Left wingers are getting a bit scared

[turbobloke]

Zod said:

turbobloke said:

edh said:

Thoughtful article here by Vernon Bogdanor

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/...

OK, I read it but afterwards I gained the impression that the title should have been "Why reasoning by assertion is an absurdity that won't fool anyone..." then added "outside the Guardian's limited core readership".

It's an anti-Tory rant dressed up and toned down for CIF.

Vernon Bogdanor taught Cameron at Oxford and misses few opportunities to tweak his former student's tail. Anyone might think he was a little jealous of his student's success.

Then he can mark his own work gamma+ (+ because there were no obvious typos).

[edh]

Nice to see that PH is a hotbed of constitutional experts...

[turbobloke]

edh said:

Nice to see that PH is a hotbed of constitutional experts...

Your sarcastic claim with a smiley doesn't improve the article in question

[PhilboSE]

ash73 said:

...give me PR and I'll take an interest in politics; until then it's just a waste of time.

The trouble with PR is that you end up with endless rounds of coalition governments unable to actually push any policies through. At least with FPTP we generally get a strong government that can implement a manifesto. But you do get anomalies with any system.

[XJ Flyer]

JagLover said:

edh said:

Thoughtful article here by Vernon Bogdanor

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/...

I would agree that the constitutional anomaly creating by devolution to Scotland & Wales does not have to be answered in its entirety by "English votes for English laws". Powers in a number of areas, including transport and policing, could be devolved to county councils and metropolitan authorities.

Other than that though it is special pleading by the left to justify a constitutional situation that would not be tolerated by any other developed country.

Edited by JagLover on Thursday 25th September 12:27

The fact that we don't have and haven't ever had under the UK union any seperate English parliament under both Lab and Con governments shows that the situation has been 'tolerated' by all sides.With the Cons seemingly happy enough with the system when it provided them with help in their majority by Ulster Unionists.

If the Cons were really serious about English votes for English policies then they would be an English Conservative Party not a federalist Unionist Party.The same applies in the case of UKIP.The fact is all sides are just mixing and matching federalism and nationalism for their own agendas.When what matters is that underneath they are all just a load of federalists masquerading as nationalists when it suits them to make the English pay for Scottish etc spending.Therefore a plague on all their houses.

[crankedup]

Steffan said:

turbobloke said:

If CMD was replaced after the election, win or lose, no sleep lost here. At present it looks as though he may well get lucky after the Scotland vote and its implications, we must wait and see if he screws the chance up as badly as he has with the nation's energy security.

A very fair point. Cameron has dropped a lot of serious political bks. His great advantage is the luck of facing the least competent Labour leader of all time. And of having the open goal of the total disaster that the Labour party demonstrated itself to be with the massive repeated economic mistakes in the Blair/ Brown terms. Without that combination of luck and a very easy target I doubt if Cameron could succeed at the next election.

As it is he might just shade a victory. But given these two matters of pure luck he still looks distinctly vulnerable. He is most certainly not politically astutute or much of a leader. I think he may win on balance. With Boris joining the fold how long Cameron can retain power will be an interesting turn of events to watch.

I agree with your POV entirely, and it's the main reason this Country is facing another five years of horse 5hit, whichever of the big two land in the hot seat. I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

[turbobloke]

crankedup said:

I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

That must signal a choice not to look at recent voting patterns or opinion polls. I appreciate that the latter can be wrong but the match-up is good at the moment and it signals Lib Dem annihilation. They may get a sympathy bounce, but my shilling on the side says it'll be not quite as high as a dead cat.

[XJ Flyer]

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

That must signal a choice not to look at recent voting patterns or opinion polls. I appreciate that the latter can be wrong but the match-up is good at the moment and it signals Lib Dem annihilation. They may get a sympathy bounce, but my shilling on the side says it'll be not quite as high as a dead cat.

In a fight between the Cons and Labour the ex Libdem vote certainly isn't going to switch to the Cons they'll either stick with Clegg or join Labour.The next election 'was' going to be all about a Labour switch to UKIP allying themselves with rebel Conservatives v what's left of the Libdems and Labour.

