[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[A1X]

To rig the system so the tories can't win?

I'd be pleased by the outcome, but how can this be justified? It makes us just as bad as them surely?

PR wouldn’t “rig the system so the Tories can’t win”, it’d make them come up with policies which a majority of the entire electorate could support.

If they can’t do that then that’s their problem.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

It is a shame. A great shame. But I won't be officially counted as a supporter of a titanium-hard Brexit outside the Single Market.

To be fair, we don't have the exact wording of the manifesto yet - so things can in theory change.

It's a shame we don't have a voting system that doesn't let you express that view without it effectively counting as a vote for whoever comes second (I'm not paying enough attention to the current situation in Hove to know if the Conservatives might do so badly that it's not them).

Sorry, I said I wouldn't write any more about that. Bad Sid

 

[beorhthelm]

Corbyn who was voted leader with the largest member mandate ever and was within 17k votes of government in 2017. Right now we have a PM who the Tory party members didn't even want.

It's not about rigging elections, the point I was making was the electorate as a whole is left of centre but the voting system delivers a right wing government

wait, do you get that 17k votes based on how votes in key FPTP seats worked out? certainly wasnt that few votes shy of outright majority.

last two national elections under PR, for EU parliament, returned right wing majorities. the thing about changing the system is voting patterns will change and so will parties. it wont necessarily give the outcome wanted.

 

[WATFORD zero]

The attitudes towards people who support Brexit wasn't and isn't particularly tolerant. Yes, tolerant in the sense that you allow people to talk about it and to disagree, but not tolerant in the sense of being polite and respecting their opinion.

This is not directed at you personally, it's a comment on the general board ethos.

I am always polite and have always respected valid opinions.

Valid
adjective
(of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent.
"a valid criticism"

Where opinions can be factually shown not to be valid, I point this out to the person presenting this invalid opinion (always politely as evidenced throughout the Brexit thread). If we all respected, believed and kept repeating opinions that had no validity, with no basis in Logic or Fact then just imagine where we could end up ...................... Oh

 

[WATFORD zero]

wait, do you get that 17k votes based on how votes in key FPTP seats worked out? certainly wasnt that few votes shy of outright majority.

last two national elections under PR, for EU parliament, returned right wing majorities. the thing about changing the system is voting patterns will change and so will parties. it wont necessarily give the outcome wanted.

If the outcome wanted was that the Houses of Parliament more directly reflected the actual votes cast it would

 

[vegster]

Starmer has lost my vote with his repeated support of an adamantite-hard Brexit outside the Single Market. That will not be in my name and my vote won't be counted as "in support of it". So my vote wll be a Lib Dem vote or a spoiler at the next election to be decided nearer the time.

He has to be meekly pro Brexit or else the Tory loons and media will try and say he's anti Brexit/anti The Will of the People at the election...He has to say he will make it work but, if after two years in office, with access to the facts and figures of our economic losses he can't make it work he can publish the figures and say

" I've tried but there's nothing left I can do ?...do you, the people, want me to try to negotiate a customs union/ single market ? "
If Starmer can show the figures that it isn't going to work then hopefully, by then the loons will have died off to an extent and a younger, more pro Europe UK can go forward again.

However, we will never recover our former glory, that's gone forever. 6th biggest economy in the world and we have people starving, collapsing healthcare and social care, crumbling roads and low wages.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

PR wouldn’t “rig the system so the Tories can’t win”, it’d make them come up with policies which a majority of the entire electorate could support.

If they can’t do that then that’s their problem.

Actually that's a very good point.

I'm not sure that it's true though.

The problem is the outcome of PR. Look at Israel. The largest party is always held to ransom by extremists. Eventually the largest party (Likud till recently) are the extremists.

I suspect that changing the system won't change our parties, and as noted may times previously, we are simply not tuned in as a people to the idea of expecting a coalition government and voting accordingly. The last two coalitions here, the lib-lab pact and the tory/Liberal coalition of ten years or so ago were not welcomed by the public, and were both disasters for one or other of the partners.

Anyway, it isn't going to happen so there is no point banging on about it. Rejoining the EU any time soon, ditto.

Sorry but politics is the art of the possible and what may be possible in the next year or so is seeing to tories booted out and a majority labour party taking over the shop for a bit. People may even find they like it.

