Grow a backbone.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Grow a backbone.
whats the point of this?
What's the point of a backbone? Wow you really have been corrupted.
Jesus Christ.
On a serious, you can't just casually support anti democratic moves (because tory) and then get upset and hide when someone takes offense at that. If you can't back that shit up then stop believing in it.
Local Election & Hartlepool By-Election Results: What Went So Wrong for Labour?
As I’ve said in this thread or the other one, their are positives and negatives to any voting system.
It might be nice to discuss them rationally.
the fact we have different voting systems for different elections is somewhat bizarre - and just from a personal perspective and from others I’ve spoken to choosing 2 candidates seems illogical. Hence me voting for Binface.
it’s certainly not something ‘I believe’ in, I have no affinity to a voting system, like I would assume very few do.
Go on then give us some rational discussion. All you've done so far is said "I don't like this and I prefer this other thing", that there might be arguments to support your opinion but you won't share them because people were mean to you.
So here is your chance to answer and I promise to be nice and rational with you:
Why is fptp better than sv? Pros and cons please as you said.
Slightly condescending
but I’ll play!firstly, I’m coming from a layman’s perspective - because I don’t have to spend time and effort researching voting systems. I know you will use that as a criticism against me - but i very much believe you can and should have a discussion without the need to be 100% read into the scenario.
These are musings rather than pro’s and con’s - as I’ve tried to be clear, I’m not wedded to any system.
one of my key issues is having different voting systems, it’s confusing to the electorate and obviously if FPTP or SV or any other system was preferred then why do we have a mixture?
how valid are second choice votes? Are they more likely to go to candidates that just have name recognition, or for a ‘joke’ vote? Aside from the candidate you vote for, and usually the direct rival - does the voter actually know anything about their second choice?
granted, I’m sure many voters don’t know anything about the first choice candidate they are voting for - but I’m sure you see my point.
Slightly condescending
firstly, I’m coming from a layman’s perspective - because I don’t have to spend time and effort researching voting systems. I know you will use that as a criticism against me - but i very much believe you can and should have a discussion without the need to be 100% read into the scenario.
These are musings rather than pro’s and con’s - as I’ve tried to be clear, I’m not wedded to any system.
one of my key issues is having different voting systems, it’s confusing to the electorate and obviously if FPTP or SV or any other system was preferred then why do we have a mixture?
how valid are second choice votes? Are they more likely to go to candidates that just have name recognition, or for a ‘joke’ vote? Aside from the candidate you vote for, and usually the direct rival - does the voter actually know anything about their second choice?
granted, I’m sure many voters don’t know anything about the first choice candidate they are voting for - but I’m sure you see my point.
I agree that a mixture isn't ideal but I'm not sure why you'd solve that by using the least democratic method everywhere (fptp).
Your second question I'm not sure how to answer.
One advantage of the system is that it allows for instance green voters to indicate a preference for green without "wasting" their vote on a candidate that they think unlikely to win.
If people haven't researched who they are voting for then that's on them. They don't have to utilise the second choice, they can just choose one. And as you say you could make the same argument for the first choice too so I don't see the logic in that.
Another advantage in my view is that it discourages negative campaigning or at least makes it less effective by making voting less of a binary choice which leads to people often voting against a party rather than for it.
And the stuff about not being arsed to do research is very disrespectful, both to the time of the people you debate with on here, and more importantly to democracy. Please stop voting if you don't care enough to educate yourself about how your vote works.
i was with you until your last paragraph.
I have more than enough knowledge about voting systems, candidates and ‘where my vote goes’.
what I take absolute offence at is the notion as I said earlier that you have to be “100% read into the scenario” to have a debate.
you don’t need to, and shouldn’t have to.
Otherwise you can simply only debate areas where you have a level of expertise.
I may have been somewhat facetious in earlier posts about my knowledge. your statement is explicitly anti democratic.
do you honestly think the average voter researches each candidate/ party?
whilst I expect we disagree on many fundamentals, I’m sure we could have a lively and interesting discussion in real life. What % of the electorate could or would want to do so?
everyone has a right to vote, no matter how little they know or care, or that they make a voting decision based on knowledge gleamed from Facebook - it is a fundamental right.
there are very few absolute rights or wrongs - which is what I took issue with yesterday. But to say someone (anyone) shouldn’t vote is a massive no no.
Soooo many bots in the replies with various flavours of ‘he’s been running the country who cares?”
