Brexit Celebrations
Discussion
wst said:
Sway said:
We had a referendum to remove the first past the posy system. The populous rejected it. Democracy in direct action.
Oh yeah because AV was such a good system. Anyway, democracy isn't a "I turned up on the day" thing, it's a constant process."Democracy is great!"
"Can we vote again?"
"NO!"
jonnyb said:
alock said:
jonnyb> Are you therefore generally in favour of more EU regulations instead of EU directives?
Personally, I'm more in favour of regulation. In my opinion the EU should be a state in its own right and should be governed as such.I am a federalist.
Fittster said:
wst said:
Sway said:
We had a referendum to remove the first past the posy system. The populous rejected it. Democracy in direct action.
Oh yeah because AV was such a good system. Anyway, democracy isn't a "I turned up on the day" thing, it's a constant process."Democracy is great!"
"Can we vote again?"
"NO!"
It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then wins 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
Edited by SpielBoy on Tuesday 21st March 12:56
Edited by SpielBoy on Tuesday 21st March 13:03
SpielBoy said:
FFS - the Conservative and Labour voters voted for self interest!
It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then win 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
We have a representative democracy via a first past the post system. The ideal is then your representative (irrespective of the party) is your direct link with the parliamentary process. Even though I didn't vote for him my MP is obliged to respond to my questions and if need be ask them in the house of commons. That is the type of democracy we have and whilst not perfect it has stood the test of time very well.It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then win 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
Edited by SpielBoy on Tuesday 21st March 12:56
Step away from the percentages - the main thing we should be focusing on is getting the boundaries correct so that each vote in the process has the same weight. Party politics is not a needed part for a democracy - don't confuse party politics and the inherent tribalism with democracy.
sidicks said:
Fittster said:
I do love the logic
"Democracy is great!"
"Can we vote again?"
"NO!"
Of course there are those whose idea of democracy suggests we should never have had a referendum in the first place!"Democracy is great!"
"Can we vote again?"
"NO!"
I'd certainly be in favour of another referendum (to go back in) in say 5 years.
SpielBoy said:
FFS - the Conservative and Labour voters voted for self interest!
It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then wins 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
Someone around GE2015 did the maths and found that a party could have a parliamentary majority with 9.1% of the vote. That's a "worst case" but a system that allows that possibility is completely flawed.It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then wins 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
Edited by SpielBoy on Tuesday 21st March 12:56
Edited by SpielBoy on Tuesday 21st March 13:03
Jinx said:
SpielBoy said:
FFS - the Conservative and Labour voters voted for self interest!
It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then win 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
We have a representative democracy via a first past the post system. The ideal is then your representative (irrespective of the party) is your direct link with the parliamentary process. Even though I didn't vote for him my MP is obliged to respond to my questions and if need be ask them in the house of commons. That is the type of democracy we have and whilst not perfect it has stood the test of time very well.It is not democratic when a party can get 36.9% of the vote and then gets to run the country without reference to the other 63.1% who voted differently
It is not democratic when a regional party (SNP) gets 50%ish of that regions votes and then win 95% of that regions seats in parliament.
It is not democratic with other parties (Lib Dems & UKIP) can get around 10% of the vote and then receive 8 & 1 seats in parliament respectively.
It is indefensible for anyone who claims to believe in democracy to accept that this is OK.
People are being disenfranchised - it needs to change.
The ongoing consequences for our country and the divisions within it can only be dealt when we get a properly representative parliament.
Edited by SpielBoy on Tuesday 21st March 12:56
Step away from the percentages - the main thing we should be focusing on is getting the boundaries correct so that each vote in the process has the same weight. Party politics is not a needed part for a democracy - don't confuse party politics and the inherent tribalism with democracy.
The percentages aren't important? 36.9% voted conservative and we got a Conservative government (and there where similar %ages the other way back when Labour was in power)
Of course they are Important - Parliament does not represent the opinions of how people voted - that is wrong!
In my constituency the sitting conservative MP regularly gets over 50% (and there are labour constituencies elsewhere with the same issue) - if your political opinions are different to such a sitting MP there is practically no point in you even voting.
If you want people to be engaged they have to feel their vote matters.
You say the first past the post has served us well - well I would subscribe that it has actually failed us and is continuing to fail us - it has and is handing power to political parties without a popular mandate and because of this accentuated divisions within the country.
Vocal Minority said:
Mr GrimNasty said:
I see Brexit like something that just needed to be done.
Celebrating might be inappropriate and risks falling into the same trap as the remoaners, treating it like a personal loss/victory.
There should be no ego invested in the outcome.
This is exactly right. Celebrating might be inappropriate and risks falling into the same trap as the remoaners, treating it like a personal loss/victory.
There should be no ego invested in the outcome.
As a remoaner I think it was the wrong decision, but there we are, the decision has been made and we have to make sure it all goes as well as it can.
The principal reason for any celebration in my opinion is for people who want a personal gloat.