 

[Bodian]

the last time I was hauled up on a disciplinary for making facetious comments

the last time? How many times have you been hauled up??!

 

[Jim in the West]

The attitudes towards people who support Brexit wasn't and isn't particularly tolerant. Yes, tolerant in the sense that you allow people to talk about it and to disagree, but not tolerant in the sense of being polite and respecting their opinion.

This is not directed at you personally, it's a comment on the general board ethos.

I hope I don't disappoint you with this comment, but my tolerance for Brexit supporters is very limited. Brexit has destroyed this country's reputation, will likely lead to the break up of the UK (and is, anyway, causing unnecessary, very risky, tension in Northern Ireland), has taken away the opportunity for my children to live and work in 30 other European countries, led to significantly lower growth, and higher inflation, than in the EU, resulted in HUGE bureaucracy, is causing havoc with our agriculture, our manufacturing, our fishing....etc, etc. All of these things were entirely foreseeable - but many people voted for Brexit despite all this. And as soon as a Remainer tries to highlight any of the negative consequences of Brexit they are royally castigated for disrespecting the "will of the people" - even called traitors (or worse). I would say that generally Remainers are a far more tolerant bunch than Brexiteers. But perhaps I'm biased!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

the last time? How many times have you been hauled up??!

Three. I am not capable of keeping my head down and my mouth shut, and don't react kindly to institutional tomfoolery. Being on the autism spectrum doesn't help matters, I suspect. Regrets? Absolutely none. And what I do is appreciated by more colleagues than those who hate me and think I'm a twat (and there are many of those - fancy that! ).

 

[Bodian]

Three. I am not capable of keeping my head down and my mouth shut, and don't react kindly to institutional tomfoolery. Being on the autism spectrum doesn't help matters, I suspect. Regrets? Absolutely none. And what I do is appreciated by more colleagues than those who hate me and think I'm a twat (and there are many of those - fancy that! ).

I too tend to be quite outspoken about 'corporate bollocks'. We've just had a 360 degree feedback survey thing, and the responses for me were quite interesting, depending upon where in the organisation the feedbacker works!

I've been through two disciplinaries - but for the same sustained thing; so probably only one!

But the thing is - having been part of these processes, it really does make you wonder how folk like Raab and Johnson got/get away with outrageous behaviour for so long. Schofield has an affair & lies to his bosses - his career is over. Johnson has affairs and lies constantly to everyone and the country - still in politics.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I hope I don't disappoint you with this comment, but my tolerance for Brexit supporters is very limited. Brexit has destroyed this country's reputation, will likely lead to the break up of the UK (and is, anyway, causing unnecessary, very risky, tension in Northern Ireland), has taken away the opportunity for my children to live and work in 30 other European countries, led to significantly lower growth, and higher inflation, than in the EU, resulted in HUGE bureaucracy, is causing havoc with our agriculture, our manufacturing, our fishing....etc, etc. All of these things were entirely foreseeable - but many people voted for Brexit despite all this. And as soon as a Remainer tries to highlight any of the negative consequences of Brexit they are royally castigated for disrespecting the "will of the people" - even called traitors (or worse). I would say that generally Remainers are a far more tolerant bunch than Brexiteers. But perhaps I'm biased!

I'm not. I still think that those who voted Brexit were deluded (this includes some good pals of mine who now admit they were wrong) at best, and thick and racist at worst.

However, it would be madness for Labour to moot plans to reverse Brexit, even slightly, at present, because there is a general election on the way and it seems to be a thing, especially among tories, to say that even though they voted remain they are foursquare behind the will of the people and it would be a betrayal of democracy to do anything other than work to make Brexit a success.

Yes, I agree that is a load of old bolleaux, but labour have to win the next general election. This won't happen if the likes of you and I stay in our echo chamber, waving our tiny fists at all those other wankers, over there, thanking Johnson for saving the day and getting Brexit done. Art of the possible....things will get better but it can't be rushed.

And we could very easily see a return of Johnson after the tories lose the next general election. Proven winner, and them tories love a winner. Let's not paint a target on our arses and bend over.....

(ps - My best wishes Jim, it has been a long time )

 

[Bodian]

I thought that Johnson's old phone was broken or something. But it just seems as though he was told never to use it again because of potential security breaches. Should be pretty easy for an electronic specialist to retrieve all the messages then.

