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

[essbee1]

Rebel Conservative MPs are drawing up plans for “vote strikes” in a bid to paralyse law-making and capitalise on the dramatic Boris Johnson no-confidence vote.

Some of the 148 MPs who voted to oust the prime minister on Monday said they would try to stymie his government’s legislative agenda, as happened at the end of the Theresa May era, by abstaining on key laws.

They plan to start with a showdown over a bill to override sections of the Northern Ireland protocol, to be published within days.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Brilliant. Obstruct and get that fat f***k out.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Again, the concept is wonderful, like a lot of things.

Sadly, reality does not always reflect this visionary dream of Utopia.

Not always, but it has been known.

And an unwillingness to find a consensus just strikes me as daft, antagonistic, an indication that what we are going to do is so extreme (whether left or right) that you won’t like it.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Not always, but it has been known.

And an unwillingness to find a consensus just strikes me as daft, antagonistic, an indication that what we are going to do is so extreme (whether left or right) that you won’t like it.

Lot of assumptions in there, which I'm sure you didn't mean.

I think hinderances might be exemplified in strong, binary posts where the current PM is referred to as a 'bungle####' and we might even rejoin the EU.

Pardon me if my enthusiasm for such steps forward might be tempered.

No hurdles there then, at least not from me.

I'm all for a bit of give and take.

 

[Machiavelli]

I am not sure about your inferences. So let's 'model' it to see what 'feels' fair.

Imagine we have 11 constituencies, two parties (A and B), and eleven voters in each constituency.

At one end of extreme outcomes, Party A wins every seat by 6 votes to 5. So they end up 66 votes to party B's 55, but obtain 11 MPs, with party B obtaining none. Change the system to PR and party A would end up with 6 MPs and party B 5. Fair? Yes, very for PR. Dreadful with FPTP

At the othere end of the extreme, party A win 5 seats by a margin of 11 votes to 0. They lose the other 6 by a vote of 5 votes to 6. They lose the general election by 5 seats to 6. However change the system to PR, with 85 votes to party B's 36, they win the election by a landslide (9 seasts to 3). Fair? Yes, again PR is fairer.

My preference is to base the outcome on who wins the seat. Well, that's the whole point of constituencies/seats, but it isn't 'representative' of the electorate, as your two prior examples illustrate It may not always 'feel' fair but the alternative is to give disproportionate reward to monocultures. literally no idea what you're referring to here Thus, imagine one constituency where all the voters favour one party (A). Such as Harrogate.It'd definitely take an act of imagination, more than that, an abstraction where one party garners 100% support, certainly doesn't/hasn't happened in Harrogate Then imagine somewhere else where the the same party is favoured by 45% of the electorate and other party (B) is favoured by 55% of the electorate. You have three boroughs with a 'B' majority, but the net electoral outcome for the four boroughs would be a win for party A. I don't think that's fair. Well, I think it is, because A got more than B, but I see your point, although it's only been done by a very particular (contrived?) example.

You could of course make it more complicated, but I thought the idea was to maximize voter turn out, not abandon the franchise to triganomatrists.

See above, my comments in bold. Not remotely convincing. Still, nowhere near as bizarre as your flat tax suggestion. On which, read the last chapter of Capital and Ideology by Thomas Piketty, which will make your blood boil, but I find entirely convincing.

 

[Lever]

What an odd comment Lever.
What is this degeneration you speak of?

Oops, you are in a word loop now....

Take a rest.....

You'll be able to think and express yourself more clearly after a break.....

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The issue is that it has already failed, hence it's impossible to implement. The only choices left are either to implement it or rollback Brexit (via article 16)

The elephant in the room was always where you put the border between the EU's single market and GB's new 'taking back control' market. I don't know how many hundreds of times this was pointed out on the Brexit thread, but every single Brexiteer from Ppf to Nigel Farage stuck their fingers in their ears and shouted 'Project fear' as the solution

Unless of course, there is anyone on NSC who could simply point out where I am wrong and maybe outline a solution for where the border should actually be placed. After 6 years to consider it, that would be brilliant and 'move us on' [emoji38]ol:

No, I am talking about the new upcoming bill which they want to use to Get Johnson's oven ready salmonella riddled Brexit Undone.


The better plan would be to join the EEA.

They could even brand it as "The UK-EU Common Market" to get all the nostalgia lovers onside.

 

[Is it PotG?]

No, I am talking about the new upcoming bill which they want to use to Get Johnson's oven ready salmonella riddled Brexit Undone.


The better plan would be to join the EEA.

They could even brand it as "The UK-EU Common Market" to get all the nostalgia lovers onside.

Bercow. He's yer man to sort this.

 

[The Clamp]

I actually think a party taking on a very strong rejoin the EU identity, if they ran the campaign properly, would prove very popular. Strongly sending the message that a vote for them is a vote for rejoining. I say draw the battle lines and let's slug this out. See if we can restore true democracy to the UK. Appeasing the Brexiteers and pussy-footing around the fact Brexit is an utter disaster needs to end. A clear, strong message ...REJOIN. would go down very well I reckon.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Bercow. He's yer man to sort this.

I doubt it.

 

[essbee1]

I actually think a party taking on a very strong rejoin the EU identity, if they ran the campaign properly, would prove very popular. Strongly sending the message that a vote for them is a vote for rejoining. I say draw the battle lines and let's slug this out. See if we can restore true democracy to the UK. Appeasing the Brexiteers and pussy-footing around the fact Brexit is an utter disaster needs to end. A clear, strong message ...REJOIN. would go down very well I reckon.

