PDA

View Full Version : Well?


tony draper
26th Mar 2014, 20:35
Personally I think Nigel flung the Cleg creature over the lectern and gave him a dammed good seeing too,but then I would because I hate loath and despise the EU with every fiber of my being.
:rolleyes:

500N
26th Mar 2014, 20:36
Link ?


Was this the Cameron / whoever EU debate ?

tony draper
26th Mar 2014, 20:40
Yup the debate was just on,
Sorry dont have a link for Sky News Channel
:)

Gertrude the Wombat
26th Mar 2014, 21:55
Was this the Cameron / whoever EU debate ?
Except that I thought I heard that Cameron had chickened out, and was therefore the loser, before it even started (no matter who you think might have won).

500N
26th Mar 2014, 21:56
Yes, I was going by a headline I saw on the front page of the DM :rolleyes:

Ronald Reagan
26th Mar 2014, 22:12
Nigel was brilliant as always. I especially loved his comments on Ukraine.
There is at least one good British politician!


Nigel Farage Says EU Has 'Bloody Hands' Over Ukraine Crisis During LBC Debate With Nick Clegg (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/26/nigel-farage-says-eu-has-blood-on-hands-in-ukraine-during-lbc-debate_n_5037811.html)

Dak Man
26th Mar 2014, 22:37
link to debate

The LBC Leaders' Debate - Watch In Full | LBC (http://www.lbc.co.uk/watch-lbc-leaders-debate-live---26th-march-87667)

acbus1
27th Mar 2014, 08:34
How did Clegg fool so many people at the last election?

Because he was the best of a bad bunch.

Stick Nigel on the stage during the 2015 televised election debates and he'll make them all look like the toss**s they are.

...which is why it won't happen.

tony draper
27th Mar 2014, 08:48
After the debate the London media fluffies closing ranks desperately trying to say it was Cleg who ere triumphed ere, by a little bit,after all Nigel looked sweaty and red faced( a sure sign of being a oink) the idea that some outsider would come in and upset their cosy incestuous mutual arse kissing relationship with the existing political establishment fills them with horror.
Not much being mentioned on the news channels this morning either,another sign the great unwashed in the poll picked the wrong winner and should not be encouraged
:rolleyes:

teeteringhead
27th Mar 2014, 12:10
How did Clegg fool so many people at the last election? He only had to fool two: Call-me-Dave and the North British Cyclops.

They were clearly both aware (quite correctly) that overall majorities were unlikely; so the most frequent phrase from both of them in the three way TV debates was:

"I agree with Nick!" :yuk::yuk:

A reminder of seats won (out of 650)

Tory - 306 (+97)

Labour - 258 (-91)

Lib Dem - 57 (-5)

Capetonian
27th Mar 2014, 12:14
Looking at it neutrally, I thought both acquitted themselves quite honourably. From my perspective, as I loathe the LimpDems and find Clegg false and slimy, I thought Nigel Farage came out far better, and it seems the majority who viewed the debate would agree. Of course I am biased.

acbus1
27th Mar 2014, 12:15
Well, Tony, we'll just have to do our best to remind them who's in charge at General Election time.

Of course, we're up against an undemocratic voting system, which Clegg in effect did naff all to change after the last election.

awblain
27th Mar 2014, 12:22
Clegg got his referendum on PR, it just didn't give him the result he wanted.

By normalizing the bizarre idea of having referenda in the UK, he's also set the scene for a spectacularly foolish collective decision on leaving the EU should Lord Snooty get back in.

Lon More
27th Mar 2014, 12:29
Thank God it'll be irrelevant to Scotland whichever of them gets in :}

Lon More
27th Mar 2014, 19:11
Sorry, I don't taske money from children or the mentally challenged.

acbus1
29th Mar 2014, 05:59
Clegg got his referendum on PR

No he didn't!

We were given a choice between the undemocratic staus quo and a deliberate joke they knew nobody would vote for.

I voted for the joke. :E

acbus1
29th Mar 2014, 06:01
Clegg got his referendum on PR

...and answer this: Which of the two options we were give in the referendum even remotely resembled the 'PR' you so casually include in the above quote? :suspect:

acbus1
29th Mar 2014, 06:22
The great election fraud in pictures a child could understand. A shame that adults can't manage it:


Percentage of vote vs year of election

http://www.politicsresources.net/gif/percentgraph.png


Percentage of seats vs year of election

http://www.politicsresources.net/gif/seatshare.png


Source: Share of seats and votes in UK General Elections since 1945 (http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/percentvote.htm)

ORAC
29th Mar 2014, 07:48
The great election fraud in pictures a child could understand. A shame that adults can't manage it That's what happens in a FPTP majoritarian as opposed to a consensus PR system; it's not unfair, just different, and has it's own advantages.

The UK population was asked in a referendum if they wanted to vote for a PR system, it was rejected by a sizeable majority. A pity some people can't seem to understand.

acbus1
29th Mar 2014, 08:04
Wikipedia:

Proportional representation (PR) is a concept in voting systems used to elect an assembly or council. PR means that the number of seats won by a party or group of candidates is proportionate to the number of votes received. For example, under a PR voting system, if 30% of voters support a particular party then roughly 30% of seats will be won by that party.

