Off Topic Political Debate

It may have had a different character but not a different outcome. Miliband never achieved in most people's mind that he was prime ministerial material, just didn't happen. He also alienated middle England by appearing to be anti inspirational. Its so funny that all of the Labour leader candidates now recognise this obvious failing. The Labour / SNP pact, if it happened would have resulted in the tail wagging the dog, this justifiably horrified many in England.

I wish more people like you would encourage Labour to slip to the left, the result would be more failure in 2020.

 

Apparently, Andy Burnam, the union's choice, is the current bookmaker's favourite. As a Tory that would be an excellent choice.

In my opinion the one person who could be a real force in the future for Labour is David Lammy. He is very smart, bags of charisma and comes over as a real person on tv. He is however a candidate for London mayor so may not run.

 

Leo, the first past the post system cannot be justified either by its antiquity or by the fact that people 'know' it. The fact is that there is not one other country in the EU which has such a system, and the only other one party majorities which you find in Europe are in Russia and Belarus. It throws up governments which are always against the will of the people and which do not have an evenly spread legitimacy throughout the UK. The Tories have a majority - yet the capital Greater London voted Labour, all of the northern industrial cities voted Labour, in some of them (Liverpool) the Tory vote dropped below 10%. The SNP controls Scotland and Labour is still the strongest in Wales. There is no neutral observer who would give the UK any chance whatsoever of surviving in its existing form let alone coming through an EU referendum in one piece.

 

It is simplistic you are right - but nevertheless correct. Every Labour leader who has moved his party to the left has lost the next election. It happened to Foot, to Kinnock and now to Miliband. There is no evidence that a left leaning Labour Party can win in England -which has to be won to win the UK. Scotland and Wales are traditionally left wing and it made no difference to the outcome of the election if Labour had taken 50 of the seats that SNP took - they were both anti Tory parties - just substitute one for the other. The SNP did not win because it was left wing -it won because Scottish Labour imploded and created no alternative.
It was no shadow of fear as you put it - it was simply that people in England did not want a left leaning Labour government - and if Labour had to be supported by a party that wants the UK to cease to exist so much the worse.
Greens got votes because they are Green and flavour of the month and it is now seen as a better protest vote than LibDems -not really a right or left choice.

My prediction - Labour will (unlike you) see the move away from Blairite consensual Leftism was a mistake that cost them the election and they will turn to a new leader who takes them back in the "right" (pun intended) direction.

It will never be known but I bet David Miliband would have won this election.

 

You must be joking!! The UK will last in its present form for ages. As long as it suits the two main parties they will not vote against it. It does not need to be justified, it may not suit the smaller parties but so what. After every election when the Greens and UKIP type protest groups only pick up a few seats they will whinge, do the majority of voters care, no.

 

I assure you that no joke is intended - just over 63 % of the people who voted did not vote Tory so where does the justification for your majority come from ? There is no other country in Europe which has such regional differences in voting behaviour as the UK does, and no other European government which has less support from its population.

 

Well it can be justified on both those grounds - you just don't agree with it. I do not justify it on those grounds though.
Also what other countries in the EU are totally irrelevant - we had Democracy when soe of them were still almost medieval -whocares what they have - no relevance at all.
If you mention Russia and Belarus once more I shall scream. Can you not see they are irrelevant - can you really justify in your own mind comparing the UK to them - it weakens every argument you make. Forget them - they do not have the UK's system.
A justification for first past the post is that the Party that "wins" gets to govern on its manifesto. People know what they are voting for. Once you have coalitions nobody has a clue what might happen. Do you honestly have a clue what could have been agreed had Labour and the SNP made a deal - I don't and doubt anyone else would.
In PR you could have the same regional effects. Under PR this time theSNP would have got far fewer seats and perhaps a Tory / UKIP coalition could have been formed - would that suit you better. Scotland is not anentity in the UK government, nor is Wales nor is London nor is Cornwall - so what????? In PR you end up with a deal that suits those who get to do it - everyone else under your argument could claim to be disenfrachised. Under PR the tiny party that happens to be the important one that enables a coalition to be formed gets influene hundreds of time sits voting power. For all its faults this government has more support than any other party got.

I would switch to PR personally so I am not arguing from self interest but stop pretending that our form of Democracy is deficient - it is just different. PR was rejected as recently as 2011 in the UK by a referendum of the whole UK voters - you cannot get more democratic or decisive than that. You begin to sound like the SNP - you lost so want to whinge about it and change the rules and probably have a re-run. NOdoubt you can come up with 15 reasons why 2011 should be ignored. I love our democracy and am disappointed you do not (yes yes I remember you telling me how much you love our country I was not implying you do not) - but you will get no sympathy from me when you compare us to Russia. Whatever you think I believe they are closer to your preferred wing of government.

 

A higher % did not vote Labour - or Green - or SNP - or LibDem. Don't use daft statistics. How do you know what each person's second choice is?
I do not even agree with your unfounded claim that no other European government has less support. You equate a coalition's support to the sum of the votes for its independent elements - not the same at - ask the LIbDems after 2010

 

I am not trying to morally justify it. I am enjoying a system that is unfair to minority parties who I have no interest in gaining more seats. You can correctly describe my attitude as selfish but that description would also be required to describe both Conservative and Labour political parties. The only reason we had a vote in 2011 on an alternative system was because of the coalition. The Tories wanted boundary changes and the Libs wanted a vote. Unlike the SNP the UK will not vote again on this subject for a generation, unless we have another coalition, which might be difficult to get a another smaller party to agree to after the experiences of the LIB Dems.

 

Leo the British form of democracy is deficient, quite simply because most of the population have voted against the ruling government. Incidentally, I would say this even if there were a Labour majority government built on the same system. The accumulated result of so many governments not having had the support of the population is a gradual estrangement from politics. Other countries have seen this and changed - or why did both Australia and New Zealand change to a PR system ? Coalitions do at least have the support of a wider base of the population - particularly if parties actually do research amongst their members and supporters to find out which coalitions they would accept in advance. Can't understand why the Liberals didn't take a membership vote on this one.

 

In 2010 the Lib Dems did approach the Labour Party regarding coalition but found they were not interested. It would have also raised the question of the party with the most votes being sidelined. The Tory/Lib Dems figures stacked up much better, which proved to be a stable government for 5 years.

 

As long as the British do not put a first and second choice on their ballot paper (which may not be a bad idea) we can presume that every vote which is not Conservative is , by definition, anti Conservative ie. they did not want a Conservative government or they would have voted for it. Many people in other countries know in advance which coalitions their party will go into and vote accordingly - when I vote in Germany I vote once for the Party and once for the direct candidate (and not always for the same party).

 

You can quote as many examples in other countries as you like but our system ain't changing.

I admire you doggedness but you due a lifetime of disappointment backing the Greens, PR etc, but they are all lost causes. I hope WFC are your second favourite team with your record!!!

 

Australia didn't though - unless you define preferential voting as a form of proportional representation. Or unless you're referring to the Senate....

 

Bearing in mind that the Greens have doubled their membership and their percentage of the vote (even within your system). That they are members of the European Greens - and that their sister parties have been parts of ruling coalitions in 6 different countries. Bearing also in mind that the British conservatives are so right wing and so insular that they do not even sit with the other European Conservatives in Brussels (In fact they sit in the same block as AfD). Also remembering that the party of which I am a member, Bundnis 90 die Grünen have more members than the British Conservatives. I do not feel like a loser. Also I have been a Watford fan for about 45 years.

 

I was referring to the UK only. I've done 48 years so far.

 

The Labour SNP pact was never going to happen. Its a misnomer and Miliband was honest when he said they would not be allying with the SNP. If people thought any pact was possible they were deceived. If all the SNP seats had remained labour and lib dem or even swung to all labour it would have made no difference to the overall outcome in terms of who is in government and cabinet. Labour will not slip to the left but move back to the central ground just right of the lib dems.

 

Thankfully we do not follow the EU norm..... Long may it continue. It works for the UK, maybe not for Germany but for the UK yes it works. Borders of constituencies favor labour by the way.

 

errr France?

 

If the figures had added up I'm sure Labour would have come to a loose arrangement with SNP to keep the Tories out, thankfully the sums didn't add up.

It should be quite a meeting tomorrow between Cameron and Sturgeon. You can see the whinging from Sturgeon around the corner that the government is taking no notice of the SNP, she's in a win win position.