It's voting day. I'm off to do some voting.

And if you're still undecided, remember who it was that 'squatted' the Squats, invented comp and raised the price of tin? Yes, it was Cameron...true story...

Nick Clegg, on the other hand, pushed for the redesign of the DA codex for YEARS. I'm glad we've finally woken up and listened to him. It's probably something to do with TV debates.

Right, I'm off to put my rights into action....

Nick Clegg is a bit like JJ.

He talks a good talk but in the end we'll end up with a convoluted mess with the comment 'its just a game, deal with it'.

I will be voting after work.

And I would love for politicians (and certain of their followers) to stop just badmouthing each other and actually attempt to put forward positive ideas and behaviour.

I voted this morning

Whilst there doesn't seem to be anyone out there who I agree with totaly, I went for te party who were closest. So heres to another 4 years for our Cyclopean overlord!

You screaming liberals make me want to vomit, i vote conservative because i am made of pure win. Nick Clegg wears a warpstone talisman and wont be happy until we replace the British army with a Peace and love unit of goat stroking sweet smelling woofters that criss cross the world handing out pamphlets that advocate wheat free cakes and fair trade sweaters. I thought i hated that foul two faced scottish cyclops, but id rather keep labour than give the screaming liberals a voice. I wish i could threaten to leave the country if the lefties won, but i cant, because unlike us, other countries actually have laws regarding immigration! :-)

Has mattyrm had too much caffeine this morning?

Thats good calling the libs woofters, then voting conservative, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/03/28/would-be-tory-mp-and-the-rent-boy-115875-22143704/

http://www.uknews.org/tory-mp-in-rent-boy-honey-trap-shock-%E2%80%93-cameron-reeling/

http://www.chasepost.net/news-in-cannock/tm_objectid=16739344&method=full&siteid=75673-name_page.html

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Judge+suspended+over+rent+boy+claims-a0202616878

Read and laugh

You can be gay and still be manly though

Go for Gordon!

Blues and Reds have both pissed on this nation in my lifetime.

I'm going to try Yellows.

But yellow is even closer to the colour of actual wee - sure you want to take that risk?

Voted via mail last week, but will be watching with interest. I voted for the blues, but tbh I don't like any of them, just want Cameron to do two of his manifesto promises and hope he doesn't wreck the country in the mean time.

Although I can't see any of them being much better than the others no matter who wins.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Voted via mail last week, but will be watching with interest. I voted for the blues, but tbh I don't like any of them, just want Cameron to do two of his manifesto promises and hope he doesn't wreck the country in the mean time.

Although I can't see any of them being much better than the others no matter who wins.

I fear this is close to the truth.

Voted at 07:45 and dragged my heavily pregnant (and slightly grumpy) wife with me.

Live in a pretty strong Tory seat, so voted Lib Dem to cut his majority and keep him on his toes. The missus voted Tory thereby cancelling out my vote.

loki is more red than red ken. I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl, or he worked in a mine. The intellectually vacuous idea that you cant vote conservative because he is posh is utterly ridiculous, not just because it is childish but because they all are. And Nick Clegg went to a more expensive school than Cameron.

Oh dear. There's me following the election on facebook, where everyone is lib/lab, and confident in the knowledge that nobody was ACTUALLY fooled by David Cameron's smug-Tony-Blair-smarmy-lying debate speeches.

But it is as I feared. In the real world, people are going to vote tory...:/

I'm so gonna have to change job. No more arts funding in a Tory govt, so no more theatre/entertainment work. And once all the money is taken out of the economy, the corportate clients won't want to hire me either!!!

Srill, with the massive resultant recession at least people will spend even more on 'relatively cheap' hobbies. Maybe it's time to start that game shop. And hey, if I get married, I'll immediately be a better class of citizen (in the eyes of our Tory overlord) and they'll give me some cash for stock...

mattyrm wrote:loki is more red than red ken. I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl, or he worked in a mine. The intellectually vacuous idea that you cant vote conservative because he is posh is utterly ridiculous, not just because it is childish but because they all are. And Nick Clegg went to a more expensive school than Cameron.

I wouldn't presume that.

In fact, you probably shouldn't either.

And you definitely shouldn't post it either.

Limit your statements to the topic at hand, rather than the individual who posted them.

You know, as per the rules of this forum?

mattyrm wrote:a Peace and love unit of goat stroking sweet smelling woofters that criss cross the world handing out pamphlets that advocate wheat free cakes

I think you've missed the point matty - wheat free cakes are STILL tasty tasty cakes. Bring on the cake army!

Loki and i have a long history of political jousting, but its nothing to get flustered about, indeed im well aware how many "reds" are on this website..

I didnt have you on my list though Ian, we can discuss the merits of the Conservative party in Bugmans Bar in August. Ill have you fox hunting by December!

(Note i dont actually fox hunt)

mattyrm wrote: a Peace and love unit of goat stroking sweet smelling woofters that criss cross the world handing out pamphlets that advocate wheat free cakes and fair trade sweaters.

I thought that was the RAF's new recruitment slogan...

squilverine wrote:

I thought that was the RAF's new recruitment slogan...

Chortle

What about the RAF regiment?

They are ..you know.. good at... er..

.... guarding Kandahar Air Field in almost total safety while the proper soldiers actually go and fight.

They arent so bad.

mattyrm wrote:

squilverine wrote:

I thought that was the RAF's new recruitment slogan...

Chortle

What about the RAF regiment?

They are ..you know.. good at... er..

.... guarding Kandahar Air Field in almost total safety while the proper soldiers actually go and fight.

They arent so bad.