However Farage then saving Cameron by selling out to Gordon Brown's Scottish Unionist cause wasn't in the script.At least in the case of anyone who understands the difference between a Unionist and an 'Independence' Party.

[JagLover]

XJ Flyer said:

If the Cons were really serious about English votes for English policies then they would be an English Conservative Party not a federalist Unionist Party.

Not at all

For the union to work going forward there needs to be fairness and proper devolution for all members of the union.

[crankedup]

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

I'm not disagreeing regarding independence for England. But given the choice of an independent England stuck with a one party political agenda I would ditch the independence choice. So far as local democracy and decision making goes, that feels me with dread, its bad enough as it stands now. Just look at these Police crime commissioners and their cronies for a taste of localism.

It looks suspiciously as though you don't like it because you know what colour tie will be involved for the most part and it's not yellow or red.

PCC is an easy cherry pick given recent news items. For national fusterclucks via centralised decision making see just about everything under 'Labour UK'. For lessons on how to hold back national recovery try the LibDem contribution to the coalition which has tried to out-Labour the Labour party and seen electoral support fall off a cliff. Fortunately there may well be so few yellow ties on the lizards next time as to prevent a repeat performance.

Its pitiful/tiresome that you seem to lower every thread with your same angst against Labour/Lib-Dem. In this instance your 'suspicions' have entirely misdirected the tone.

[crankedup]

XJ Flyer said:

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

That must signal a choice not to look at recent voting patterns or opinion polls. I appreciate that the latter can be wrong but the match-up is good at the moment and it signals Lib Dem annihilation. They may get a sympathy bounce, but my shilling on the side says it'll be not quite as high as a dead cat.

In a fight between the Cons and Labour the ex Libdem vote certainly isn't going to switch to the Cons they'll either stick with Clegg or join Labour.The next election 'was' going to be all about a Labour switch to UKIP allying themselves with rebel Conservatives v what's left of the Libdems and Labour.

However Farage then saving Cameron by selling out to Gordon Brown's Scottish Unionist cause wasn't in the script.At least in the case of anyone who understands the difference between a Unionist and an 'Independence' Party.

I agree that many Lib-Dems will vote Labour, that is unless the Lib-Dems polling shows an upturn from its current position. Personally I cannot yet bring myself to vote Tory or Labour, but if it means keeping the Tories out then I shall bite the bullet voting, well UKIP are now sucking up to Tories, so it will have to be the WHO'S LEFT.

Edited by crankedup on Thursday 25th September 19:15

[XJ Flyer]

JagLover said:

XJ Flyer said:

If the Cons were really serious about English votes for English policies then they would be an English Conservative Party not a federalist Unionist Party.

Not at all

For the union to work going forward there needs to be fairness and proper devolution for all members of the union.

The fact is devolution and federalism are as contradictory as an ideologically Unionist/Independence Party.Assuming that the Union was 'working' and 'going forward' with 'fairness' for all then it obviously wouldn't need devolution because every part of the Union would be working for the interests of each other.Which just like any federalist state is just socialist dreaming because the real world doesn't work like that.

Which is why there's no way that the Scottish MP's will settle for anything which doesn't give them more out of the UK budget than the English get in terms of public spending per head let alone the same.

Which just leaves any prospective English parliament with the choice of cutting English spending and/or increasing English taxes to pay for it.Which is why the federalist Cameron wants an 'English parliament' to create the powers needed for him to make the cuts and probably bring in some sort of replacement for Thatcher's poll tax.

When what was/is really needed is an English nationalist government in an independent England that stands for the interests of the English working classes.That 'would/could/should have been' UKIP after confirming that the 'UK' in UKIP wasn't an ideological position and that it is as anti Cameron as it is anti Miliband and Brown and as anti federalist in the case of the UK as it 'supposedly' is in the case of the EU.

When the fact is they've let the English working classes down catastrophically in that regard by supporting Cameron and Brown in keeping the federalist idea of the UK staggering on.Thereby removing any real credibility that such an ideologically Unionist Party can really also stand for 'Independence' in whatever form.

