Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Christ fucking alive.
vote ukip, get labour. vote snp, get tory. vote green, get snp. vote libdem, get laughed at.
"Labour has scrapped all plans to run billboard posters of David Cameron during the general election campaign in what it says it is a deliberate attempt to avoid “negative personalised adverts” and raise the tone of debate."
going well so far.
but after saying he'll let Scottish Labour do their own thing they decide to use their new-found freedom make him look stupid too.
I love that they just don't seem to get it. That's what happens when you treat a bundle of seats as a given.
If you're an independent-minded scot, then its vote SNP, get SNP and another chance for independence.
...they remembered how successful their negative campaigning at the last Scottish election was and decided it was a tactic worth sticking with.
How did you vote last time?
How on earth did the LibDems & the UK manage to fuck up a referendum on PR
Mainly because the Yes campaign was woeful compared to the No campaign, but also because AV wasn't enough for many people who did/do want constitutional change and so they voted against, presumably not realising it meant constitutional change would be off the menu for another generation after a no vote.
I mean first of all the LibDems have been campaigning for PR since they were a brand new party - it's been so central to their belief system for as long as I can remember. I really cannot get my head around why Clegg didn't make it an absolute deal-breaker in forming a coalition that a yes/no referendum on PR would go ahead or even an FPTP/PR/AV straight choice (I realise these aren't exactly accurate terms)
the Lib Dems were totally unprepared for a campaign on ANY form of electoral reform. The arguments quite obviously hadn't been rehearsed and refined properly, the funding wasn't there and the backing wasn't in place. If they couldn't win the argument over a tiny improvement in the system, there's no way they'd have managed a wholesale change to the way we elect our MPs.
I mean it's still just counting votes but simply allocating seats differently
you could even have kept constituencies by having party lists
but them leading and winning a campaign... yeah, I'm inclined to agree
such a shame though - a massive lost opportunity for a more modern & inclusive political landscape in the UK that would mean none of this votethisgetthat bollocks
it's surely going to be on the cards following this election, which by all indications isn't going to produce either a winner or a result that anyone is happy with.
or less inclined to have PR - all this 'hung parliaments forever' fearmongering etc.
I guess it depends on the voter turnout, if it's appallingly low then clearly something has to be changed in order to motivate people to engage
the only thing FPTP is supposed to have going for it is its ability to produce a winner. "it's a horrible system, but it gives us a result". If it fails to do that for a second time running, we SURELY have to look seriously at changing it.
the british public are fucking useless right enough so we'll probably still be complaining about this 100 years from now.
whatever the result, too many people in both the Labour and Conservative party depend upon the current system to retain their taste of power. They'll throw out the argument that the people spoke on reform only 3/4 years ago and decided against any change, so it's a waste of time and money to go over the same thing again, particularly in this time of austerity - that pro-reform people just want to ask the question over and over again until they get the answer they want.
If Miliband had got rid of the dinosaurs in the Labour Party and they were the largest party then maybe you might have got something out of them, but it ain't happening before the 2020 parliament.
No chance they'll let us get AV. They've too much to lose.
They did get that yes/no referendum, didn't they? I thought it was an absolute deal-breaker and it took a while to come to fruition.
As to why it failed, colinzealuk nailed it somewhat, because certainly the people who were all AV-or-nothing are absolute fucking maniacs. I generally assume most of those were people who liked to pretend they wanted AV but really just wanted the status quo, particularly if they were politicians.
On top of that, referendums generally keep the status quo, don't they? I thought it was mostly a given that people as a group tend to be shit scared of change.
