My point entirely
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Tory voters- where do you go from here?
- Thread starter stewart12
- Start date
My point was that if you tried to interpret the graph(s) by interpolating between the start and the end in order to illustrate a steady decline, you would fail.
I wrote that as a reply to the suggestion there has been a steady decline in voter turnout over the decades.
There clearly is not a steady decline. Whether starting in 24 or after the war.
And I was not trying to prove anything with statistics. I was showing that an assertion made without statistics (data ) was incorrect.
Apart from that, yeah, spot on, bang to rights, etc.
Intersting and thoughtful comments
1. If the rest of Europe does it we should we not do it? This is an interesting argument. The rebuttal may be 'but we are not like the rest of Europe, which is why we left the EU'. As a strong remainer I would be conflicted by this reasoning, were it not for the fact that although the majority approach is usually the best, this is not always the case, and it is OK to make up one's own mind. For similar reasons I never became a fan of The Osmonds or East Enders. Or Mrs Thatcher.
2/3. Thank goodness the leadership has the confidence to ignore motions passed at conference. It has been one of the PLP's strengths to have ignored some of the silly arse motions passed at conference over the years.
Incidentally, for those who consider that PR would reverse the 'steady decline' in voter turnout in UK GEs, let's take a look at Germany (which has PR). Oh dear. A 'steady' fall in turnout since 1983. To fix this threat to democracy perhaps they should consider FPTP.
Half Time Pies
Well-known member
I have to say I find your verment defence of FPTP at little bit odd. Surely everyone can see that the political system we have at the current time serves nobody's interests particularly well, it returns government after government that nobody particularly likes, and very few prime ministers that people look back on with fondness, There may be a whole raft of reasons for that, but it does appear that the whole system needs looking at, and as part of that a change to the voting system shouldn't be off the table to try to make it more representative. The famous saying comes to mind 'Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results'.Intersting and thoughtful comments
1. If the rest of Europe does it we should we not do it? This is an interesting argument. The rebuttal may be 'but we are not like the rest of Europe, which is why we left the EU'. As a strong remainer I would be conflicted by this reasoning, were it not for the fact that although the majority approach is usually the best, this is not always the case, and it is OK to make up one's own mind. For similar reasons I never became a fan of The Osmonds or East Enders. Or Mrs Thatcher.
2/3. Thank goodness the leadership has the confidence to ignore motions passed at conference. It has been one of the PLP's strengths to have ignored some of the silly arse motions passed at conference over the years.
Incidentally, for those who consider that PR would reverse the 'steady decline' in voter turnout in UK GEs, let's take a look at Germany (which has PR). Oh dear. A 'steady' fall in turnout since 1983. To fix this threat to democracy perhaps they should consider FPTP.
View attachment 190042
Last edited:
I am no tory but the tory supporters seems to be jubilant when Johnson was elected.
And as a Labour member I was jubilant when Labour won this year.
I accept that even many Tories became disillusioned with Johnson and his Lilliputian successors.
And I am already somewhat m'eh about Starmer.
But that doesn't mean I want to change the electoral system in the expectation that if only there were a few liberals and Greens in the cabinet coalition, Starmer and chums would be able to lead us on to a bright new tomorrow.
Disappointment with political leaders is part of life. Aside from anything else, we cannot all expect to get exactly what we want. Politics is the art of the possible and involves compromises (except if you are a fringe bullshit grifter like Farage).
Look, PR may make things better, but how much better? There are no guarantees. And is it even needed? Changing the system is always risky.
And things are 'bad' only because we have been living in interesting times: The global finance crash, Brexit, Covid, the emergence of a charismatic charlatan, the influence of fake news, and the sad fact that far too many educated people live in social, and social media silos.
My ex-wife is convinced we are being destroyed by a global capital conspiracy. One of my brothers seems to think Israel is destroying the world. The latter puts the blame firmly at the feet of Blair who betrayed socialism. OK . . . mates.
I am raising an eyebrow about all this. And holding my nerve. The last thing we need now is to sweep away our electoral system and replace it with one that will give the Farage gang 50 seats and an opportunity to form a coalition with Badenoch. The black and white minstrels ride again
(It also saddens me that I am apparently in conflict with many of NSC's voices of moderation and reason
such as yourself)m20gull
Well-known member
It's not the voting system that is feeding us with governments we don't like. It's the party system that supplies us with a conveyor belt of like-minded career politicians.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
I really didn't. I rejected the claim that it was 'a ridiculous appointment', and explained why Labour needed an insider -- a civil servant, if you will -- or someone with governmental experience in order to transition from opposition to government.