Careful now, apparently the rock apes are special forces according to.... oh according to the RAF regiment, oh well never mind I am sure that Clegg can count upon their support

Aye they used to make me laugh, whenever i met one they would say "oh we are part of THE BIG THREE" (Marines, Paras, Raf regt)

The word big three is childish, but they say it.

Personally id say there is a big two, and then a handful of other great infantry regiments who have seen alot of action out there. But lets be honest, anybody who actually knows how they work knows the crack, and that is that i would rather fight alongside any other light or mechanised infantry regiment than the RAF reg.

Nothing personal against the lads, but their job entails securing the RAFs interests, and they just dont get there hands dirty enough.

The ldea that there are some kind of "elite" fighting unit is truly laughable. I wonder if they have actually suffered a gunshot wound in the last ten years? They have lost the occasional guys to IEDs or Rocket attacks in or around the large static locations they tend to guard, but id be surprised..

Im off to check the casualty stats on the BBC website, my mockery has actually piqued my interest.

Vote for this guy! You know you want to.

mattyrm wrote:Loki and i have a long history of political jousting, but its nothing to get flustered about, indeed im well aware how many "reds" are on this website..

I didnt have you on my list though Ian, we can discuss the merits of the Conservative party in Bugmans Bar in August. Ill have you fox hunting by December!

(Note i dont actually fox hunt)

1) I'm not flustered.

2) Just how many 'reds' do you think are on this website?

We'll find out - all it takes is a few good men

mattyrm wrote:loki is more red than red ken. I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl, or he worked in a mine. The intellectually vacuous idea that you cant vote conservative because he is posh is utterly ridiculous

OOPS wrong, so I'll break it down.

loki is more red than red ken - well wide of the mark, can't stand the guy or his politics.

I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl - My father is right of the conservatives.

or he worked in a mine - only for a short time and I left long before the miners strike. So partly right

Never voted for blair, because he was two faced.

Flashman wrote:Voted at 07:45 and dragged my heavily pregnant (and slightly grumpy) wife with me.

Live in a pretty strong Tory seat, so voted Lib Dem to cut his majority and keep him on his toes. The missus voted Tory thereby cancelling out my vote.

If you had know she was going to do that you could have shoved her in a ditch before getting to the polling station.

loki old fart wrote:

mattyrm wrote:loki is more red than red ken. I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl, or he worked in a mine. The intellectually vacuous idea that you cant vote conservative because he is posh is utterly ridiculous

OOPS wrong, so I'll break it down.

loki is more red than red ken - well wide of the mark, can't stand the guy or his politics.

I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl - My father is right of the conservatives.

or he worked in a mine - only for a short time and I left long before the miners strike. So partly right

Never voted for blair, because he was two faced.

At least i got one right mate eh?

mattyrm wrote:

loki old fart wrote:

mattyrm wrote:loki is more red than red ken. I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl, or he worked in a mine. The intellectually vacuous idea that you cant vote conservative because he is posh is utterly ridiculous

OOPS wrong, so I'll break it down.

loki is more red than red ken - well wide of the mark, can't stand the guy or his politics.

I can only presume his mother and father beat him with the labour stick since he could crawl - My father is right of the conservatives.

or he worked in a mine - only for a short time and I left long before the miners strike. So partly right

Never voted for blair, because he was two faced.

At least i got one right mate eh?

You did m8, and if I'm up your way. I'll park the merc outside your place, grab some nukie brown out of the fridge in the back.
And you can tell me where I'm going wrong.

Man hug alert!

Park a Merc?

NUKE BROWN?

Tories.....

Alpharius wrote:Man hug alert!

Stop being facetious


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ArbitorIan wrote:Park a Merc?

NUKE BROWN?

Tories.....

OMG

park my mercedes motorcaravan
Newcastle brown ale
And as for the last one I'd rather cut my fingers off

Real men vote conservative.

TheFirstBorn wrote:Real men vote conservative.

Why?

Voted!

I can't vote for =(

(for another 3 weeks. Stupid UKIP guy...)


Not that it'll change much, as I'm right in the Tory heartland (and probably going to vote Tory too, although I detest Cameron)

We all this Electorial raporte has inspired me.

I'm off home to give Gordo the boot, er...... I mean cast my much considered vote.

Off back on shift in an hour to finish counting the postal votes. I'm not expecting any surprises, bunch of safe Labour seats and Cleggy. Meet the new boss...

Ill answer for him MGS, my entirely likeable yet left leaning chum! Its because tories think flogging should be brought back, think the work shy should be forced to work, think political correctness is pathetic, think that talking about all the old wars is great, think we have nothing at all to apologise for because our ancestors invaded people, think calling your kids Guinivere and acting like malcom and cressida from 'the modern parents' is absurd, think that calling sexism 'sexual apartheid' makes you sound like some sort of deranged fanatical lesbian, and think that left leaning wheat free cake eating, bongo playing basket weaving loose women watching whale saving tree hugging, perm sporting, jewelry wearing modern girly man lefties should bugger off and drive their electric cars over to France! :-)

mattyrm wrote:Ill answer for him MGS, my entirely likeable yet left leaning chum! Its because tories think flogging should be brought back, think the work shy should be forced to work, think political correctness is pathetic, think that talking about all the old wars is great, think we have nothing at all to apologise for because our ancestors invaded people, think calling your kids Guinivere and acting like malcom and cressida from 'the modern parents' is absurd, think that calling sexism 'sexual apartheid' makes you sound like some sort of deranged fanatical lesbian, and think that left leaning wheat free cake eating, bongo playing basket weaving loose women watching whale saving tree hugging, perm sporting, jewelry wearing modern girly man lefties should bugger off and drive their electric cars over to France! :-)