Not a yes/no on PR. Brilliantly, the Lib Dems didn't actually support AV.
but it seemed to be the only thing that they would get through to a vote
I demonstrated on here (sometime in the past) how PR mechanism would work, and how clear it was, and certain and fair, and also keep local representation (I cant just come up with it immediately again...I had some figures and calculations and stuff to demonstrate.....alas I dont know how to find it again)
Nothing to do with Lib Dems not running a good campaign.
so that they could put that behind them once and for all, and try to just be more popular due to disillusionment with tories and labour.
the campaign was appallingly badly done......and they could have easily bargain chipped with the tories......
exchanging their co-operation over student fees (hugely controversial and reversal of their manifesto and an ideological problem for libdems)
with tory party co-operating over electoral reform (not at all controversial, and not an ideological problem for conservatives)
so why didnt they do this as a bargain? weakness? ineptitude? or secretly not caring?
where a large part of the Tory party threw huge amounts of effort and money into the no campaign and wanted blood from Cameron for agreeing to a referendum.
Think you've just made that up, bro.
You read Matt D'Ancona's `In It Together`? Gives an account of how the agreement came into being, how it was viewed in the party, but also the impact on Clegg of Cameron's saying that the Tories wouldn't campaign against AV, and then did so with such fervent gusto it was actually hilarious.
Clegg's reneging on boundary reform actually has more of its roots in Cameron's behaviour re: AV then it does re: House of Lords reform as it commonly cited.
Imagining Clegg coming back to his party clutching the list of Tory agreements as very
and those that had supported and voted for LibDems, what had gone on and the reason for not backing boundary reform?
Why has he chosen to not allow the electorate to not know what went on? Do the public not deserve to know? hasnt he been given reason to do such a thing? (even John Major let us all know that there were 'bastards up against him')
Why does Clegg want to keep these things from the voters?
that, in exchange for the libdems facilitating the tuition fees.....which was pretty extreme, they would exhange for the tories facilitating PR (which is not extreme).
now if clegg then just let cameron roll him over because cameron said "hey nick, you know when we did those promises and i said if you'd scratch my back, even though more against what libdems want.....that i would scratch your back, and you know that when you asked for assurances that i would be able to deliver on that future scratch? well it turns out that I was wrong, even though the conservative party is not ideologically oppossed to democracy, many of my party are really to angry to do a deal with you, so its off Im afraid.....they are ideologically opposed to doing a deal with you...........now i know that you are a party of co-alition.....but lets face it, you're very very tiny......also you are a great big sucker........whatcha gonna do bout it? "
so yes perhaps its weakness on behalf of the libdems/clegg that caused it.
Clegg could always have gone(or threatened to go public with) "we entered into partnership with the tories and agreed compromises on our behalf, however they have now reneged on their agreement, we renounce this co-alition, because the conservatives have betrayed their promises"
THaT would have been effective....that would not be weak, that would be strong and powerful.
surely vindicates Brands stance, and invalidates claims that 'you have to be involved to get electoral reform'
It surely shows that you cannot 'Vote for democratic refoem'
Some Libdem voters must have been Sooooooo gutted.
there was a lady who was a member of the labour party. vote labour and you get her and she was really nice. david c even really liked her but not in a poison chalice inwainbows, way just in a respectful way because she was clearly one of the greats.
The one where some Tory MPs were going to assault the cameraman.
I could only find the tamer version :(
It's not a PR voting system for a start - which is the bare minimum that those of us who support electoral reform would like to see.
The system doesn't provide for a more equitable distribution of seats according to national vote - see this for instance:
Personally I'd like to see an electoral system along German lines, with single member constituencies and party lists to provide a proportional element. I think that offers the best of both worlds.
I doubt there's many people who'd argue that it's a good system for getting a representative parliament, which would be my goal too.
That said, personally, I'd argue it's a better system than we currently have, if only because it means you don't have to consider whether to vote tactically any more but it's all ground that was trodden very well during the referendum. Sadly I can't see any better system being tabled before we've had a couple more general elections now.
I remember when the yes campaign repeatedly insisted that scotland voting labour didnt affect the outcome of uk GEs.
Bless you for trying, though.
yeah... no that wasn't what people were saying. But anyway, 'bless me for trying' except that scotland voting labour actually affected the outcome of the very last general election, sooo...
You missed a 'LOL' and a 'whatever' somewhere along the way.
And you went off down an entirely incoherent rabbit hole of denial without explanation the last time we did this, too. So you're consistent, at least.
thewza is just as insincere just as often.