Totally agree.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

I actually think a party taking on a very strong rejoin the EU identity, if they ran the campaign properly, would prove very popular. Strongly sending the message that a vote for them is a vote for rejoining. I say draw the battle lines and let's slug this out. See if we can restore true democracy to the UK. Appeasing the Brexiteers and pussy-footing around the fact Brexit is an utter disaster needs to end. A clear, strong message ...REJOIN. would go down very well I reckon.

Only issue there is we would have to fully join which I believe would cause many to question rejoining.

 

[The Clamp]

Only issue there is we would have to fully join which I believe would cause many to question rejoining.

I don't think it would be as binary as that. Negotiations, options, rebuilding trust and friendship. I think we would find a much more welcoming and flexible EU once we had cleansed the corridors of power of barbarians like Johnson and Mogg.

People seem to have rolled over and resigned themselves to being a weak neighbour of the EU, never to return. I say time to fight back and reclaim our place at the table.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I actually think a party taking on a very strong rejoin the EU identity, if they ran the campaign properly, would prove very popular. Strongly sending the message that a vote for them is a vote for rejoining. I say draw the battle lines and let's slug this out. See if we can restore true democracy to the UK. Appeasing the Brexiteers and pussy-footing around the fact Brexit is an utter disaster needs to end. A clear, strong message ...REJOIN. would go down very well I reckon.

The LibDems and Greens are pro EU and always have been.

 

[crookie]

I actually think a party taking on a very strong rejoin the EU identity, if they ran the campaign properly, would prove very popular. Strongly sending the message that a vote for them is a vote for rejoining. I say draw the battle lines and let's slug this out. See if we can restore true democracy to the UK. Appeasing the Brexiteers and pussy-footing around the fact Brexit is an utter disaster needs to end. A clear, strong message ...REJOIN. would go down very well I reckon.

Not sure it would. I think you'll find most people don't want to replay that devisive battle. However I wouldn't be surprised if a party offering a much more pragmatic partnership with the EU, perhaps looking at joining the EFTA, or even rejoining the Customs Union might be successful. Not sure there is a majority in the country determined to rejoin the EU political organisation.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[rogersix]

Lot of assumptions in there, which I'm sure you didn't mean.

I think hinderances might be exemplified in strong, binary posts where the current PM is referred to as a 'bungle####' and we might even rejoin the EU.

Pardon me if my enthusiasm for such steps forward might be tempered.

No hurdles there then, at least not from me.

I'm all for a bit of give and take.

aaah! you're triggered by the thought of the b word

at the mo, the convo is about ruling the nation by concensus

chill, think ........................ "PATRIOTISM!"

edit: it's bungle****.

not a "bungle****"

he's earned it

 

[rogersix]

Not sure it would. I think you'll find most people don't want to replay that devisive battle. However I wouldn't be surprised if a party offering a much more pragmatic partnership with the EU, perhaps looking at joining the EFTA, or even rejoining the Customs Union might be successful. Not sure there is a majority in the country determined to rejoin the EU political organisation.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

this is the way forward, realisticly, politicaly.

for the nation's wellbeing, asap, which is step by step, over twenty years maybe! for both of the obvious reasons!

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Lot of assumptions in there, which I'm sure you didn't mean.

I think hinderances might be exemplified in strong, binary posts where the current PM is referred to as a 'bungle####' and we might even rejoin the EU.

Pardon me if my enthusiasm for such steps forward might be tempered.

No hurdles there then, at least not from me.

I'm all for a bit of give and take.

Possibly not assumptions, but just my views on how I would LIKE to see things being done. When doing psychometric tests and that sort of stuff, I always come out strongly as a team player.

 

[Stat Brother]

I'm guessing this is already here somewhere, but still worthy of a repost

[tweet]1534224798850621443[/tweet]

 

[nicko31]

I don't think it would be as binary as that. Negotiations, options, rebuilding trust and friendship. I think we would find a much more welcoming and flexible EU once we had cleansed the corridors of power of barbarians like Johnson and Mogg.

People seem to have rolled over and resigned themselves to being a weak neighbour of the EU, never to return. I say time to fight back and reclaim our place at the table.

No party is being bold about calling out the failed deal, its destroying our industries. Take farming, its in total crisis

When its gone its gone, there will be no return and our food security will be weakened further.

Meanwhile for EU agric importers its business as usual, the government are basically scared of implementing their own deal and not implementing import checks.

Throw in the threats new trade deals from AU / NZ and we're heading to a very bad place

Only hard working UK exporters are getting punished

 

[Westdene Seagull]

What’s wrong with people looking to work together.

I can remember a while ago - and I can’t remember what the issue was - Therese Coffey’s shadow opposite number offering to work on a cross-party basis about something. Her response was something along the lines of “we don’t need to because we have a massive majority.

She might as well have said “@#&£ off, we don’t care what anyone else thinks and we are going to do something lots of people don’t like” - an attitude which I personally find abhorrent.

Working together might actually mean that the other side don’t change it if and when they regain power.

You mean like the rest of us do at work ? We might not agree with everything done / suggested or even actually like everyone we work with but we always have to work together. Shame politicians can't be so grown up.