Seems easy enough to me. The second graph in my previous post would match the first. In 1983 (as a good example) The Liberals would have had almost the same number of seats as Labour, perfectly reflecting the wishes of the voting public.

PR, as defined above, wasn't offered in the referendum. True democracy wasn't offered, therefore.

I'm not suggesting it is perfect, but it is democracy. Nothing else is.

ORAC
29th Mar 2014, 08:28
PLURALITY AND MAJORITARIAN ELECTORAL SYSTEMS (http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/researchpublications/bp334-e.htm#PLURALITYtxt)

tony draper
29th Mar 2014, 08:47
It also means we dont have to have a election every three weeks.:rolleyes:

Lon More
29th Mar 2014, 19:26
Thread title brought this to mind

Fleetwood Mac - Oh Well (FULL VERSION) - YouTube

Could you repeat that in English?

if you can't understand a simple statement in English I think my point is proven

Gertrude the Wombat
29th Mar 2014, 19:50
The UK population was asked in a referendum if they wanted to vote for a PR system
No, we were asked if we wanted to vote for something that wasn't really even a half-arsed compromise.

The FPTP lobby voted against because they prefer FPTP, the two party system, the whole dinosaur politics bit.

The PR lobby in part voted against because it wasn't PR. (There isn't, of course, any perfect PR system - in fact there's a mathematical proof which I read once which pupports to show that it's impossible to design a perfect PR system. So to be logical the PR perfectionist geeks would have voted against anything.)

There never was any lobby for AV in the first place.

So actually it's surprising that there were as many YES votes as there were. (With the benefit of hindsight and all that.)

Ancient Mariner
29th Mar 2014, 19:58
Santos 1970, Ancient Mariner 16 years old at the Suomi Bar, Maria Santos de Ribeira in his lap, band played Fleetwood Mac's Oh Well.
Memories. :{
Per

TomJoad
29th Mar 2014, 20:26
Have to say, I'm coming across so many examples of atrocious reading comprehension in here lately.............

Could be the problem is more localised.:E

llondel
29th Mar 2014, 20:41
No, we were asked if we wanted to vote for something that wasn't really even a half-arsed compromise.

That was my opinion of it too, I consider AV to be worse than FPTP so there's no way I'd have voted for that. It was a bit of clever political manoeuvring on the part of those who didn't want a change, by managing to make the alternative worse.

There should have been two questions, the first asking whether we should change, the second asking which system to use if we did change.

acbus1
30th Mar 2014, 05:55
Here's hoping that this time around, it'll be Farage in the same bargaining position as Clegg was last time. I doubt we'll witness the same extent, if any, of sellouts in exchange for token titles like (just for example, you understand) 'Deputy Prime Minister'.

Gertrude the Wombat
30th Mar 2014, 09:59
Here's hoping that this time around, it'll be Farage in the same bargaining position as Clegg was last time.
I don't think that getting a bunch of MEPs gives you any bargaining power at all. It didn't give UKIP any last time.

And their support will evaporate for the general election next year, as support for Euro-election parties of protest has done before (anyone remember some people called the "Greens"?) and people get back to serious politics.

(There is a bit of a difference this time, in that UKIP now has some county councillors in seats borrowed temporarily from the Tories. Several of whom have featured in the tabloid press for various crimes, scandals, re-defecting to the Tories, or just generally being bonkers. (Some are still in post as UKIP councillors.) One of the many many vital bits of party machinery that UKIP is currently lacking is an effective candidate vetting system.)

Capetonian
30th Mar 2014, 10:12
And their support will evaporate for the general election next year, as support for Euro-election parties of protest has done before (anyone remember some people called the "Greens"?) and people get back to serious politics.Somehow, I doubt it.
Serious politics ........ I don't think the UK has had a serious politician worthy of the name since Mrs. Thatcher.

Lon More
30th Mar 2014, 10:30
UKIP now has some county councillors in seats borrowed temporarily from the Tories

Presumeably most of these disappearing as their various crimes, stuidities and pecadillos come to light.


.... and since when did lawyers speak English?

Capetonian
30th Mar 2014, 10:32
Presumeably most of these disappearing as their various crimes, stuidities and pecadillos come to light. And since when were politicians of any political persuasion as pure as the driven snow?

Lon More
30th Mar 2014, 10:35
I never claimed any were Capetonian. It seems that UKIP attracts a much higher percentage.

acbus1
30th Mar 2014, 12:17
Support for UKIP would be less likely to evaporate if the proportional representation we've been discussing was firmly in place before 2015. One blatantly obvious reason some current supporters of UKIP might defect to the two main parties is the universal realisation that a vote for UKIP stands a high chance of being a wasted vote, due to the current undemocratic system of vote recognition.

Give all parties and the electorate a level playing field during the party political broadcasts, the televised debates, in the press (some hope) and at the ballot box and watch the evaporation strike where it is most deserved.

Gertrude the Wombat
30th Mar 2014, 12:45
if the proportional representation we've been discussing was firmly in place before 2015
Conventional wisdom is that the loss of the AV referendum has ruled out any change for a generation.