparently) is used but there doesn't seem to be one because it's such a poor system!

It is used by the Aussies for elections to their House of Representatives, the Irish to elect their President and for by-elections to the Dail (they use STV PR in national elections), Papua New Guinea for parliamentary elections and the US States of Maine and Alaska for a small proportion of their Presidential, Congressional and Senatorial elections.

That's it. If FPTP is the horsehair underpants of electoral systems, AV is the nettles and duct tape.

[BoomerPride]

You can continue your "debate" on the OP's new poll here https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[768]

Evanivitch said:

the-photographer said:

FPTP worldwide

That's only 1.5Bn people, what do they know!

I'd imagine India alone is nearly that.

Do I see Yemen there, Oman and Qatar? I suspect not all of these FPTP systems are quite used in the same way that might be expected of a notionally democratic system. But I'm not that swayed by the geographical coverage argument, the equivalent map for PR has Russia on it.

[Super Sonic]

S600BSB said:

It’s not really PH though is it - just NP&E.

True.

[Super Sonic]

Gecko1978 said:

Plus many who post often are left leaning.

Many who post often are right leaning too.
Do you think the left leaning posters are in the majority, but haven't bothered with this poll?

Edited by Super Sonic on Tuesday 18th June 17:16

[turbobloke]

An intriguing and concerning article from Lord Ashcroft for voters to consider and for Starmer's first in-tray.

https://www.lordashcroft.com/2024/06/express-comme...


In other news the PH poll lead for Labour has slipped to 6% having started around 20%.

[blueg33]

I have voted.


Not sure the PH poll is representative of anything outside of a very particular bubble

[turbobloke]

blueg33 said:

I have voted.


Not sure the PH poll is representative of anything outside of a very particular bubble

Nor am I, but find the trend interesting. I noted the initial 20 point gap which quickly became 10 then more slowly 9, 8. 7 and now 6.

[uk66fastback]

It's probably incredibly daft - but I have £5 on a hung parliament ... hearing these IPSOS polls makes me think it was a fiver thrown away but you never know ... !

[turbobloke]

There's more this morning from Lord Ashcroft.

Lord A said:

A woman in one of my focus groups last week said that if she had nothing to go on but the leaflets that came through her door, and if these had no party logos, she would probably vote Conservative. This, in fact, she had no intention of doing.

It’s not the Tory policies people don’t like…it’s the Tory party

[Evanivitch]

turbobloke said:

There's more this morning from Lord Ashcroft.

Lord A said:

A woman in one of my focus groups last week said that if she had nothing to go on but the leaflets that came through her door, and if these had no party logos, she would probably vote Conservative. This, in fact, she had no intention of doing.

It’s not the Tory policies people don’t like…it’s the Tory party

If you're in an abusive relationship for 14 years, you don't suddenly start believing promises for the future.

[turbobloke]

Evanivitch said:

turbobloke said:

There's more this morning from Lord Ashcroft.

Lord A said:

A woman in one of my focus groups last week said that if she had nothing to go on but the leaflets that came through her door, and if these had no party logos, she would probably vote Conservative. This, in fact, she had no intention of doing.

It’s not the Tory policies people don’t like…it’s the Tory party

If you're in an abusive relationship for 14 years, you don't suddenly start believing promises for the future.

There's no evidence in the focus group report from Lord A that any focus group members described being in an abusive relationship with a political Party for 14 years, that's your fictional failed analogy. One of the focus group disliked members of the political Party, and via his choice of headline Lord A implies they're not alone, which is hardly surprising but a less than ideal basis for voting one way or another as individual politicians are here today gone tomorrow.

This was equally interesting among the snippets: "Looking at those who say they are more likely than not to vote for a particular party, we find Labour well ahead on 43 per cent and Reform UK drawing level with the Tories on 18 per cent each."

[Pan Pan Pan]

Starmers sound bite that the tories have had 14 years of failure, does not compute. If the tories had been failing for 14 years they would not have won subsequent elections, since they got into No10. Clearly something went wrong in the last few years of their stay in No10. Although arguably the first thing that went wrong was keeping Johnson on as PM, especially as he appeared to be being worked from behind, by Cummings and Carrie.

[Louis Balfour]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Starmers sound bite that the tories have had 14 years of failure, does not compute. If the tories had been failing for 14 years they would not have won subsequent elections, since they got into No10. Clearly something went wrong in the last few years of their stay in No10. Although arguably the first thing that went wrong was keeping Johnson on as PM, especially as he appeared to be being worked from behind, by Cummings and Carrie.

A buffoon worked from behind by two squabbling nutters.

[Evanivitch]

turbobloke said:

There's no evidence in the focus group report from Lord A that any focus group members described being in an abusive relationship with a political Party for 14 years, that's your fictional failed analogy.

I'm not sure how an analogy can be fictional and failed, given it's neither intended to be a documentary or goal orientated.

turbobloke said:

One of the focus group disliked members of the political Party, and via his choice of headline Lord A implies they're not alone, which is hardly surprising but a less than ideal basis for voting one way or another as individual politicians are here today gone tomorrow.

Why do you think members of the Tory parliamentary group are disliked?

[Evanivitch]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Starmers sound bite that the tories have had 14 years of failure, does not compute. If the tories had been failing for 14 years they would not have won subsequent elections, since they got into No10. Clearly something went wrong in the last few years of their stay in No10. Although arguably the first thing that went wrong was keeping Johnson on as PM, especially as he appeared to be being worked from behind, by Cummings and Carrie.

2015 every was still hanging onto austerity. It'll work, just give it time, they cried. Did it? I think the evidence we have today is pretty clear.

2019 Labour were the most non-credible alternative in their history.

[S600BSB]

uk66fastback said:

It's probably incredibly daft - but I have £5 on a hung parliament ... hearing these IPSOS polls makes me think it was a fiver thrown away but you never know ... !

Are you a prospective Tory candidate? I ask because there seems to be a lot of this betting malarkey going on.

[JagLover]

Evanivitch said:

2015 every was still hanging onto austerity. It'll work, just give it time, they cried. Did it? I think the evidence we have today is pretty clear.
.

Is it?

Public finances were looking much healthier and then everyone decided it would be a great idea to shut down the economy and spend £400bn dealing with the consequences.