theyd have to gain another few more percentage points to win outrightbecause of our shitty first past the post system
(,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 12:57,
archived)
actually i quite like first-past-the-post, in principle at leastit means we're *meant* to be represented in parliament by a person rather than voting for some centralised party with its own little dictats. (the reality is, of course, totally different and we all vote by party rather than person... but the principle of our system is not built on parties and i wish party politics would fuck right off and die.)
the big problem here i'd say isn't so much the first-past-the-post system but the increasingly skewed constituencies. i'd not immediately say they've been gerrymandered, but i would certainly say that labour aren't going to be in a hurry to encourage a redrawing of the boundaries while it's aiding them so much, and i doubt the other parties will be in a position to force the issue for quite some time yet.
(the big problem here i'd say isn't so much the first-past-the-post system but the increasingly skewed constituencies. i'd not immediately say they've been gerrymandered, but i would certainly say that labour aren't going to be in a hurry to encourage a redrawing of the boundaries while it's aiding them so much, and i doubt the other parties will be in a position to force the issue for quite some time yet.
boris the spider,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:00,
archived)
i dont think the constituency boundaries are the problem.Its because the labour vote tends to be concentrated in urban areas whereas the libdem vote is fairly evenly spread across the country.
(,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:10,
archived)
well, yeahthat's kind of what i'm meaning -- there are too many constituencies in the cities. there's been a tendency towards moving out of the cities, and a few redrawn boundaries within the cities. neither very big, so far as ive heard, but big enough to leave urban constituencies with generally fewer voters who are generally more likely to be natural labour voters. then you have urban constituencies, who are less likely to be labour, covering much wider ground and these days more people.
the way i see it there's two conclusions you can draw from that. either the boundaries suck and should be redrawn (the one i've taken), or the whole system sucks and we should scrap it and go to pure PR.
either way, i'd say *something* has to change.
(the way i see it there's two conclusions you can draw from that. either the boundaries suck and should be redrawn (the one i've taken), or the whole system sucks and we should scrap it and go to pure PR.
either way, i'd say *something* has to change.
boris the spider,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:14,
archived)
The population rise of the last 20 years has been concentrated in the cities.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/why-capturing-the-magic-number-of-seats-is-harder-for-the-tories-1930594.html
is fairly interesting. it's doesn't particularly back up my actual claims but it's the same kind of reasoning. depends whether you trust the independent, but it's not traditionally the most hideously tory of papers...
(is fairly interesting. it's doesn't particularly back up my actual claims but it's the same kind of reasoning. depends whether you trust the independent, but it's not traditionally the most hideously tory of papers...
boris the spider,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:34,
archived)
To be honest,as long as the Lib Dems at least form some kind of coalition with Labour, i will be happy. It isn't ideal, but would be a million times better than if the Tories win outright or the Liberals are forced into a coalition with them.
If there were a Tory/Liberal coalition, which I do think is hugely unlikely, but possible, absolutely fuck all would get done due to the parties being so diametrically opposed.
(If there were a Tory/Liberal coalition, which I do think is hugely unlikely, but possible, absolutely fuck all would get done due to the parties being so diametrically opposed.
Redsushi! Whoop! Whoop! Yes, that one!,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:04,
archived)
depends how "pure" the Libs actually areor whether the Tories could make aquiescing on policy "worth their while" with high paid high profile low responsibility cabinet posts, and new business contacts
(
twig Save 6 Music,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:10,
archived)
To be honest,I can't see that happening. Say what you like about the efficacy of the Lib Dems, they are the most principled and honest of the political classes as far as I am concerned.
( Redsushi! Whoop! Whoop! Yes, that one!,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:14,
archived)
It's easy to be honest when you're too powerless to be worth bribingedit: that said, i agree, but i don't think there's anything intrinsically honest about a lib dem mp just because he's lib dem. and i've lost a lot of respect for the party as a whole since the shenanigans over their removal of charles kennedy, but i still prefer them by a long way to the other two big parties. still, let's see how principled they still are when they get any power...
( boris the spider,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:17,
archived)
people said the same about New Labourthey were elected on a huge anti-sleaze platform, and look what happened. Saying that, I was going to vote Lib Dem anyway and probably still will, just hope that if they get in in any form they stay true to their principles
( twig Save 6 Music,
Mon 19 Apr 2010, 13:20,
archived)