For a prime minister who phoned it in, Boris Johnson is having a lot of trouble handing over one mobile | Marina Hyde

Conveniently, the device he used most during the pandemic cannot be switched on due to security reasons, says Guardian columnist Marina Hyde

www.theguardian.com

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I too tend to be quite outspoken about 'corporate bollocks'. We've just had a 360 degree feedback survey thing, and the responses for me were quite interesting, depending upon where in the organisation the feedbacker works!

I've been through two disciplinaries - but for the same sustained thing; so probably only one!

But the thing is - having been part of these processes, it really does make you wonder how folk like Raab and Johnson got/get away with outrageous behaviour for so long. Schofield has an affair & lies to his bosses - his career is over. Johnson has affairs and lies constantly to everyone and the country - still in politics.

Raab, is a relentless bully willing to force the victims to testify against them, but to be fair, he's got his come-uppance now.

Schofield has been hiding in plain sight, but has been fairly careful. And he's also had his come uppance now.

Johnson is another beast altogether. He can turn on the easy charm when needs must. Even I am still capable of laughing at his jokes if I'm not paying attention. I have a work colleague who is much the same - lies through his teeth and has even blagged an OBE with his easy charm. Even I would call him a pal, even though he isn't. It is weird.

I tend to laugh at fools, and they can see it in my eyes that I think they are (you know the rest, the Roy Keane thing with the referee ) so I can't get away with anything. Not that I care

 

[dsr-burnley]

Many pro-Remain MPs and other prominent public supporters, along with ordinary supporters on social media (including myself), have been subject to regular death threats and threats of violence or arson, some female 'Remain' Conservative MPs had to seek police protection or injunctions against aggressive Brexit supporters threatening them in public, and the Labour MP, Jo Cox, was murdered by a Right-wing racist thug.

Please tell me roughly how many Brexit supporters have been assassinated, suffered death threats, assaulted or otherwise threatened by aggressive or violent Remain supporters.

Your engaging in the usual Right-wing tactic of implying that "both sides area as bad as each other", when it is clear that since 2016, Brexit supporters have been the overwhelming perpetrators of bullying, intimidation, and threats against Remainers.

That is one of the reasons I hate Brexit - not just the policy itself, but because so many Brexit supporters are plain nasty, thuggish, people - the 'school of hard knocks, university of life, wear your poppy with pride' brigade. I've been 'engaging' with them on social media since 2016, and they cannot (or will not) discuss issues in an intelligent or grown-up manner, but - in block capital letters - hurl abuse, insults, and threats, with 100s of their mates joining in, like vicious animals hunting in packs. They also send vile and threatening messages and threats via Messenger; - "We know where you and your wife live, c***" being a regular one.

If you were to try discussing Brexit with them face-to-face in a pub, many Brexiters would happily punch you in the face to silence you. But, yeah "Remain supporters are as bad"

[deleted by poster]

 

[A1X]

Actually that's a very good point.

I'm not sure that it's true though.

The problem is the outcome of PR. Look at Israel. The largest party is always held to ransom by extremists. Eventually the largest party (Likud till recently) are the extremists.

I suspect that changing the system won't change our parties, and as noted may times previously, we are simply not tuned in as a people to the idea of expecting a coalition government and voting accordingly. The last two coalitions here, the lib-lab pact and the tory/Liberal coalition of ten years or so ago were not welcomed by the public, and were both disasters for one or other of the partners.

Anyway, it isn't going to happen so there is no point banging on about it. Rejoining the EU any time soon, ditto.

Sorry but politics is the art of the possible and what may be possible in the next year or so is seeing to tories booted out and a majority labour party taking over the shop for a bit. People may even find they like it.

I see where you're coming from and agree with some of what you say, although I'm not so pessimistic as you on the idea that the major parties won't change. As I see it, both major parties are effectively formalised coalitions already (a party cannot realistically fully represent everyone on a spectrum from Tony Blair to Jeremy Corbyn, and ditto Lee Anderson to Rory Stewart). My suspicion is that it would eventually lead to an unravelling of those parties into smaller groupings. Now you might be right that this means "the tail wags the dog" on the extremists, but then I would argue that that is exactly the situation we are in with the current Government (and if not right now then certainly in the 2017 to 2020 period that was definitely the case).

