PR ........................................
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
How will you vote tomorrow?
- Thread starter Lord Bracknell
- Start date
PR ........................................
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
That 'interpreting' can sometimes amount to the same thing. Beyond that, there are 101 other examples of unelected people in positions of power who have the ability to impact on our lives. Brussels is just one in a long list; which is why, IMHO, calls for a referendum carry no particular weight.
Quoting Switzerland as an example to follow is a bit ludicrous given that it stayed out of all the 20th century conflicts. It effectively acts as a conduit between North and South Europe through vital road and rail freight links, plus has its holiday reputation. It can therefore stand alone economically.
The UK has little of that to offer. We are geographically on the periphery of Europe. We have no reputation as a safe neutral state. We have to be part of the Europens state, to cope with competition from the USA China and Indisa in global terms.
What about Norway?
If BNP want AV, surely the best thing for them to do is say they don't want it, knowing that the majority of people will do the opposite of what they say. All too easy.
If Labour really wanted AV, we'd already have it - they just had 3 terms in power.
Norway has a population of 4m and a shedload of oil. It is an extremely wealthy nation that can afford to be picky about the EU. Switzerland has a population of 5m (I think) and is another extremely wealthy nation, funded by a uniquely closed banking system, tourism and a strategic location in the heart of Europe. Both nations have always been politically neutral.
Honestly, I'm struggling to see why anyone would see the point in comparing our nation to these, any more than I would bother pointing out that heavily populated Turkey is desperate to *join* the EU.
Tony Meolas Loan Spell
Slut Faced Whores
I could maybe BORROW Notters Toyota Prius?
What's so difficult about :
1. Choose the person you want to win and put a 1 against their name
2. Decide if there is anyone else you'd quite like to win if your number one choice doesn't win and put a 2 against their name
3. Repeat until you have either put a number against all the candidates or there is nobody else you wish to put a number against
I'm sure most on here have done the market research surveys that ask you to rank in order of preference - this is just the same
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,264
In a political system that has been dominated by only 2 parties in the last 90-odd years why do 92% of Tories support FPTP but only 35% of Labour?
Lord Bracknell
On fire
- Thread starter
- #152
That's up to you.
If you want the FPTP result, it's CONSERVATIVE & NO.
The Alternative Result is that more people have voted LABOUR than Conservative and more people have voted YES than No.
... proving that FPTP doesn't reflect the true opinion of the electorate.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,264
To be serious for a moment, does this "mini-poll" suggest that floating voters who voted Lib Dem at the last General Election are moving to Green / UKIP, rather than the two main parties?
I realise there's an element of protest vote going on, and we've already seen this before with the Greens in the 1988 European Elections, but the Other vote is remarkably high.
I realise there's an element of protest vote going on, and we've already seen this before with the Greens in the 1988 European Elections, but the Other vote is remarkably high.
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
Other may indicate voting yes or no but living in London where there are no council elections.
Indeed. It seems obvious why Lib Dems would want AV, but it's not so obvious why Labour would want it. I guess they feel it harms the Tory's chances of election more than it harms Labours.
My concern is that it encourages weak governments that don't like taking tough decisions, which leaves you open economic policies that countries like Greece employ.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,264
Except that this coalition government has taken far tougher decisions than Labour did in 13 years of government, i.e. government cuts, VAT increase, tuition fees, NI rises.
Some would argue that it's precisely because there's 2 or more parties in a coalition that the "blame" for tough decisions is diluted between the coalition partners, so no one party is wholly responsible, thereby making it MORE likely those tough decisions get made.
Not really. Blair sent us to war in Iraq despite only 30% of the electorate backing him, don't forget. A VAT increase is *not* a "tough" decision, seeing as it has only ever risen since it was introduced. Much tougher to reduce it and implement an income tax hike, which IMO is fairer but less palatable to the electorate.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,264
The tough decision would NOT to have gone to war, as it would have tested this "Special Relationship" we purport to have with the USA.
As for the VAT hike, whatever leeway traders had to increase their prices to combat price rises has been gobbled up by the 2.5% VAT rise. 20% is a record high for VAT and a fukll 5% higher than where we were 17 months ago.
Employer's and Employees NI has also gone up by 1% - "a tax on jobs" the Tories called it before the election but still brought it in. Lib Dems get clobbered for being htypocrits but the Tories are guilty too.
As for the VAT hike, whatever leeway traders had to increase their prices to combat price rises has been gobbled up by the 2.5% VAT rise. 20% is a record high for VAT and a fukll 5% higher than where we were 17 months ago.
Employer's and Employees NI has also gone up by 1% - "a tax on jobs" the Tories called it before the election but still brought it in. Lib Dems get clobbered for being htypocrits but the Tories are guilty too.