Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 14:31:14 GMT
Okay...IF Corbyn had won the 7 seats he LOST, he could have formed a government by getting the support of the: SNP Lib Dems DUP Why are we considering this an achievement? Basically He would have needed the support of practically everyone in Parliament that wasn't the Tory party to form a government if he had done better and the torys done worse. This election result is down to the abject horror show of the Conservative campaign and that link shows that the Torys were just 287 votes from a majority government. So May was 287 votes away from a majority Corbyn 2200 votes away from a four party coalition. You completely failed to address the fact that the Tories got 800,000 more votes and gained 56 more seats. A 2% share of the vote gets you 56 more seats does that seem remotely fair to you? The reality is Milliband messed up so badly in the last election that Labour would have had to have Tony Blair like numbers to win the marginal seats necessary to form a government,it was never going to happen. That's not to mention the appalling gutter press and right wing media of those country which unfairly shit on Corbyn at every opportunity,not to mention the Blairite traitors in his own party that sort to undermine him at every turn. If there is an election later on this year and May stays on as prime minster I'm confident Labour will win that election,with Corbyn or someone else. The Tories count on the votes of baby boomer selfish old duffers(much like the republicans of America do) to carry them over the line,demographics are against them in this regard and I feel the next Labour government will be in power for sometime to come.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Jun 10, 2017 15:59:08 GMT
You completely failed to address the fact that the Tories got 800,000 more votes and gained 56 more seats. A 2% share of the vote gets you 56 more seats does that seem remotely fair to you? The reality is Milliband messed up so badly in the last election that Labour would have had to have Tony Blair like numbers to win the marginal seats necessary to form a government,it was never going to happen. That's not to mention the appalling gutter press and right wing media of those country which unfairly shit on Corbyn at every opportunity,not to mention the Blairite traitors in his own party that sort to undermine him at every turn. If there is an election later on this year and May stays on as prime minster I'm confident Labour will win that election,with Corbyn or someone else. The Tories count on the votes of baby boomer selfish old duffers(much like the republicans of America do) to carry them over the line,demographics are against them in this regard and I feel the next Labour government will be in power for sometime to come. I failed to address it simply because I'm not really prepared to go through the constituencies of the UK by population and why they have the numbers of MPs they have. Why does Barnsley get two MP's and the Isle of White only one? In 2010, the Torys got 2,100,000 more votes than Labour and only 48 more seats in 2001 Labour won by 2,400,00 votes, but by 238 seats. So in 2001, Labour got a 9% more of the popular vote. But 238 seats more. In 2015 Labour got 29% of the popular vote and 258 seats, the Lib dems got 23% of the popular vote and 57 seats in 2010 The Conservatives got 7% more of the popular vote, but only 48 more seats. In 2017 The Conservatives got 2% more of the popular vote, and 56 seats. In 2017 The Torys got 33% of the Welsh vote and only 20% of Welsh seats, compared to Labour who got 48% of the vote and 70% of the seats. In 2017 in Scotland, Labour got 27% of the vote and 12% of seats, compared to the SNP who got 37% of the vote and 60% of seats. The popular vote numbers are not relevant to our parliamentary system. Was it fair that in 2015 UKIP got 3,800,000 votes, making them the third largest party by vote share in the UK, more than the SNP and Lib dems combined, but only 2 seats compared to the 64 of the SNP and Lib dems? Complaining about the system after the fact isn't an argument. Labour knew the system before the election and failed to secure enough seats to form a government. If we are going to make this argument then the Labour victory in 2001 was the least fair election on the 21st century.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 16:19:09 GMT
You completely failed to address the fact that the Tories got 800,000 more votes and gained 56 more seats. A 2% share of the vote gets you 56 more seats does that seem remotely fair to you? The reality is Milliband messed up so badly in the last election that Labour would have had to have Tony Blair like numbers to win the marginal seats necessary to form a government,it was never going to happen. That's not to mention the appalling gutter press and right wing media of those country which unfairly shit on Corbyn at every opportunity,not to mention the Blairite traitors in his own party that sort to undermine him at every turn. If there is an election later on this year and May stays on as prime minster I'm confident Labour will win that election,with Corbyn or someone else. The Tories count on the votes of baby boomer selfish old duffers(much like the republicans of America do) to carry them over the line,demographics are against them in this regard and I feel the next Labour government will be in power for sometime to come. I failed to address it simply because I'm not really prepared to go through the constituencies of the UK by population and why they have the numbers of MPs they have. Why does Barnsley get two MP's and the Isle of White only one? In 2010, the Torys got 2,100,000 more votes than Labour and only 48 more seats in 2001 Labour won by 2,400,00 votes, but by 238 seats. So in 2001, Labour got a 9% more of the popular vote. But 238 seats more. In 2015 Labour got 29% of the popular vote and 258 seats, the Lib dems got 23% of the popular vote and 57 seats in 2010 The Conservatives got 7% more of the popular vote, but only 48 more seats. In 2017 The Conservatives got 2% more of the popular vote, and 56 seats. In 2017 The Torys got 33% of the Welsh vote and only 20% of Welsh seats, compared to Labour who got 48% of the vote and 70% of the seats. In 2017 in Scotland, Labour got 27% of the vote and 12% of seats, compared to the SNP who got 37% of the vote and 60% of seats. The popular vote numbers are not relevant to our parliamentary system. Was it fair that in 2015 UKIP got 3,800,000 votes, making them the third largest party by vote share in the UK, more than the SNP and Lib dems combined, but only 2 seats compared to the 64 of the SNP and Lib dems? Complaining about the system after the fact isn't an argument. Labour knew the system before the election and failed to secure enough seats to form a government. If we are going to make this argument then the Labour victory in 2001 was the least fair election on the 21st century. I already know this. If we had a representative democracy with PIP the Tories would be permanently up shit creek. You are saying Corbyn did poorly I'm saying given the system he was operating in,the backstabbing by members of his own party and his appalling treatment by sections of the media he did ok. And guess what political experts of all types agree with me.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Jun 10, 2017 17:08:05 GMT