Now you're quite right it would initially lead to most of the next few governments being Labour + Liberal in their makeup, but I would also argue that given where we are in the electoral cycle and the popularity of the current Tory Government that's probably going to be the scenario we end up in anyway, with Labour-led Governments forming at least the next couple after the next election (as ever, this is based on how it looks right now and much can change). But there is no reason why that lasts forever as parties / politicians rise and fall, generally in this country in the last half century or so it's been 10 years for one lot, then the other lot get 10 years (roughly) and there's no reason to assume a change in the electoral system would change that. And indeed, in terms of the extremist parties, often in this country exposure has led to them being found out and kicked to the kerb. The BNP won several councils 15-20 years ago, but once people saw them in "power" once they never went back. UKIP went through something similar. It's why Farage never hangs around in one party for very long, he's as aware of this as anyone. That and it offers him a new "get rich quick" opportunity.

I suppose a lot of the case with PR depends on whether you think it's more important that we have strong, stable Governments, at the expense of everyone having a vote that counts, or whether there's more of a need for everyone to feel they have an equal and meaningful stake in our democracy, even if this means they can make poor choices.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I see where you're coming from and agree with some of what you say, although I'm not so pessimistic as you on the idea that the major parties won't change. As I see it, both major parties are effectively formalised coalitions already (a party cannot realistically fully represent everyone on a spectrum from Tony Blair to Jeremy Corbyn, and ditto Lee Anderson to Rory Stewart). My suspicion is that it would eventually lead to an unravelling of those parties into smaller groupings. Now you might be right that this means "the tail wags the dog" on the extremists, but then I would argue that that is exactly the situation we are in with the current Government (and if not right now then certainly in the 2017 to 2020 period that was definitely the case).

Now you're quite right it would initially lead to most of the next few governments being Labour + Liberal in their makeup, but I would also argue that given where we are in the electoral cycle and the popularity of the current Tory Government that's probably going to be the scenario we end up in anyway, with Labour-led Governments forming at least the next couple after the next election (as ever, this is based on how it looks right now and much can change). But there is no reason why that lasts forever as parties / politicians rise and fall, generally in this country in the last half century or so it's been 10 years for one lot, then the other lot get 10 years (roughly) and there's no reason to assume a change in the electoral system would change that. And indeed, in terms of the extremist parties, often in this country exposure has led to them being found out and kicked to the kerb. The BNP won several councils 15-20 years ago, but once people saw them in "power" once they never went back. UKIP went through something similar. It's why Farage never hangs around in one party for very long, he's as aware of this as anyone. That and it offers him a new "get rich quick" opportunity.

I suppose a lot of the case with PR depends on whether you think it's more important that we have strong, stable Governments, at the expense of everyone having a vote that counts, or whether there's more of a need for everyone to feel they have an equal and meaningful stake in our democracy, even if this means they can make poor choices.

Very thoughtful post.

Yes, all the larger parties are coalitions. In labour we have Fabians, Co-op affiliates through to clause 4 advocates. The idea is that we follow some sort of middle path that can veer a bit left or a bit right depending on prevailing opinions and the direction of the wind. Yes Labour have had problems with internal take-overs and all sorts. Militant. But the only time there was real fragmentation was when the gang of four flounced off to form the SDP - a five minute wonder. Labour remains a 'broad church'.

Likewise I don't see the tories fragmenting.

The reality is that you need to be a big grouping to obtain enough seats to form a strong and stable government, and it makes better sense to be in one party and navigate internal compromises/coalitions, rather than have to keep up a constant cross-floor dialogue with smaller parties in order to anticipate and navigate a coalition. In he UK such a dialogue would be seen as a backroom stitch up (because it would have to be done in secret so as to preclude a spoiler attach from the main opposition).

Your proposal at the end assumes one or the other, and also assumes that PR will allow everyone to have an 'equal and meaningful stake in our democracy'. I can see that being the case for those who don't support any particular party, and don't mind who is in power as long as they are in the middle somewhere. However my stake in democracy will not improve if PR delivers me a Tory-Lib Dem coalition. And I can't see many tory members thrilled at the prospect of a Labour/Liberal coalition. Perhaps in 20 years when old bastards like me are long dead views may be different. In which case, fine.