Hear hear!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I voted by post on sunday, voted labour, i dont agree with everything they've done but, one they're the most socialist of the parties(which isnt really hard to be honest) and i actually like Gordon Brown. Where i live is a labour heartland but if worst comes to worst my conceince is clear, i didnt vote tory.

mattyrm wrote:Ill answer for him MGS, my entirely likeable yet left leaning chum! Its because tories think flogging should be brought back, think the work shy should be forced to work, think political correctness is pathetic, think that talking about all the old wars is great, think we have nothing at all to apologise for because our ancestors invaded people, think calling your kids Guinivere and acting like malcom and cressida from 'the modern parents' is absurd, think that calling sexism 'sexual apartheid' makes you sound like some sort of deranged fanatical lesbian, and think that left leaning wheat free cake eating, bongo playing basket weaving loose women watching whale saving tree hugging, perm sporting, jewelry wearing modern girly man lefties should bugger off and drive their electric cars over to France! :-)

Well, I agree with the vast majority of that.

What I don't agree with is stating policy without presenting a shred of evidence as to how you would achieve it, removing vast amounts of cash from the economy as a publicity stunt, an attitude towards business that rewards the rich and discourages the poor, the idea that married people are somehow superior to unmarried people and thus deserving of a tax break, the deluded idea that Britain is still a great empire and can survive without Europe, an unelected house of lords, a voting system that allows a party with a minority of the vote to get in power, a leader who was specifically put in charge to counter Blair by being exactly the same as Blair, the real power behind him who comprise of the worst of the expenses scandal lords lining their own pockets, and the idea that fat cat bankers spouting on about how their 'country is so great', 'things were better in the old days', 'might makes right', 'we don't need anyone else', 'foreigners come over here and steal our jobs' and 'people should know their place' have anything to do with advancing a workable society.

I agree with all the vague 'idea' statements above, and I imagine Brown and Clegg do too. However, they live in the real world, as do I, which is why I've voted based on what the parties actually intend to do with power in the next four years rather than the wooly concepts they trundle out to win the voted of middle england...

mattyrm wrote:Ill answer for him MGS, my entirely likeable yet left leaning chum! Its because tories think flogging should be brought back, think the work shy should be forced to work, think political correctness is pathetic, think that talking about all the old wars is great, think we have nothing at all to apologise for because our ancestors invaded people, think calling your kids Guinivere and acting like malcom and cressida from 'the modern parents' is absurd, think that calling sexism 'sexual apartheid' makes you sound like some sort of deranged fanatical lesbian, and think that left leaning wheat free cake eating, bongo playing basket weaving loose women watching whale saving tree hugging, perm sporting, jewelry wearing modern girly man lefties should bugger off and drive their electric cars over to France! :-)

And you think those straw boater hat and sweater round the neck wearing, weak chinned, silver spooned and over privileged aristo-degenerate, satsuma up the anus and dead from asphyxiation wearing suspenders, inbred and floppy haired nonces are more in keeping with your way of thinking...

Malcolm and Cressida are as likely to be tory as new labour (they sure as feth aren't old labour, because brother, that's were I fething hail from and we skin fethers like that). The tories finally replaced old reptilian bastards like Michael 'just tying some bitch to the railtracks' Howerd with new flouncy 'Ya, absolutely, love Wagamammas f'sure' gakkers like Cameron IN ORDER TO ATTRACT THOSE CHATTERING CLASS DILL WEAVILS. In fact all 3 main parties are mincing after the same group of people to vote for them.

What fething pains me brother is that you're one who should give a gak about The Working Man, cos you're him, and the tories have never given a damn about ordinary working folks, they're always about lining the pockets of the privileged few. Like those poor saps who crowed about how fething great Maggie was for selling them their council house or giving them shares in privatised National Services THAT THEY ALREADY OWNED.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-if-youre-looking-for-class-war-just-read-camerons-policies-1939666.html

But, enjoy it. I'll be off to the States in a few more months anyways, then it's find a remote house, massive garden and minimal interaction with anyone but Mrs Stompa, her cats, my fish and all the folks coming over for games of 40k once the tables up and running.
And I'll be armed to the fething teeth, yeah... Left wing, bastard blood red Socialist me with more heat than the Chinese Army.

Lets face it whoever gets in,
The army hospitals and education are screwed

I was joking, we had a mini election at our school, and my mate was being the "conservative party leader". We decided to come up with catchy posters, so we littered the school with
"Don't be a douche, vote conservative"
"Real men vote conservative"
and "Fit girls vote conservative"

TheFirstBorn wrote:I was joking, we had a mini election at our school, and my mate was being the "conservative party leader". We decided to come up with catchy posters, so we littered the school with
"Don't be a douche, vote conservative"
"Real men vote conservative"
and "Fit girls vote conservative"

Funny I think that's how the conservatives election campaign came over to mattyrm too, going by his last post.

You should all think yourself lucky I get to vote for a party of possible terroroists, or a party who after thirty years of taking the no surrender line decided to capitulate or half a dozen no hopers. Welcome to the 6 counties

EDIT: The real kicker is no matter who I voted for it will have no real effect on the matter as a whole

What kind of time are the results going to be announced?

From what I have read, any time between now and tomorrow morning.

chub wrote:You should all think yourself lucky I get to vote for a party of possible terroroists, or a party who after thirty years of taking the no surrender line decided to capitulate or half a dozen no hopers. Welcome to the 6 counties

EDIT: The real kicker is no matter who I voted for it will have no real effect on the matter as a whole

Hey,



beats

Decided to yet again to uphold my right to not bother.

Sod the ! Yet again there is not one viable option.

Labour get in (no chance) Same old economic ruination.

Cons get in (probable) See above.

Lib Dem (slim chance) Namby pamby lefty money sponges.

Hung parliament (most likely) They join up and the end is nigh.

I was actually going to vote this year for the first time. Decided against it.

The country is up feceas creek.

ArbitorIan wrote:What I don't agree with is stating policy without presenting a shred of evidence as to how you would achieve it, removing vast amounts of cash from the economy as a publicity stunt, an attitude towards business that rewards the rich and discourages the poor, the idea that married people are somehow superior to unmarried people and thus deserving of a tax break, the deluded idea that Britain is still a great empire and can survive without Europe, an unelected house of lords, a voting system that allows a party with a minority of the vote to get in power, a leader who was specifically put in charge to counter Blair by being exactly the same as Blair, the real power behind him who comprise of the worst of the expenses scandal lords lining their own pockets, and the idea that fat cat bankers spouting on about how their 'country is so great', 'things were better in the old days', 'might makes right', 'we don't need anyone else', 'foreigners come over here and steal our jobs' and 'people should know their place' have anything to do with advancing a workable society.

I agree with all the vague 'idea' statements above, and I imagine Brown and Clegg do too. However, they live in the real world, as do I, which is why I've voted based on what the parties actually intend to do with power in the next four years rather than the wooly concepts they trundle out to win the voted of middle england...

QFT.

Well, most results should be in by 3 AM tomorrow, although the first one has come in: Labour has held Sunderland South.

For information on the election as it happens, watch BBC 1 for live coverage, and view this link for stuff as it happens:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/

I'll add more links as I find them.

All this news about people getting to the polling booths too late is a bit worrying, if it continues it may well draw out the election with legal issues.

I have been listening to election coverage on th radio all night.

We are looking at hung parliament. While hanging our polticians sounds appealing what that means is that no single party has a majority.

I for one an happy, even though Gordon Brown gets first opportunity to form a coalition. The last thirteen years have resulted in a marked increase of dodgy behaviour in our politics. With too much power split it will be difficult for any one parliament to dispose of dirty laundry or sweep mistakes under the carpet.

It will also be difficult for anything important to get done.

Also, I knew I should have put a bet on the fact that no one was going to vote lib dem. No one ever does, and no one ever will. Even with the biggest waste of space government having been in power for over a decade, still on one will vote for the no-hope lib dems.

Yeah Ian/MGS, Funny thing is was taking the piss as well. I dont think the majority of labour voters are actually like that and im well aware we are living in an age of increasingly centralised politics. Im from the boro for feths sake! almost all of my friends and certainly family (curse their oily hides!) vote labour. I just feel that generally the tories will reward people (slightly more)for making money. The labour attitude of tax the rich till they are dead seems to me to reward lazy people. To reward the stupid. To basically say 'dont take any risks, dont be brave, dont try and better yourself, just be a bus driver, i mean, why deal with all the stress of big business? just be a cleaner or something' but anyway.. I wouldnt put all your faith in the USA. My missus doesnt want to go home to California, after 8 months, she desperately wants to stay here, her mate has been staying with us for 6 weeks, and she wants to stay as well. Something about no traffic, more days off, no worries about health insurance, plentiful cheap booze and yorkshire pudding appeals to them. :-) Oh, and in winter conservative kids build snowmen, labour kids build black disabled snow lesbians. :-)

That would be from all the pollution from the Labour heartland constituency's industr... wait... that can't be right...

SilverMK2 wrote:It will also be difficult for anything important to get done.

Also, I knew I should have put a bet on the fact that no one was going to vote lib dem. No one ever does, and no one ever will. Even with the biggest waste of space government having been in power for over a decade, still on one will vote for the no-hope lib dems.

I'm by no means a Lib Dem voter but I have some sympathy for them. According to the BBC, the Lib Dems have received nearly as many votes as Labour, yet have far, far less seats won. So far, Labour have had 8,211,677 votes to the Lib Dems 6,426,742, which is not exactly a massive discrepancy. This is compared to the 247 Labour seats against the 51 Lib Dem seats which even the most partisan apologist would admit is massive disparity. It's no wonder there seems to be a pervasive air of political apathy in this country - I voted Tory, but even I think our electoral system blows chunks. The flip side is, if it is changed, we will see more hung parliaments.

mattyrm wrote: Oh, and in winter conservative kids build snowmen, labour kids build black disabled snow lesbians. :-)

Lulz, feth off.
tory kids stay indoors due to the weight of their floppy fringes and their sickly constitution and direct poor socialist kids to build their snowmen for them via megaphones... Till the socialist kids wake up to outnumbering the tory kids and being far stronger, kick down the doors and take the country pile for themselves and turn it into a shared living space for everyone who contributes!!

I didn't realise they had that many votes. It is probably the reason the lib dems have been campaigning to change the voting system so that it is direct votes that count, rather than seats

SilverMK2 wrote:I didn't realise they had that many votes. It is probably the reason the lib dems have been campaigning to change the voting system so that it is direct votes that count, rather than seats

Precisely - it's a drum the Lib Dem's have been banging for years. And the reverse of the argument is the reason that Tories traditionally are opposed to Proportional Representation; because they would more than likely end up with less seats than they win. A large part of our current system is more to do with where large blocks of voters live rather than total votes cast.

Ah well, soon the zombies will come and it will not matter who is in power (unless it is the "Pro-Zombie party for the chaining of all people in a zombie filled pit Party"

We need voting reform

Indeed we do. We also need shot of fething Scotland.

Like most of the things that might be worth considering changing maybe, you can be sure the change is worse than the original condition.

Lib Dems, sure there are a fair few of them, but never enough it seems. Tough, thats democracy. So they want proportional representation, why, because it helps the poluace, no because it helps themselves.

In our system you vote for a local candidate, not a regional set of lists. Your local MOP is your local representative, if you dont like them and cant win with the guy you want, vote tactically.

With a regional list system constituencies are larger and have multiple MP's, the votes are divided by percentage and MP's are allocated accordingly. So if you had say 10 MP's for a region and Labout got all the votes , they get 10 MP's. More likely we ghet a 4/3/3 split all the time.

Sounds fair. No it isnt. You can get rid of an MP you dont like by tactically voting, in a listed system if you have an oily scum unfit for office, and there are a fair few of those then if due to back talking and having oily friends in oily places that scum is the number one choice for the party concerned then unless you practically annihilate that parties showing in the ballots you are unlikely to ever be rid of him.

Martin Bell was able to get out a partuicularly odious tory MP in 1997 because Labour and Lid Dems both withdrew their cndidates in support of him. In a lists system that would not be enough, if the unwanted candidate was high enough up the parties list.

Then you add a new problem. What happens to the odd percentages. 10 MP's and a percentage vote gives 1 MP per 10% votes polled.

Say the three main parties tally enough to take three candidates each with rough change of percentages. What happens next, you get essentially the same as the disadvantage of the current system, first part the post wirth other voting blocks. Only you get it a whole lot worse, independents will cease to exist, so bang goes your only chance of a truly local MP.

Now you can 'fix' this proble my making the listing larger and thus splitting down the percentages further, you can also 'fix the propblem of nopt having local representatives by appointing them from amongst MP'sd elected in the same way Ministerrs are given cabinet positions. The trouble is you get less democracy not more.

If you have regional lists you get your 'local MP in the nerarest big conurbation, urbanised politics. Rural voters and then marginalised and roundly ignored.

To make matters worse given large enough lists fring parties will get MP's elected. Sure it is genuinely fasir as far as proportional representationis concerned, but once the seats are allocated and people get their regional representative then paerties with voting blocks of 400k to 1M voters will finsd a seat or two. Someone has got to draw the short straw and have Nick Griffin as their elected representative, even if noone in the region he represents wanted him.


Liberal Democrats call out for proportional representation because it HELPS THEM. It has nothing to do with whether it helps the populace, its 100% self interest.
Our system is one of the betters ones and so long as the rules are followed it is no less unfair than PR, after all if the Lib-Dems are first past the post, they win.

I live in a labour strong hold, If they put donald duck up as candidate he'd win. so if I vote anything other than labour whats the point. So you tell me why is your vote more important than mine. We need a new system of voting

SilverMK2 wrote:Ah well, soon the zombies will come and it will not matter who is in power (unless it is the "Pro-Zombie party for the chaining of all people in a zombie filled pit Party"

Funny thing is: there is (or was) a party standing for Brighton Pavillion, (which just happens to be full of students and jedi knights (it contained the most in the last census)) called 'the undead rights and equality party' or something along those lines.

And you thought you were being silly...

On a more serious note, i'm suprised at how accurate the exit poll turned out to be, and also the complete faliure of the liberals to get a greater number of seats than last time. The fact that they were coming 2nd in most polls going up to election night and the fact they got over 6 million votes really brings home how damaged their chances are due to the current voting system. I can see now why they want proportional representation: they're just too spread out. However, this does all mean that Clegg has become one of the most influential men in the country right now, and the tories and labour will most likely be fawning all over him and fighting over who gets to tie his shoelaces in return for support to form a coalition government.

I am still amazed at how many labour votes there were... surely those voters must have been voting for the local candidate, not for Gordon 'I'll keep on spending' Brown?

IMO we could solve the issues of proportional representation and the House of Lords by converting the second chamber to a proportionally elected system.

There would have to be constitutional reform to define the powers of Parliament as a whole. ATM the Lords are allowed to send back bills but the Commons are allowed to force them through if they are to do with finance. Clearly that should be changed if the upper house is elected.

If only the Tories had Creed, then they could outflank Cameron into no. 10

Brown: *Vaguely coherent mumbling to the effect of "Haha, no one can get to me in my house where the door only opens from the inside!"*

-A slight displacement of air-

Brown: *Slightly more urgent jowely gibbering to the effect of "Cameron?! How did you get in here? It would take a tactical gen... CREEEEEEEED!"*

Surely you mean a political geniu... CLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEG!

He's the only man with the power to outflank people into no. 10 right now.

Haha!

Most excellent.

Thanks.

Here's a bombshell for you, Gordon Brown quit 5 minutes ago.

No link yet AFAICT, but I will keep searching.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scratch that, it was at 5 past 5.

Gordon Brown wrote: I have no desire to stay in my position longer than is needed to ensure that the path to economic growth is secured"

He is staying PM for now, and Clegg will begin talks with the Labour party soon.

Nick Robinson wrote:Mr Brown's decision to resign was designed to "unlock" a possible coalition deal between Labour and the Lib Dems

Live Coverage here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/liveevent/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In fact, can the Thread Title be changed to 'UK Politics Thread' ?

So is it true that the guy/party who received the most votes is about to NOT be elected? Sounds like a Chicago style election to me.

How does that work?

Ok, before I launch into a detailed explanation of the British Voting system, how clued up are you on it already?

ONly partially. I sort of understand that you're voting for MPs and not the specific person, sort of like voting for COngress and Congress then chooses a President

Ok, here goes then:

To win an election in Britain, a political party needs to win more than half the total number of seats in the house of commons in the country, thus giving them an overall majority, and permission from Her Majesty to form a government. Each seat represents a constituency.

There are 650 Constituencies in total, each with roughly 30-40k people living in them. This means that the winning party would need 326 seats to have an overall majority. To win a seat, an MP needs to get more votes than anyone else.

What has happened this election is that the conservatives have only won 306 seats, with 10 million votes. Labour has 258, and the Liberal Democrats have 57, with roughly 8 million and 6 million votes respectively. The rest of the seats voted for one of the other parties (eg, the Green Party or the Scottish National Party, who are in no way affiliated with the BNP).

This means you have a situation known as a Hung Parliment, where no party has an overall majority. This means Gordon Brown got to stay in power until the parties can sort something out by forming coalitions with one another until one coalition has more than half the total seats. Whichever parties formed that coalition get to form a Coalition Government, where members of the Cabinet (sort of like a high council) come from more than one party. This means that Labour could technically form a coalition with the Liberals, meaning Labour (and therefor Gordon Brown) stays in power, as they had more seats than the Lib-Dems.

Now Gordon Brown has announced he will step down, Labour will elect a new leader, who will continue talks with the Liberals after he (or she) has been elected from among their number.

Interesting. In most races here where there are multiple candidates and there is a minimum, typically the top two candidates have a follow on runoff election. other types have whoever has the most votes or electors (national) wins.

What if the Queen says "sod off!"? If I were Qu, er King I'd say "Sod off!" just because I could. (If I were Queen I'd be rich of music royalties).

We are the champions, my friends...

The Queen can do a lot of things but generally does whatever the politicians want. She has a lot of power, but I don't think anyone knows what would happen if she ever tried to use it.

Brown's standing down. The largest obstacle to a Lib-Lab controlled alliance has just been removed.

SilverMK2 wrote:The Queen can do a lot of things but generally does whatever the politicians want. She has a lot of power, but I don't think anyone knows what would happen if she ever tried to use it.

Didn't this happen to the last guy?

I'm not entirely sure, as the Monarchy is not all that powerful anymore, even the Queens speech is written by the Government...

I don't think they'd be allowed to, and at a guess, there would presumably be another General Election.

But as I said, I'm not really sure, as she is basically just a figurehead now . *salute

Start putting your money on a Lib / Lab coalition folks. The biggest obstacle to this was Gordon Brown, and now he has been 'removed', the deal is on. Looks like the 3 days talks with the Tories yielded nothing and we are set to end up with a minority government. I don't think the Lib / Lab coalition can scrape together enough seats for a majority - they would need the support of Plaid Cymru, the SNP, Greens and SDLP for a majority.

Welcome to weak and ineffectual government. Expect votes of no confidence and a recalled election with ~6 months.

I hope not - con/lib would be better for everyone.

They can get a Lib-Lab majority, just...

The conservatives have also released a last ditch attempt to get a coalition. They promise 'a referendum on bringing in a different voting system - known as AV'

Copy-Paste from the BBC website:

Alternative Voting:
Voters rank the candidates. If no candidate has 50% of first preferences then second preferences are counted and so on until someone has a majority.

UK use: By-elections to Northern Ireland Assembly. /end copy-paste.

Breaking news is that apparantly the Cabinet have not been talking about potential leadership candidates... Suprisingly, but they all look quite glum leaving No 10.

filbert wrote:Start putting your money on a Lib / Lab coalition folks. The biggest obstacle to this was Gordon Brown, and now he has been 'removed', the deal is on. Looks like the 3 days talks with the Tories yielded nothing and we are set to end up with a minority government. I don't think the Lib / Lab coalition can scrape together enough seats for a majority - they would need the support of Plaid Cymru, the SNP, Greens and SDLP for a majority.

Welcome to weak and ineffectual government. Expect votes of no confidence and a recalled election with ~6 months.

How does that work FB? If the coaltion has the majority votes, would they be the ones to call the vote? It would not be in their interest to call a vote. Who call a vote and what are the conditions?

Ach so confusing. You need a right and proper fixed election with specified terms!

Frazzled wrote:Ach so confusing. You need a right and proper fixed election with specified terms!

We're gonna ship in Jeb Bush for a recount. One, six, fifty-seven, four, twelvety...

The opposition would call for the Vote of no Confidence, then the House of Commons, and (I assume) the house of Lords as well, vote for or against. If the consensus is For, there is another General Election.

I believe they can call for a vote of no confidence at any point, but obviously there would be no point against a strong government.

Dastardly Dave wrote:The opposition would call for the Vote of no Confidence, then the House of Commons, and (I assume) the house of Lords as well, vote for or against. If the consensus is For, there is another General Election.

I believe they can call for a vote of no confidence at any point, but obviously there would be no point against a strong government.

Why would the party in power ever vote "for?"

It is a secret Ballot, so the ruling party members hopefully vote with the best interests of the country in mind.

Its called a Vote of no Confidence for a reason - it is designed for the worst of circumstances.

I'm not sure whether it has to be a majority either, possibly less than 50% is needed. I'm not entirely sure though.

Dastardly Dave wrote:It is a secret Ballot, so the ruling party members hopefully vote with the best interests of the country in mind.

Wait these are politicans voting right?

Indeed. We can only hope.

Then, er who guards the guards?

Then, er who guards the guards?

Obvious.

Ethereals, Spirit Hosts, Tomb Banshees.

UK Parliament is full of Vampire Counts, the truth revealed.