I suspect the job Sue Gray has done is mixed and maybe it was good in the month of transition, but not thereafter -- although I'm not that well informed on such things. My view is that Alastair Campbell must be absolutely seething, and am tempted to listen closely to a relevant episode of The Rest is Politics where he addresses this in-depth (if anyone knows which one, please share).
There is a stark contrast between the discipline and messaging that Starmer and his team generated in the last few years of opposition and the post-first month period of government. In part that's down to the skillset of Gray and the levels of trust/control Starmer invested in her -- the widespread view now is she lacked political nous, and that's been clearly exposed. The extent of her performance, however, might flow from a purported power battle between her and her replacement, who does have political nous, and seems to be rather practiced in the dark arts. I picked this up from this article which, for me, explains an awful lot about Labour over the past few years:
‘Corbyn had flown too close to the sun’: how Labour insiders battled the left and plotted the party’s path back to power
Exclusive extract from new book says Corbyn’s appearance at Glastonbury was a key moment in the party’s long way back to power. And as one anti-Corbyn group tried to build a moderate coalition, it also needed a credible leader …
www.theguardian.com
For reference to my original post #3202, that I think you were referring to:
So, in a couple of posts, we've got two posts from mods. One describes this as astonishing hypocrisy
, and you've gone with it being an "utterly ridiculous appointment".I'm aware you can only speak for yourself, but surely the appointment made perfect sense: she was a civil servant who knew the civil service intimately, and had experience at policy implementation. There was precious little of this in the Labour Party. I'm aware it hasn't gone too well of late, but it did help the transition from opposition to government.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
The budget
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,100
Jenrick is awful. A poundshop Farage, Badenoch policy wise is bad too...... this massive act of Tory stupidity is a great day for the Labour party.
The only upside of Badenoch is that she is a black woman and from the party that has had all 3 female PMs, that alone is a positive in 2024 UK when contrasting to Labour which is always white men.
A bit like the US Election being on November 5th - famous for gunpowder, treason and plot.
Doh.
I also blame much of the electorate - it was the 'great British voters' who gave us Brexit and Boris Johnson.
I do sometimes wonder if there should be some kind of political intelligence/awareness test before people should be allowed to vote. Unpopular and elitist, I know, but it really depresses me that many people give such simplistic, superficial or shallow reasons for how they vote; I once knew a woman in a low-paid job who said she voted Conservative because she liked Margaret Thatcher's hairstyle, and thought she looked 'nice'.
Or vote for a party simply because that's what 'their' newspaper tells them to do.
Deportivo Seagull
I should coco
So in summary the Tory great and good (pardon!) have decided that their future lays in the hands of two unelectable fucktards. Jenrick is just a turd in human form and Badenoch, who if she were white, would be taking pelters for being a racist bitch.
The Tories are the political equivalent of ‘The Office’ but just not as believeble.
I have to say it’s a relief to see all the usual suspects back having apparently gone to ground for the last four weeks, all stroking themselves excitedly at the opposition’s leadership appointment process 
I believe there is a “Set Piece” due in a couple of weeks, you’ll all be scurrying back to your rocks soon
I believe there is a “Set Piece” due in a couple of weeks, you’ll all be scurrying back to your rocks soon
And i’ve heard there is a whole bunch who vote for people you don’t like, can you believe that, shocking
I have repeatedly advocated a political literacy test for budding voters.
I have suggested similar.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,903
whereas PR also delivers a government nobody particulary likes. PR isn't supposed to deliver a government you like, its suppose to give better representation, with the theory that's least objectionable to the electorate.
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,519
I suppose certain types of people like the idea that "we the elite" get a say in what goes on while "they the common people" have to do as they are told by "we the elite". They used the same logic to ban women from voting, strangely enough - they didn't think they were sufficiently savvy to be worth a vote.
What happens if "the elite" decide that your political opinions are not right and your are one of the "common people"? Or are you so self confident that you believe that the whole world looks to you as an example?