When I was 13 years old, I didn't want to join but had to get on with it.
Years later, my decision to vote to remain was based on the life I had built for myself and my family which heavily involves Europe.
I didn't moan about the result other than to mutter, "oh for f
ks sake", the next morning.Now I'm, 'lets get on with it and cross which ever hurdles and bridges appear on the road ahead.
Never seen so much gloating on anything before.
SpielBoy said:
Really?
The percentages aren't important? 36.9% voted conservative and we got a Conservative government (and there where similar %ages the other way back when Labour was in power)
Of course they are Important - Parliament does not represent the opinions of how people voted - that is wrong!
In my constituency the sitting conservative MP regularly gets over 50% (and there are labour constituencies elsewhere with the same issue) - if your political opinions are different to such a sitting MP there is practically no point in you even voting.
If you want people to be engaged they have to feel their vote matters.
You say the first past the post has served us well - well I would subscribe that it has actually failed us and is continuing to fail us - it has and is handing power to political parties without a popular mandate and because of this accentuated divisions within the country.
I would suggest this is the inherent problem with party politics not the method of counting. The percentages aren't important? 36.9% voted conservative and we got a Conservative government (and there where similar %ages the other way back when Labour was in power)
Of course they are Important - Parliament does not represent the opinions of how people voted - that is wrong!
In my constituency the sitting conservative MP regularly gets over 50% (and there are labour constituencies elsewhere with the same issue) - if your political opinions are different to such a sitting MP there is practically no point in you even voting.
If you want people to be engaged they have to feel their vote matters.
You say the first past the post has served us well - well I would subscribe that it has actually failed us and is continuing to fail us - it has and is handing power to political parties without a popular mandate and because of this accentuated divisions within the country.
Jinx said:
SpielBoy said:
Really?
The percentages aren't important? 36.9% voted conservative and we got a Conservative government (and there where similar %ages the other way back when Labour was in power)
Of course they are Important - Parliament does not represent the opinions of how people voted - that is wrong!
In my constituency the sitting conservative MP regularly gets over 50% (and there are labour constituencies elsewhere with the same issue) - if your political opinions are different to such a sitting MP there is practically no point in you even voting.
If you want people to be engaged they have to feel their vote matters.
You say the first past the post has served us well - well I would subscribe that it has actually failed us and is continuing to fail us - it has and is handing power to political parties without a popular mandate and because of this accentuated divisions within the country.
I would suggest this is the inherent problem with party politics not the method of counting. The percentages aren't important? 36.9% voted conservative and we got a Conservative government (and there where similar %ages the other way back when Labour was in power)
Of course they are Important - Parliament does not represent the opinions of how people voted - that is wrong!
In my constituency the sitting conservative MP regularly gets over 50% (and there are labour constituencies elsewhere with the same issue) - if your political opinions are different to such a sitting MP there is practically no point in you even voting.
If you want people to be engaged they have to feel their vote matters.
You say the first past the post has served us well - well I would subscribe that it has actually failed us and is continuing to fail us - it has and is handing power to political parties without a popular mandate and because of this accentuated divisions within the country.
So I would rather deal with our current reality and get proper representation based upon what we currently have as regards party based politics.
It is of course possible to retain some local constituency based representation (ie get independents elected) within some PR voting methods.
Jinx said:
Step away from the percentages - the main thing we should be focusing on is getting the boundaries correct so that each vote in the process has the same weight. Party politics is not a needed part for a democracy - don't confuse party politics and the inherent tribalism with democracy.
That cannot happen in a first past the post systems. Even after the current boundary changes about in 80% of all constituencies 45% of the votes have no value.SKP555 said:
Remember under one of the most proportional systems in the world Mark Rutte just remained PM of the Netherlands with a shade above 20% of the vote.
That's because they tend to lean towards returning a coalition style Government and "true" PR certainly does.He's not a dictator who has been installed on the back of some shonky vote.
FN2TypeR said:
SKP555 said:
Remember under one of the most proportional systems in the world Mark Rutte just remained PM of the Netherlands with a shade above 20% of the vote.
That's because they tend to lean towards returning a coalition style Government and "true" PR certainly does.He's not a dictator who has been installed on the back of some shonky vote.
And especially relevant here, does he have any particular moral right to pick and choose who he will form a coalition with, to the extent of excluding Geert Wilders PVV with 13% while including the CU with 3.4%?
SKP555 said:
No not at all. But is he any more legitimate than a PM elected by FPTP on 30% of the vote?
And especially relevant here, does he have any particular moral right to pick and choose who he will form a coalition with, to the extent of excluding Geert Wilders PVV with 13% while including the CU with 3.4%?
In order to pass legislation he will need a coalition with close to 50% of the vote. So far more legitimacy then a FPTP leader with 30% of the vote.And especially relevant here, does he have any particular moral right to pick and choose who he will form a coalition with, to the extent of excluding Geert Wilders PVV with 13% while including the CU with 3.4%?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff