Sir Ed Davey - Lib. Dem Leader

[pequod]

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

I wondered why the LibDems never mention anything other than PR, including the German/Kiwi (et al) mode as was previously mentioned, which would appear to be a fairer system of selecting MP's, so I had a further excavation of the matter!

Lo and behold, it will be Labour who will suffer the most ....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep...

The ambition is to be applauded, yet, if they expect the 'probable' next Govt to change the system, then they are barking mad and are simply a Party of protest.

Shame really.

Labour may suffer the most, but Labour have been almost perpetually in opposition, other than (mostly!) under Blair anyway.

So it's official Opposition (via PR) or bust for the LIbDems? Sod the electorate, who may consider a new form of democracy, as the German system wouldn't be to LD's advantage.

Quelle surprise!!!

Pardon?

Yes, you are! Or has the official LibDem policy changed in the last 15 minutes?

... Just going to check >>>>>

[MC Bodge]

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

I wondered why the LibDems never mention anything other than PR, including the German/Kiwi (et al) mode as was previously mentioned, which would appear to be a fairer system of selecting MP's, so I had a further excavation of the matter!

Lo and behold, it will be Labour who will suffer the most ....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep...

The ambition is to be applauded, yet, if they expect the 'probable' next Govt to change the system, then they are barking mad and are simply a Party of protest.

Shame really.

Labour may suffer the most, but Labour have been almost perpetually in opposition, other than (mostly!) under Blair anyway.

So it's official Opposition (via PR) or bust for the LIbDems? Sod the electorate, who may consider a new form of democracy, as the German system wouldn't be to LD's advantage.

Quelle surprise!!!

Pardon?

Yes, you are! Or has the official LibDem policy changed in the last 15 minutes?

... Just going to check >>>>>

Are you OK?

[pequod]

MC Bodge said:

Are you OK?

Fine, thanks!

I notice you haven't provided an opinion about the 'German' way? Any reason?

[MC Bodge]

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

Are you OK?

Fine, thanks!

I notice you haven't provided an opinion about the 'German' way? Any reason?

Did you ask?

I favour a system like Germany's.

[pequod]

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

Are you OK?

Fine, thanks!

I notice you haven't provided an opinion about the 'German' way? Any reason?

Did you ask?

I favour a system like Germany's.

'Like', or the same as Germany uses? If it's good enough for post war Germans then why not adopt the same here?

[MC Bodge]

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

Are you OK?

Fine, thanks!

I notice you haven't provided an opinion about the 'German' way? Any reason?

Did you ask?

I favour a system like Germany's.

'Like', or the same as Germany uses? If it's good enough for post war Germans then why not adopt the same here?

Are we disagreeing?

I'm in no position to influence it, but yes. Germany's system.

The UK is unfortunately based too much on SE England though. The German economy and population is more evenly divided.

[Derek Smith]

dcb said:

+1

I've had quite a few chats with non-Tory voters and they quite liked the Tory-LD
coalition.

At very least, it prevented the more extreme Tory policies being enacted and brought
a wider group to the table to sort out what's right.

Getting the politicos to sit around a table and make them reach a consensus
seems a better way to go. Certainly helps keep the politicos out of running the
country, which is mostly a good thing.

NB Belgium ran quite happily for years without a functioning government, as a few posters have noticed.

I'm an occasional tory voter and I thought the coalition allowed the government to concentrate on matters of importance, as the weirdos had little power.

[MC Bodge]

Derek Smith said:

I'm an occasional tory voter and I thought the coalition allowed the government to concentrate on matters of importance, as the weirdos had little power.

Unlike the past few years.

Braverman, Dorries, "Sir" Gavin Williamson etc. really are awful. Political and intellectual lightweights. How anybody can still have faith th in the Tories is a mystery.

[pequod]

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

pequod said:

MC Bodge said:

Are you OK?

Fine, thanks!

I notice you haven't provided an opinion about the 'German' way? Any reason?

Did you ask?

I favour a system like Germany's.

'Like', or the same as Germany uses? If it's good enough for post war Germans then why not adopt the same here?

Are we disagreeing?

I'm in no position to influence it, but yes. Germany's system.

The UK is unfortunately based too much on SE England though. The German economy and population is more evenly divided.

I don't think we are disagreeing, I'm just trying to clarify what LibDem supporters are trying to achieve?

If, as is likely, the next government will be formed by Labour it seems most improbable, as the Guardian article I posted previously suggests, they will grant a referendum to change the system from FPTP to PR, or consider rejoining the EU, yet you and your fellow LibDems will be campaigning to 'Stop the Tories' same as last week's local elections, to what end?

Do the LibDems really believe Labour will do any better than the Tories at running the country?

[Bannock]

Diderot said:

precisely this. The Tory party has always been an absurdly broad church, but if we had PR, the factions would simply coalesce into smaller parties. Same with the Labour factions. It would be chaos.

I'll try asking this again, as it seems the FPTP Church don't like the question (coincidentally they seem to align with people I've seen on here supporting the Tories and Brexit) : how would you characterise the last 7 years in politics and government, if not "chaos"?

[768]

All things are relative. It absolutely could have been more chaotic.

[Diderot]

Bannock said:

Diderot said:

precisely this. The Tory party has always been an absurdly broad church, but if we had PR, the factions would simply coalesce into smaller parties. Same with the Labour factions. It would be chaos.

I'll try asking this again, as it seems the FPTP Church don't like the question (coincidentally they seem to align with people I've seen on here supporting the Tories and Brexit) : how would you characterise the last 7 years in politics and government, if not "chaos"?

Ahem, how long did it take for Belgium to form a Government? How long did it take for Germany to form a Government recently? Italy is the paragon of political stability obviously. Rhetorical questions and an ironical statement. Be careful what you wish for.

To answer your loaded question, the last 7 turbulent years have not been the fault of FPTP, because as you seem to have forgotten there was a referendum. (For the record, as much as I detest the EU, I voted remain).

[SpeckledJim]

Bannock said:

Diderot said:

precisely this. The Tory party has always been an absurdly broad church, but if we had PR, the factions would simply coalesce into smaller parties. Same with the Labour factions. It would be chaos.

I'll try asking this again, as it seems the FPTP Church don't like the question (coincidentally they seem to align with people I've seen on here supporting the Tories and Brexit) : how would you characterise the last 7 years in politics and government, if not "chaos"?

I'd say it's been 'relatively disorderly by the long-term standards of the UK'.

The problem if you succumb to Drama Inflation, if you use the word 'chaos' to describe the UK, then you haven't left yourself many words to describe places that really are actually chaotic.

If we rewind 7 years and drop the same challenges into the lap of a coalition of

1. Some former Tory Wets
2. Some former Labour Blairites
3. Some comatose Lib Dems
4. Some N.Irish Nationalist Nutters
5. Some Scottish Nationalist Nutters
6. Some English Defence Deplorables
7. The St Jeremy of Islington Worshipful Gathering of Lunatics

Do we really think that together they'd have made a better job of it all?

[Bannock]

SpeckledJim said:

Bannock said:

Diderot said:

precisely this. The Tory party has always been an absurdly broad church, but if we had PR, the factions would simply coalesce into smaller parties. Same with the Labour factions. It would be chaos.

I'll try asking this again, as it seems the FPTP Church don't like the question (coincidentally they seem to align with people I've seen on here supporting the Tories and Brexit) : how would you characterise the last 7 years in politics and government, if not "chaos"?

I'd say it's been 'relatively disorderly by the long-term standards of the UK'.

The problem if you succumb to Drama Inflation, if you use the word 'chaos' to describe the UK, then you haven't left yourself many words to describe places that really are actually chaotic.

If we rewind 7 years and drop the same challenges into the lap of a coalition of

1. Some former Tory Wets
2. Some former Labour Blairites
3. Some comatose Lib Dems
4. Some N.Irish Nationalist Nutters
5. Some Scottish Nationalist Nutters
6. Some English Defence Deplorables
7. The St Jeremy of Islington Worshipful Gathering of Lunatics

Do we really think that together they'd have made a better job of it all?

Ignoring your daft descriptions and labels, yes I do think that a coalition which excluded the Tories at the last couple of elections would have done a better job. That's why I voted in the only way I could in 2019 to try to generate that outcome of a hung Parliament (i.e. I voted tactically in my constituency to keep the Tory out, rather than voting for the person/party I actually wanted - because FPTP forces me to do that in the circumstances). It worked in my marginal constituency, but sadly there were enough nutters elsewhere who thought Boris Johnson was the man.

[SpeckledJim]

Fair enough then.

[Diderot]

Bannock said:

SpeckledJim said:

Bannock said:

Diderot said:

precisely this. The Tory party has always been an absurdly broad church, but if we had PR, the factions would simply coalesce into smaller parties. Same with the Labour factions. It would be chaos.

I'll try asking this again, as it seems the FPTP Church don't like the question (coincidentally they seem to align with people I've seen on here supporting the Tories and Brexit) : how would you characterise the last 7 years in politics and government, if not "chaos"?