[XJ Flyer]

crankedup said:

XJ Flyer said:

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

That must signal a choice not to look at recent voting patterns or opinion polls. I appreciate that the latter can be wrong but the match-up is good at the moment and it signals Lib Dem annihilation. They may get a sympathy bounce, but my shilling on the side says it'll be not quite as high as a dead cat.

In a fight between the Cons and Labour the ex Libdem vote certainly isn't going to switch to the Cons they'll either stick with Clegg or join Labour.The next election 'was' going to be all about a Labour switch to UKIP allying themselves with rebel Conservatives v what's left of the Libdems and Labour.

However Farage then saving Cameron by selling out to Gordon Brown's Scottish Unionist cause wasn't in the script.At least in the case of anyone who understands the difference between a Unionist and an 'Independence' Party.

I agree that many Lib-Dems will vote Labour, that is unless the Lib-Dems polling shows an upturn from its current position. Personally I cannot yet bring myself to vote Tory or Labour, but if it means keeping the Tories out then I shall bite the bullet voting, well UKIP are now sucking up to Tories, so it will have to be the WHO'S LEFT.

Edited by crankedup on Thursday 25th September 19:15

^ This.The bit that the Cons supporters can't seem to get their heads around is that it is possible to have a disillusioned Labour vote that despises Cameron's ideology as much as Miliband's.Especially when that vote is looking for a fair deal and a genuine new force in UKIP to dump all the old federalist order and make England work for the English working classes without either the spectre of the Cons self serving policies or Labour's outdated failed ideology of socialism.

[turbobloke]

XJ Flyer said:

crankedup said:

XJ Flyer said:

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

That must signal a choice not to look at recent voting patterns or opinion polls. I appreciate that the latter can be wrong but the match-up is good at the moment and it signals Lib Dem annihilation. They may get a sympathy bounce, but my shilling on the side says it'll be not quite as high as a dead cat.

In a fight between the Cons and Labour the ex Libdem vote certainly isn't going to switch to the Cons they'll either stick with Clegg or join Labour.The next election 'was' going to be all about a Labour switch to UKIP allying themselves with rebel Conservatives v what's left of the Libdems and Labour.

However Farage then saving Cameron by selling out to Gordon Brown's Scottish Unionist cause wasn't in the script.At least in the case of anyone who understands the difference between a Unionist and an 'Independence' Party.

I agree that many Lib-Dems will vote Labour, that is unless the Lib-Dems polling shows an upturn from its current position. Personally I cannot yet bring myself to vote Tory or Labour, but if it means keeping the Tories out then I shall bite the bullet voting, well UKIP are now sucking up to Tories, so it will have to be the WHO'S LEFT.

^ This.The bit that the Cons supporters can't seem to get their heads around is that it is possible to have a disillusioned Labour vote that despises Cameron's ideology as much as Miliband's.

LibDems may vote Labour, a lot won't.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/03/ukip-...

Also, where is the evidence that Conservatice supporters claim that scenario is off limits? A disillusioned Labour voter despising CMD's ideology would be unremarkable.

As to "the spectre of the Cons self serving policies" when did classic lizards not have scales, the issue is degree - and the left takes the biscuit on that score. A suitable illustration follows.

Former Mr Speaker Gorbals Mick Martin said:

I didn't come into politics not to take what's owed to me.

[XJ Flyer]

turbobloke said:

XJ Flyer said:

crankedup said:

XJ Flyer said:

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

I hope the Lib-Dems can creep back in somewhere/somehow to take the edge off the worst of the 'big two'.

That must signal a choice not to look at recent voting patterns or opinion polls. I appreciate that the latter can be wrong but the match-up is good at the moment and it signals Lib Dem annihilation. They may get a sympathy bounce, but my shilling on the side says it'll be not quite as high as a dead cat.

In a fight between the Cons and Labour the ex Libdem vote certainly isn't going to switch to the Cons they'll either stick with Clegg or join Labour.The next election 'was' going to be all about a Labour switch to UKIP allying themselves with rebel Conservatives v what's left of the Libdems and Labour.