I would also add that the strongest proponents of PR appear to be those who imagine they will benefit most by it, and whose idea of 'fairness' boils down to little more than having their guys running (a bit of) the show. The only Labour types I have come across who favour PR are those who think PR is more likely to deliver a labour government (an issue that arose when the Scot Nats nicked all labour's Jock seats). I have never met a tory who favours PR. Diners vote for Christmas and turkeys vote against. Fancy that!

I would take PR more seriously if someone could show me that I would get more of the sort of government I like as a consequence, and by that I do not mean having socialism diluted by sorts who are obsessed with legalizing cannabis and who would have vetoed the building of The Amex if they had had more of a grasp on power.

We all may sometimes wish everything could be completely different. One day perhaps it will.

 

[vegster]

The murder of Jo Cox was nothing to do with people on this board, or their degree of tolerance, and (for what it's worth, which isn't much) the murderer didn't vote for Brexit.

I'm sure you remember the murderers repeated words that he said when he attacked and murdered a defenceless woman ? Run those words through your head and ask yourself which way he would have voted if he hadn't been banged up a week before the vote?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm sure you remember the murderers repeated words that he said when he attacked and murdered a defenceless woman ? Run those words through your head and ask yourself which way he would have voted if he hadn't been banged up a week before the vote?

Shouting Britain First, but according to the Burnley fan, it has nothing to with people on this board.

Batley & Spen was the constituency I lived in for 19 years. I said before I had voted Conservative and I voted for Elizabeth Peacock because she was a very good MP. She would be horrified at what happened to Jo Cox, and the Tory party in general. I don’t know whether she is still with us, but I still have ties with that area.

 

[Baldseagull]

Very thoughtful post.

Yes, all the larger parties are coalitions. In labour we have Fabians, Co-op affiliates through to clause 4 advocates. The idea is that we follow some sort of middle path that can veer a bit left or a bit right depending on prevailing opinions and the direction of the wind. Yes Labour have had problems with internal take-overs and all sorts. Militant. But the only time there was real fragmentation was when the gang of four flounced off to form the SDP - a five minute wonder. Labour remains a 'broad church'.

Likewise I don't see the tories fragmenting.

The reality is that you need to be a big grouping to obtain enough seats to form a strong and stable government, and it makes better sense to be in one party and navigate internal compromises/coalitions, rather than have to keep up a constant cross-floor dialogue with smaller parties in order to anticipate and navigate a coalition. In he UK such a dialogue would be seen as a backroom stitch up (because it would have to be done in secret so as to preclude a spoiler attach from the main opposition).

Your proposal at the end assumes one or the other, and also assumes that PR will allow everyone to have an 'equal and meaningful stake in our democracy'. I can see that being the case for those who don't support any particular party, and don't mind who is in power as long as they are in the middle somewhere. However my stake in democracy will not improve if PR delivers me a Tory-Lib Dem coalition. And I can't see many tory members thrilled at the prospect of a Labour/Liberal coalition. Perhaps in 20 years when old bastards like me are long dead views may be different. In which case, fine.

I would also add that the strongest proponents of PR appear to be those who imagine they will benefit most by it, and whose idea of 'fairness' boils down to little more than having their guys running (a bit of) the show. The only Labour types I have come across who favour PR are those who think PR is more likely to deliver a labour government (an issue that arose when the Scot Nats nicked all labour's Jock seats). I have never met a tory who favours PR. Diners vote for Christmas and turkeys vote against. Fancy that!

I would take PR more seriously if someone could show me that I would get more of the sort of government I like as a consequence, and by that I do not mean having socialism diluted by sorts who are obsessed with legalizing cannabis and who would have vetoed the building of The Amex if they had had more of a grasp on power.

We all may sometimes wish everything could be completely different. One day perhaps it will.

I quite liked the AV system (alternative vote) that we had a referendum on a while before the Brexit ref. The issue I have with the current system is that I have to judge which party is best to support to not end up with a Tory, as that is more important to me than getting Labour, Green, or Liberal. With AV, I could choose the representative I really wanted most, and not feel I wasted my chance to block a Tory from getting in, by stating which other candidates I would prefer if my first choice was not supported enough by others.
As it is, we usually end up with a party in power that much less than half of the population voted for, and it is hard to say how popular they really are, as many of the votes they collected are from people that just really didn't want the likely alternative, be that Lefty Labour or Nasty Tories.