I'd say it's been 'relatively disorderly by the long-term standards of the UK'.

The problem if you succumb to Drama Inflation, if you use the word 'chaos' to describe the UK, then you haven't left yourself many words to describe places that really are actually chaotic.

If we rewind 7 years and drop the same challenges into the lap of a coalition of

1. Some former Tory Wets
2. Some former Labour Blairites
3. Some comatose Lib Dems
4. Some N.Irish Nationalist Nutters
5. Some Scottish Nationalist Nutters
6. Some English Defence Deplorables
7. The St Jeremy of Islington Worshipful Gathering of Lunatics

Do we really think that together they'd have made a better job of it all?

Ignoring your daft descriptions and labels, yes I do think that a coalition which excluded the Tories at the last couple of elections would have done a better job. That's why I voted in the only way I could in 2019 to try to generate that outcome of a hung Parliament (i.e. I voted tactically in my constituency to keep the Tory out, rather than voting for the person/party I actually wanted - because FPTP forces me to do that in the circumstances). It worked in my marginal constituency, but sadly there were enough nutters elsewhere who thought Boris Johnson was the man.

Thankfully there were not enough nutters who thought Jezza was their man.

[Graveworm]

Blue62 said:

SpeckledJim said:

And reduces the power given to fringe and single-issue nutters.

In the end there’s no perfect system, but if you believe that representation should more accurately reflect actual votes then FPTP falls well short, it just enables a two party system with the same party in power most of the time.

On the point about single issues, whatever your politics it’s fair to say that the U.K. under FPTP has seen its ruling party infected by a single issue for many years, resulting in the rise of politicians like Dorries, Mogg, Anderson, Coffey, Braverman, Patel, Truss, Brigden et al, meaning that FPTP is hardly a glowing advertisement for avoiding nutters.

In PR no one gets who they vote for they get the party they vote for, who choose who to send to parliament. So you are not represented by anyone.

In PR no one gets what they voted for, as no one votes for a coalition. In FPTP at least, usually, as many as possible get what they voted for. Our history is littered with examples of where coalitions don't work here. Even countries where it does work, necessarily, have systems where devolved systems look very different, They also frequently have months of paralysis, where no government can be formed and the country is being run with almost no leadership.

It's pointless changing votes, next time, as the party could not be able to enact the policies that caused your change and without directly elected constituency MPs you have no one to tell what you want or hold accountable. So neither your vote nor your reason for voting is representative.

The irony isn't lost on many that the Liberal Democrats, using the inherent weakness of coalitions, leveraged a referendum and lost. Opinion polls in February showed nearly 2 to one of UK adults support FPTP over the alternatives. However, instead of respecting democracy, now they want PR, without a referendum in the face of majority support for parties opposed to PR. which is neither democratic nor representative.

Ed Davey is my MP, I have met him many times, he seems a sensible chap and I voted for him. That doesn't change my views on why PR isn't for us.

TLDR PR gives no one what or who they voted for and isn't representative at all.

Edited by Graveworm on Sunday 14th May 07:51

[Carl_Manchester]

In our hour of need Brits need re-assurances that the Lib Dems. can help pick up the pieces at the next election.

Here he is in all of his glory on Nick Ferrari for 30 minutes.

It is therefore re-assuring to me as a voter that Ed has chosen this moment (29 minutes 30 seconds) to respond to the question of our times....

'what is a woman?'.

https://www.youtube.com/live/mk5401npbtg?feature=s...

[Gecko1978]

Carl_Manchester said:

In our hour of need Brits need re-assurances that the Lib Dems. can help pick up the pieces at the next election.

Here he is in all of his glory on Nick Ferrari for 30 minutes.

It is therefore re-assuring to me as a voter that Ed has chosen this moment (29 minutes 30 seconds) to respond to the question of our times....

'what is a woman?'.

https://www.youtube.com/live/mk5401npbtg?feature=s...

His answer was some women could have a penis

[86]

Gecko1978 said:

Carl_Manchester said:

In our hour of need Brits need re-assurances that the Lib Dems. can help pick up the pieces at the next election.

Here he is in all of his glory on Nick Ferrari for 30 minutes.

It is therefore re-assuring to me as a voter that Ed has chosen this moment (29 minutes 30 seconds) to respond to the question of our times....

'what is a woman?'.

https://www.youtube.com/live/mk5401npbtg?feature=s...

His answer was some women could have a penis

No woman in her right mind would vote for this idiot