snap general election?

rick_chasey

The difference is mentality.

All parties are expected to go into coalition.

It would be entirely reasonable in PR for lib Dems to work with Tories for example.

In PR, given what happens with Brexit, a grand coalition wouldn't be out of the question.

And this is all before you take into account people vote differently under different systems.

mamba80

meanredspider wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

So we d now have a coalition of lab/lib/greens and/or snp/PC ? though how regional devolved areas would fit in i m not sure?
but as i said, we d have all had a chance to vote for them dependant on the exact type of PR.

i dont think you seem to realise how finely balanced the situation in NI is, its not that May is seeking a coalition/agreement (thats totally understandable) its who it is with and where they are based.

I don't know what we'd have. The Lib Dems are unlikely to form a coalition with anyone after the last time.

I understand exactly what the situation is in N Ireland.

NOTHING in what I've said indicates I'm happy with what is happening and I'm not a "right" as you seemed to indicate in the post you deleted. Before this election result, what I said is that I don't think our current form of democracy is serving us very well - not many people agreed. But now we have this result - which is totally fair under the rules - everyone's complaining about it.

deleted because you d posted the answer already... you come across as right of centre esp when you use "suck it up whinge"

under PR the libdems (or any other small party) would be expected to form coalitions with the larger ones.

i totally agree that our system of democracy needs up dating, no argument there but for me a type of PR is the best solution, its wrong that so many people voted for ukip and got no MP's in 2015

we also should nt need to vote tactically as everyone should have a valid meaningful vote.

meanredspider

Rick Chasey wrote:

The difference is mentality.

All parties are expected to go into coalition.

It would be entirely reasonable in PR for lib Dems to work with Tories for example.

In PR, given what happens with Brexit, a grand coalition wouldn't be out of the question.

And this is all before you take into account people vote differently under different systems.

The lesson the Lib Dems learned in their coalition is that the big party takes all the credit for the good stuff and the small party takes the blame for all the bad stuff.

veronese68

KingstonGraham wrote:

Just a small point, but if you think they make Trump's lot look reasonable, may I point you in the direction of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions. Or even the VP.

Poetic licence, just not very poetic. More of a rant.

kingstongraham

meanredspider wrote:

But now we have this result - which is totally fair under the rules - everyone's complaining about it.

Welcome to politics.

kingstongraham

bianchimoon wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/bills/public/english-votes-for-english-laws/

Labour still 70 seats behind in England though.

yes but this chaotic, desperate, disgraceful coalition will without doubt make Corbyn and labour stronger in this Autumns (or before) election

Unless it's a massive shift, Labour will need a coalition with the SNP to get a majority.

Tuition fees are devolved. They won't be able to deliver it in England without Conservative votes. Unless I'm reading that wrong.

meanredspider

KingstonGraham wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

But now we have this result - which is totally fair under the rules - everyone's complaining about it.

Welcome to politics.

Well, absolutely. I'm first-and-foremost a realist so you won't hear me complaining about whether it's right that, under our form of democracy, a small crowd is holding the Tories by the balls (the BBC used this expression). Whether it's a sensible thing for May to be doing in this instance is questionable. That said, the DUP has been supporting the Tories for as long as I can remember so, in some ways, the response is a little hysterical.

surrey_commuter

meanredspider wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

But now we have this result - which is totally fair under the rules - everyone's complaining about it.

Welcome to politics.

Well, absolutely. I'm first-and-foremost a realist so you won't hear me complaining about whether it's right that, under our form of democracy, a small crowd is holding the Tories by the balls (the BBC used this expression). Whether it's a sensible thing for May to be doing in this instance is questionable. That said, the DUP has been supporting the Tories for as long as I can remember so, in some ways, the response is a little hysterical.

Also think how many Tory MPs share those same views on gay marriage, abortion and evolution- I would bet my house it is more than ten.

surrey_commuter

I think the libdems should accept Brexit is happening and concentrate on influencing hard or soft. To that end they should have offered a Tory coalition but with agreements on what Brexit will look like.

If they are never going to enter a coalition I do not see the point of the libdems.

briantrumpet

meanredspider wrote:

That said, the DUP has been supporting the Tories for as long as I can remember so, in some ways, the response is a little hysterical.

There's a vast difference between an odious grouping which happens to give their support (you can't stop them doing so, any more than Republicans can stop KKK members voting for them) and actively going out to enlist that support as the only way to prop up a government.

surrey_commuter

briantrumpet wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

That said, the DUP has been supporting the Tories for as long as I can remember so, in some ways, the response is a little hysterical.

There's a vast difference between an odious grouping which happens to give their support (you can't stop them doing so, any more than Republicans can stop KKK members voting for them) and actively going out to enlist that support as the only way to prop up a government.

The Tory Party is a broad church containing some odious views. This agreement may make people realise what is hidden behind from them

Ft thinks there is a pro life Tory majority
https://www.ft.com/content/6cd2d124-180 ... 144feab49a

The gay marriage whining is starting to look ill advised. A majority of Tory MPs voted against it as well as 22 Labour and 4 LibDems :shock:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... -full-list

kingstongraham

Surrey Commuter wrote:

If they are never going to enter a coalition I do not see the point of the libdems.

Agreed. Farron's "no deals, no coalition" was plain weird. Like saying "vote for us, we're not going to have any power".