I failed to address it simply because I'm not really prepared to go through the constituencies of the UK by population and why they have the numbers of MPs they have. Why does Barnsley get two MP's and the Isle of White only one? In 2010, the Torys got 2,100,000 more votes than Labour and only 48 more seats in 2001 Labour won by 2,400,00 votes, but by 238 seats. So in 2001, Labour got a 9% more of the popular vote. But 238 seats more. In 2015 Labour got 29% of the popular vote and 258 seats, the Lib dems got 23% of the popular vote and 57 seats in 2010 The Conservatives got 7% more of the popular vote, but only 48 more seats. In 2017 The Conservatives got 2% more of the popular vote, and 56 seats. In 2017 The Torys got 33% of the Welsh vote and only 20% of Welsh seats, compared to Labour who got 48% of the vote and 70% of the seats. In 2017 in Scotland, Labour got 27% of the vote and 12% of seats, compared to the SNP who got 37% of the vote and 60% of seats. The popular vote numbers are not relevant to our parliamentary system. Was it fair that in 2015 UKIP got 3,800,000 votes, making them the third largest party by vote share in the UK, more than the SNP and Lib dems combined, but only 2 seats compared to the 64 of the SNP and Lib dems? Complaining about the system after the fact isn't an argument. Labour knew the system before the election and failed to secure enough seats to form a government. If we are going to make this argument then the Labour victory in 2001 was the least fair election on the 21st century. I already know this. If we had a representative democracy with PIP the Tories would be permanently up shit creek. You are saying Corbyn did poorly I'm saying given the system he was operating in,the backstabbing by members of his own party and his appalling treatment by sections of the media he did ok. And guess what political experts of all types agree with me. Why? The Conservatives gotten a bigger share of the popular vote in the last three elections. We would never have a parliamentary majority government if we used PR with our parliament. Even in 2001 a PR system would have only Given the Blair government 262 seats and the Torys 209. In 2005 there would have been one or two seats in in. Whichever way you look at it, the Torys have been the biggest party in the last three elections. I'm saying that Corbyn did poorly because objectively he did poorly. Look at the opinion polls before the launch of the manifestos. Labour was mauled in the local council elections. This was a Tory loss, not a Labour win.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 17:14:53 GMT
I already know this. If we had a representative democracy with PIP the Tories would be permanently up shit creek. You are saying Corbyn did poorly I'm saying given the system he was operating in,the backstabbing by members of his own party and his appalling treatment by sections of the media he did ok. And guess what political experts of all types agree with me. Why? The Conservatives gotten a bigger share of the popular vote in the last three elections. We would never have a parliamentary majority government if we used PR with our parliament. Even in 2001 a PR system would have only Given the Blair government 262 seats and the Torys 209. In 2005 there would have been one or two seats in in. Whichever way you look at it, the Torys have been the biggest party in the last three elections. I'm saying that Corbyn did poorly because objectively he did poorly. Look at the opinion polls before the launch of the manifestos. Labour was mauled in the local council elections. This was a Tory loss, not a Labour win. Call it what you will. I given you my evaluation of Corbyn's performance. That you don't want to give credit where it's due is neither here nor there.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Jun 10, 2017 17:42:27 GMT
Why? The Conservatives gotten a bigger share of the popular vote in the last three elections. We would never have a parliamentary majority government if we used PR with our parliament. Even in 2001 a PR system would have only Given the Blair government 262 seats and the Torys 209. In 2005 there would have been one or two seats in in. Whichever way you look at it, the Torys have been the biggest party in the last three elections. I'm saying that Corbyn did poorly because objectively he did poorly. Look at the opinion polls before the launch of the manifestos. Labour was mauled in the local council elections. This was a Tory loss, not a Labour win. Call it what you will. I given you my evaluation of Corbyn's performance. That you don't want to give credit where it's due is neither here nor there. Fair enough. I personally want a Labour leader that doesn't consider losing by 60 seats a victory.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jun 10, 2017 18:18:29 GMT
tpfkar I don't know how anybody could claim otherwise with a straight face. They made large gains relative to the Tories in a contest that the Tories called expecting to make gains. loves me some nazi pug guy
|
|
RedRuth1966
Sophomore
@redruth1966
Posts: 113
Likes: 42
|
Post by RedRuth1966 on Jun 11, 2017 10:24:22 GMT
In the immortal words of Little Chris
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Jun 12, 2017 22:15:59 GMT
This is quite interesting.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 14, 2017 10:41:44 GMT
In this time of political turmoil and upheaval, it is apt remembering that this week is also the 200th anniversary of the last armed insurrection on English soil, the Pentrich Rising. We are also close to marking one of the most notorious civil massacres in British history - Peterloo. The director Mike Leigh is to make a timely film of the infamous slaughter. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterloo_Massacre Although unrelated, events both represented the social unrest and the political fears of the British establishment, a movement for change leading up to the successes of the reform movement in the 1830's.
|
|