I personally think Cameron should break off negotiations with the Lib Dems - let them try to form their 'progressive alliance' with Labour. What Labour is trying to do is an unseemly, desperate attempt to cling on to power. I wouldn't be surprised if Mandelson had a major hand in these back-room deals - he's a fething snake and they are his speciality.
Let them try it - the public will turn on them in a major way (and I believe it could get VERY ugly...), there will be another General Election within months which the Tories will win by an absolute landslide, and Labour and the Lib Dems will spend years in the wilderness.

An excellent point, but are you prepared to see the country go ed balls up all around you just to see Labour and the Lib Dems humiliated?

Besides, if the Conservatives play their cards wrong ONCE during that period, the entire electorate will be completely dissallusioned (even more than they are now).

It will ruin politics completely if the conservatives slip up, and it'll be a risk. It all depends whether they manage to toe the line. I'm not even considering what would happen if the Lib-Lab alliance actually worked. (which it won't, in all probability)

Dastardly Dave wrote:An excellent point, but are you prepared to see the country go ed balls up all around you just to see Labour and the Lib Dems humiliated?

Besides, if the Conservatives play their cards wrong ONCE during that period, the entire electorate will be completely dissallusioned (even more than they are now).

It will ruin politics completely if the conservatives slip up, and it'll be a risk. It all depends whether they manage to toe the line. I'm not even considering what would happen if the Lib-Lab alliance actually worked. (which it won't, in all probability)

Whoever comes into power has a major gak storm to deal with. It will get worse no matter who is in Downing St. I would rather see an unstable alliance of 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc.-placed parties come in and try to fix it, fail horribly and take the blame, destroying their credibility for the forseeable future, than Cameron inherit this nightmare with one arm tied behind his back. With Labour/Lib Dem credibility shot to pieces this would probably mean that the Tories would come in with a very strong majority and be able to put long term measures in place to deal with our debt.

Another election is a given. Any coalition would have a slight majority (Lib-Lab would have a 38 majority at best).

Perhaps, but as always: we shall see, and whatever happens, we'll be paying for it.

This is politicians we are talking about, of course it is the regular people who will get shafted

Politicians are reflections of the electorate.

dogma wrote:Politicians are reflections of the electorate.

Whilst that is true, I think it is sad that they reflect the bad apparently more so than the good, with petty bickering, greed and so on overshadowing any good they achieve.

Politicians should be held to higher standards than your ordinary "man in the street". They are not supposed to be looking out for no 1, they are supposed to be helping their fellow countrymen, weilding the power of the nation to their best advantage - not voting themselves more money, taking money from the tax payers they are not owed, and a plethora of other acts which have resulted in the current high disregard for politicians that I think many people now feel towards the establishment.

Frazzled wrote:

filbert wrote:Start putting your money on a Lib / Lab coalition folks. The biggest obstacle to this was Gordon Brown, and now he has been 'removed', the deal is on. Looks like the 3 days talks with the Tories yielded nothing and we are set to end up with a minority government. I don't think the Lib / Lab coalition can scrape together enough seats for a majority - they would need the support of Plaid Cymru, the SNP, Greens and SDLP for a majority.

Welcome to weak and ineffectual government. Expect votes of no confidence and a recalled election with ~6 months.

How does that work FB? If the coaltion has the majority votes, would they be the ones to call the vote? It would not be in their interest to call a vote. Who call a vote and what are the conditions?

Ach so confusing. You need a right and proper fixed election with specified terms!

I logged off after my earlier post last night, so I missed your response Frazzled. This has already been semi-explained by others but further to the answers given; basically, as a result of the election in which no single party has a majority, we are left with 3 main options.

1. A Cons / Lib coalition government - probably the most stable option given that they would hold a majority. Potential to fall is also possible given that Cons / Libs disagree over many fundamentals.

2. A Lib / Lab coalition - less likely, given that the Lib hierarchy have made it clear they have a distaste for being seen to prop up a failed government against the wishes of a large portion of the electorate but possible given that Libs are ideologically closer to the Labour party. Potential to fail - quite high as a Lib / Lab alliance on it's own would not command a majority and would require the voting support of SDLP, Plaid Cymru, SNP as well so the potential for squabbling is increased.

3. A Cons minority government - an 'if all else fails' option. If coalition talks fail, Cons would have the chance to form a minority government as they have the most seats. Potential to fail - high; minority governments never last long.

Even a coalition government with a majority has quite a high potential for disaster especially one with a very narrow majority. There is a large section of the Libs who are vehemently anti-Tory and opposed to making deals with them; they would see a vote of no confidence as a way of expressing their distaste and collapsing the government.

As I mentioned earlier, I see a Lab / Lib deal on the cards, I expect this to be swiftly followed by a collapse in the House of Commons as the fragile alliance will not be able to muster support effectively. In turn, we will then see another election. I can only see this damaging the Liberal party for the somewhat sneaky and underhand way that they have been talking to Labour and making deals with them 'behind the scenes' so to speak. It's all very grubby and a shadow of things to come if we ever move to PR voting systems.

There we go, thank goodness for that:

The BBC wrote:
BREAKING NEWS

Number 10 recognises that talks with the Lib Dems have not and will reach not any positive conclusion, and they are now discussing the method of declaring that their side of the negotiation is over, BBC Radio 5 Live's political correspondent Jon Pienaar says.

Now it all hinges on whether the Conservatives/Liberals can avoid failing and get this country sorted.

Apparantly as well, somebody's belongings are being removed from No 10.

Clearly Brown got too far into debt and the Baliffs had to come and take his shirts.

Interesting news indeed - I am surprised that Labour were so quick to break off negotiations. Mind you, there has been a lot of scuttlebutt over the Lib Dems using their coalition value to hold the Cons and Labour to ransom over various policy matters - maybe Labour decided it wasn't worth the concessions?