Jez mon

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I think the libdems should accept Brexit is happening and concentrate on influencing hard or soft. To that end they should have offered a Tory coalition but with agreements on what Brexit will look like.

If they are never going to enter a coalition I do not see the point of the libdems.

On that last point, what's the point of any of the non main two parties.

The lib dems clearly got massively burnt by going into coalition, and since Cameron has left the tory party seem to be drifting further and further from having anything in common with the lib dems.

rjsterry

So the C&S deal with the DUP is not actually done yet. :roll:

If they do decide to pursue the Brexit negotiations on a cross-party basis, that's quite a silver lining.

surrey_commuter

Jez mon wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I think the libdems should accept Brexit is happening and concentrate on influencing hard or soft. To that end they should have offered a Tory coalition but with agreements on what Brexit will look like.

If they are never going to enter a coalition I do not see the point of the libdems.

On that last point, what's the point of any of the non main two parties.

The lib dems clearly got massively burnt by going into coalition, and since Cameron has left the tory party seem to be drifting further and further from having anything in common with the lib dems.

Depends if they have rejected coalition.

I think the Libdems did well in coalition and that it worked well for the UK. I think their failure was one of presentation and not writing a manifesto for possible coalition.

bendertherobot

Irish PM has been on the phone to express concern at stability of NI

surrey_commuter

We all seem to have forgotten the boundary changes in 2018 which would have given the Tories an advantage in future elections

bendertherobot

Surrey Commuter wrote:

We all seem to have forgotten the boundary changes in 2018 which would have given the Tories an advantage in future elections

What's the procedure for the changes? Remember, that's neither economic or security.

surrey_commuter

bendertherobot wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

We all seem to have forgotten the boundary changes in 2018 which would have given the Tories an advantage in future elections

What's the procedure for the changes? Remember, that's neither economic or security.

Review finishes in 2018 then just needs Parliamentary approval

ben@31

I overheard an interesting point today... Did that sociopath Theresa May even apologise to all those tory MPs who lost their seats? No. She couldn't care less about anyone else other than herself.

bendertherobot

ben@31 wrote:

I overheard an interesting point today... Did that sociopath Theresa May even apologise to all those tory MPs who lost their seats? No. She couldn't care less about anyone else other than herself.

Harsh. She made one Director of Comms.

And, on that, he's off to a flyer
https://twitter.com/RichardBurgon/statu ... 9565923328

bendertherobot

Surrey Commuter wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

We all seem to have forgotten the boundary changes in 2018 which would have given the Tories an advantage in future elections

What's the procedure for the changes? Remember, that's neither economic or security.

Review finishes in 2018 then just needs Parliamentary approval

Yes. Go on.......

meanredspider

ben@31 wrote:

I overheard an interesting point today... Did that sociopath Theresa May even apologise to all those tory MPs who lost their seats? No. She couldn't care less about anyone else other than herself.

She did apologise. I'm not a fan but there's enough stuff she got wrong without making new stuff up.

E.g. http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/09/theresa-m ... s-6698812/

bendertherobot

meanredspider wrote:

ben@31 wrote:

I overheard an interesting point today... Did that sociopath Theresa May even apologise to all those tory MPs who lost their seats? No. She couldn't care less about anyone else other than herself.

She did apologise. I'm not a fan but there's enough stuff she got wrong without making new stuff up.

E.g. http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/09/theresa-m ... s-6698812/

There are some sources who claim that she was forced to by the 1922 committee (in addition to firing the advisers). But, yes, factually so.

rick_chasey

bendertherobot wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

We all seem to have forgotten the boundary changes in 2018 which would have given the Tories an advantage in future elections

What's the procedure for the changes? Remember, that's neither economic or security.

Review finishes in 2018 then just needs Parliamentary approval

Yes. Go on.......

I can imagine as long as it favours everyone bar labour they'll be able to get it through. Currently it favours Labour.

rick_chasey

meanredspider wrote:

ben@31 wrote:

I overheard an interesting point today... Did that sociopath Theresa May even apologise to all those tory MPs who lost their seats? No. She couldn't care less about anyone else other than herself.

She did apologise. I'm not a fan but there's enough stuff she got wrong without making new stuff up.

E.g. http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/09/theresa-m ... s-6698812/

it's pretty basic though.

bendertherobot

Rick Chasey wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

We all seem to have forgotten the boundary changes in 2018 which would have given the Tories an advantage in future elections

What's the procedure for the changes? Remember, that's neither economic or security.

Review finishes in 2018 then just needs Parliamentary approval

Yes. Go on.......

I can imagine as long as it favours everyone bar labour they'll be able to get it through. Currently it favours Labour.

It doesn't. But it does favour the Tories.

I'd imagine someone's looking at it and the new effect given the swing and the potential new swings in the future. The point is though that it's neither economic or defence. So, they aren't in an automatic majority.

And, in terms of Parliamentary time, there are better wars to win.

rick_chasey

Phwoar, a lot of slim margins.

bendertherobot

IF the piece I read yesterday was true then it appears that labour spent no money at all targetting marginals. And very little support.

rick_chasey

bendertherobot wrote:

IF the piece I read yesterday was true then it appears that labour spent no money at all targetting marginals. And very little support.

Sure, but surely their victories in places like Battersea, where there was no campaigning at all by Labour, as they were sucked into nearby seats, suggests that the local ground campaign is overrated.