However Farage then saving Cameron by selling out to Gordon Brown's Scottish Unionist cause wasn't in the script.At least in the case of anyone who understands the difference between a Unionist and an 'Independence' Party.

I agree that many Lib-Dems will vote Labour, that is unless the Lib-Dems polling shows an upturn from its current position. Personally I cannot yet bring myself to vote Tory or Labour, but if it means keeping the Tories out then I shall bite the bullet voting, well UKIP are now sucking up to Tories, so it will have to be the WHO'S LEFT.

^ This.The bit that the Cons supporters can't seem to get their heads around is that it is possible to have a disillusioned Labour vote that despises Cameron's ideology as much as Miliband's.

LibDems may vote Labour, a lot won't.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/03/ukip-...

Also, where is the evidence that Conservatice supporters claim that scenario is off limits? A disillusioned Labour voter despising CMD's ideology would be unremarkable.

As to "the spectre of the Cons self serving policies" when did classic lizards not have scales, the issue is degree - and the left takes the biscuit on that score. A suitable illustration follows.

Former Mr Speaker Gorbals Mick Martin said:

I didn't come into politics not to take what's owed to me.

As I've said it isn't an issue of simplistic labels in terms of 'left' v right'.It is all about actual policies and being consistent in terms of an ideological position.In this case it is possible to hold both the so called 'left' and the so called 'right' in equal contempt.

IE what label do you attach to anyone who supports a line which sees working class advancement in terms of just income levels not the politics of envy in bringing the upper classes down.With a Capitalist economy run on Fordist lines which would obviously mean trade barriers and radical change in immigration policy to change the labour market from one of excessive supply to one of at least equilibrium,preferably excess demand,for the indigenous workforce.All under an anti federalist agenda in terms of both the EU and the UK.

[turbobloke]

?

[mph1977]

PhilboSE said:

ash73 said:

...give me PR and I'll take an interest in politics; until then it's just a waste of time.

The trouble with PR is that you end up with endless rounds of coalition governments unable to actually push any policies through. At least with FPTP we generally get a strong government that can implement a manifesto. But you do get anomalies with any system.

depends which form of PR you choose, single transferable vote is the one that allows single representative constituencies and encourages parties to present a manifest owith borad appeal as your second choice votes can be as important as your first choice votes ...

[Gaspode]

STV has always seemed to me to be the best way of ensuring we get a set of MPs that more genuinely reflect the preferences of the electorate than FPTP, and it could be done easily within the current format, so you'd still get all the advantages of having a local constituency MP.

But, as the last referendum showed, the people aren't interested. That's democracy for you - we end up with the government we deserve, not the one we want...

[turbobloke]

Gaspode said:

STV has always seemed to me to be the best way of ensuring we get a set of MPs that more genuinely reflect the preferences of the electorate than FPTP, and it could be done easily within the current format, so you'd still get all the advantages of having a local constituency MP.

But, as the last referendum showed, the people aren't interested. That's democracy for you - we end up with the government we deserve, not the one we want...

I can't speak for others but I suspect I have company in not wanting to allow a coterie of maverick minority groups any access to national policymaking. It's bad enough when a couple of communities lose all sense and vote them in, at least in those cases the idiocy falls on a limited number of people in an area or two where the electorate was collectively daft enough to ask for it.

[edh]

turbobloke said:

Gaspode said:

STV has always seemed to me to be the best way of ensuring we get a set of MPs that more genuinely reflect the preferences of the electorate than FPTP, and it could be done easily within the current format, so you'd still get all the advantages of having a local constituency MP.

But, as the last referendum showed, the people aren't interested. That's democracy for you - we end up with the government we deserve, not the one we want...

I can't speak for others but I suspect I have company in not wanting to allow a coterie of maverick minority groups any access to national policymaking. It's bad enough when a couple of communities lose all sense and vote them in, at least in those cases the idiocy falls on a limited number of people in an area or two where the electorate was collectively daft enough to ask for it.

but the Lib Dems got into power under FPTP? Anyway, some form of PR works in many countries, so why not here? So many people are disenfranchised under the current system.