If a lib/lab pact could hold together long enough to reform the voting system that would do me


If not then maybe conservative minority gov

loki old fart wrote:If a lib/lab pact could hold together long enough to reform the voting system that would do me

Really you haven't a clue. The reforms you are thinking of (PR) will guarantee EVERY election is a hung parliament. 'Reform' isnt a magic word that sets all wrongs right.

Ninjaed by Orlanth!

I dread to think of having this sort of chaos, back handed and sly dealings and general grubbiness every time we have an election in the UK.

PR would be a terrible idea for the UK electoral system without a major sea change in the mindset of politicians and the populace, mmkay?

Sounds like PR is out an AV is in. Hurrah!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm

Alternative vote is another Lib Dem backed idea, not for the sake of the nation but because it benefits them.

Fact of the matter is that central parties only benefit because the second place vote will go to a central party candidate.

Our elected major is a Lib Dem, to ensure she stays in power she instituted an AV electoral system for Watford. Now we cannot get rid of her. Admittedly she would have narrowly won on the first round of voting, but that was fair, that was people voting for her. Then when the third place candidate was removed the minor victory turned into a landslide, Tories and Labour supporters will nto vote for each other, that much is logical. Had she lost the first round she would have still won by an landslide even though the support was from candidates who actually voted Labour.

AV is no fairer, in fact it is less fairer as your second choice candiddate is not your choice of who runs the country/town or whatever, so its hardly necessary. It is there to benefit Lid Dems and Lid Dems only. People talk about how unfair it is that lib dems have 20% of the vote but a much smaller % of the seats, given AV and they will still have 20% of the real vote and landslides in every elecrtion of the seats. Not from people voting FOR them, but against the third place choice. You will in one swoop guarantee a majority government supported and run by the smallest party in terms of genuine support. A monumentous monolithic feth up that would be, and there would be NO WAY BACK. Do you think a Lid Dem government with a jerrymandered majority of 150 with only 20% of the real vote) will vote to reverse this? If you think so perhaps you still think New Labour was the answer to sleaze and Gordon Brown was the economic mastermind.

Of course Lid Dems will want a vote on giving us AV as part of any deals. Give that to them, then say no in the vote. It is in the interests of both the Conservatives and Labour to knock this one on the head.

Local first place post is the best system, like all electoral systems it has its rules, some benefit some do not as far as candidates go, but the populace always benefits as its the closest you get to adhering to the wishes of the populace.

Lib Dems, jerrymander different.

Dastardly Dave wrote:There we go, thank goodness for that:

The BBC wrote:
BREAKING NEWS

Number 10 recognises that talks with the Lib Dems have not and will reach not any positive conclusion, and they are now discussing the method of declaring that their side of the negotiation is over, BBC Radio 5 Live's political correspondent Jon Pienaar says.

Now it all hinges on whether the Conservatives/Liberals can avoid failing and get this country sorted.

Apparantly as well, somebody's belongings are being removed from No 10.

Clearly Brown got too far into debt and the Baliffs had to come and take his shirts.

Gentlemen, Britain is weak and confused. They have no functioning government. Now is the time to strike. Cry havoc! Let slip the dogs of War!

Then Weinare all doomed.

Seriously though, I think that Liberal 'talks' with labour may have just been a ploy to get the Conservatives to grovel a bit more. Now the Conservatives will be held to their 'promises' to the Liberals to form an Alliance.

This from the BBC:

The Beeb wrote:The BBC's business editor Robert Peston says he has learned some of the likely elements of a joint Con-Lib economic and business policy. The £6bn of spending cuts promised this year by the Tories would go ahead, unless the economy were to dramatically weaken. The Tories would also adopt the Lib Dem plan to increase the tax-free allowance on income tax to £10,000. A meaningful initial rise in the allowance would come quickly, with a clear timetable announced to get to the full £10,000.

I think everyone knew that a Lib-Lab coalition would never have worked, it would just have been too weak.

Orlanth wrote:Our elected major is a Lib Dem, to ensure she stays in power she instituted an AV electoral system for Watford. Now we cannot get rid of her. Admittedly she would have narrowly won on the first round of voting, but that was fair, that was people voting for her.

All Mayoral elections in the UK use this system, it wasn't instituted by your Mayor. It can produce some pretty weird results if turnout is low, check the last result for Doncaster.

There we go... He's just made a statement that he is resigning as leader of the Labour Party with immediate effect. He is currently heading to the palace to dissolve the government and will reccomend that the new one is headed by David Cameron.

I think the speech sounded like a very difficult one to make, and he sounded quite weary. He was admitting defeat, and he knew the labour party could not possibly hold onto power.

An end of an Era, perhaps...

Ladies and Gentleman we have a new PM!

Lord-Loss wrote:Ladies and Gentleman we have a new PM!

Uh oh.

Its about time, take a hammer to the public sector Dave, make us strong again!

mattyrm wrote:Its about time, take a hammer to the public sector Dave, make us strong again!

First thing to go should be the military. Useless pile of fethers, and think of the money that could be spent on stealing children's milk!

We can save a good few billion by not replacing Trident (now) and not introducing ID cards.

Not many billion though.

The big four items of government expenditure are

Social Security
Pensions
NHS
Education

not necessarily in that order though I know SS is no.1 and it's larger than Trident by a large margin.

I'm not in favour of Trident but if we want to cut government spending we need to cut social security.

Agreed, KK.

Welfare through work, so at least the nation gets something back from those who are getting hand outs, combined with drastic reform in who is "entitled" to what benefits.