Its a witch hunt
I'm not taking away your right to vote or even advocating that, I'm just asking kindly that you stop until you have taken the effort to understand it better. You clearly don't because your questions in the previous post were ridiculously basic and you plainly ignore any point I make that doesn't play into your stupid narrative.
Deaths of people on benefits prompt inquiry call https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56819727
maybe we wouldn’t have a sensible discussion in person!
Wer'e not having a sensible discussion now and you never were actually trying so maybe not.
You remind me of my Aunt who floats controversial opinions at the dinner table and then gets upset and wants to change the subject as soon as people (usually my mum) challenge her. She's a Tory too, voted for brexit, talked about it enthusiastically and now her company that she's trying to sell is not doing so well so we don't talk about Brexit any more.
and yet - nothing was controversial. Unless you really think musing over a voting system is controversial?
I don’t think anyone asked about your aunt and the dinner table.
Edit: perhaps you don’t talk about brexit anymore because no one in your family has got an online certificate confirming they have spent enough time on Google researching the subject.
Musing requires reflection and thought, neither of which are things that you seem to be willing to do here. You just want other people to develop your views for you and get upset when they don't play nice.
develop my views! I thought I was a closed minded Tory?
Yes, you post half arsed opinions and expect other people to do the research on them for you in a discussion, coming up with ridiculous questions, ignoring any point I make, instead asking more stupid questions and getting upset instead of actually posting any evidence or developed argument of your own at any point.
What points did I specifically ignore from you?
Stop it.
@sun_tzu would just give them community service. That'll sort it.
thanks for backing yourself up.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/single-mum-who-took-fatal-24068481
Another victim of the Tory government.
Mental health provision is shocking and they are driving people to be suicidal by making them jump through hoops for the support they need, with a nice bit of gaslighting along the way.
I know a guy who worked at the DWP, he said what they were told to do really made him literally depressed.
I worked with Scope and the stories I heard are so saddening.
Unfortunately it sounds like Labour now want to emulate the Tories with Reeves as chancellor.
Vulnerable people in this country are really being fecked over by the greedy majority (of voters). And the right wing media who love to demonise those who need help.
Another victim of the Tory government.
Mental health provision is shocking and they are driving people to be suicidal by making them jump through hoops for the support they need, with a nice bit of gaslighting along the way.
I know a guy who worked at the DWP, he said what they were told to do really made him literally depressed.
I worked with Scope and the stories I heard are so saddening.
Unfortunately it sounds like Labour now want to emulate the Tories with Reeves as chancellor.
Vulnerable people in this country are really being fecked over by the greedy majority (of voters). And the right wing media who love to demonise those who need help.
dont be silly... Id stick them in the poor house and make them work their debt off... if they couldnt then I guess its soylent green time (coincidentally set in 2022...)
Batley and spen by-election (jo cox was MP when she was killed)
Conservative from 1983 to 1997 when it was taken by Labour in the first Blair landslide
Been labour ever since but looks like it's going to be a close battle this time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Batley_and_Spen_by-election
Conservative from 1983 to 1997 when it was taken by Labour in the first Blair landslide
Been labour ever since but looks like it's going to be a close battle this time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Batley_and_Spen_by-election
Last edited:
He'll say something a la.. I spent just 15 K for the holiday. Imagine that! If I were to be bribed I would have demanded a 150 K holiday - and a caribbean island on top of that.
And the masses will chuckle and laugh.
But but but Keir Starmer just wants to focus on Boris's holiday than real issues. That's what the great tory public will say.
it’s a benefit in kind, so he has an incentive to keep the value lower as he will be liable for tax.
being PM is costing him a fortune
will be interesting to see if we see the likes of Tice, Farrage or fox... even count binface popping up... if we get the usual eclectic mix of extra entrants taking a few % of the vote it could actually make a signifigant diference to the end result
So will keeping all the so called Labour 'big guns' away... let the locals loose to play..after all its their own midden!
As the deposit is only £500 and there is lots of attention due to it being a by-election it will attract every man and their dog.
As an age group, surely the over 70s are more likely to be confused about who they are.
So basically copying his Republican counterparts in hoping to suppress votes. And this won't stop at new voters, if they feel it is a success, they will expand it for everyone.
Last edited:
Restart the workhouses! It's the Guido dream.
Well poor man. He deserves a holiday after everything he has done for the country...
That will be the response.