The Daily Post Election Politics Thread

[Kwacky]

There are loads of positives to take from it. For a start it shows that a party can lose one of its safest seats. It proves that voting can matter. It demonstrates that there are alternatives at election time.

I am sure that the seat will go back to the Conservatives at the next election but let's worry about that closer to the time

[Monty]

I am sure that the seat will go back to the Conservatives at the next election but let's worry about that closer to the time

That's easy for us to say, we're not working 3 jobs and eating out of food banks.

[Kwacky]

I don't see the link.

[Monty]

It's just easy for us not to have to worry about it, we're not struggling. The election is two years away, Boris will be long gone and normal Tory supporting voters will return on mass. Nothing will change for those really struggling and no other party is offering the change they need even if they get in. Even the leader of the opposition is using neoliberal "trickle-down" tropes in the press, so we know where that is going.

The argument anyone but the Tories just isn't good enough anymore, it's a start at best and they'll do what they always do and fall in line with the estabslishment.

[Kwacky]

Labour and former labour supporters continuously arguing with each other and refusing to engage with anyone else will keep the Tories in power. Calling anyone and everyone a Tory or Tory lite is all I see on social media.

Their pride and stubbornness comes before anyone else.

People need to climb out of the trenches they've dug for themselves and start making compromises. There may be some ugly alliances but it's the only way to make some progress.

[duke63]

It’s the voting system that is broken and neither Labour or the Tories want to change it as it reduces their 50:50 chance of winning an election.

Until MPs main focus is actually representing the people who vote for them then we will get the same shite Governments. Party politics is at the root of it of our problems and won’t ever solve them.

[Monty]

Labour and former labour supporters continuously arguing with each other and refusing to engage with anyone else will keep the Tories in power. Calling anyone and everyone a Tory or Tory lite is all I see on social media.

Their pride and stubbornness comes before anyone else.

People need to climb out of the trenches they've dug for themselves and start making compromises. There may be some ugly alliances but it's the only way to make some progress.

Do you honestly believe a few thousand Trots on social media are stopping Labour from winning seats? The Labour Party has been swinging from left to right and back for the last hundred years.

I do agree with you on alliances though, this country really needs more political parties and PR in every general election. The two party's we're stuck with are both morally and economically bankrupt. More of the same is not enough.

[D41]

I think if you had more political parties... and by that I mean major parties, on an equal footing as the current two...then the situation would likely be much worse, not better as a result.

[duke63]

I think if you had more political parties... and by that I mean major parties, on an equal footing as the current two...then the situation would likely be much worse, not better as a result.

Why would it be worse for another part of the electorate to be represented in actual Government policy by more parties?

[D41]

Because it would be that much harder for any one party to gain a majority.

[duke63]

Because it would be that much harder for any one party to gain a majority.

Precisely. So Government would be more representative of the voter than it would of party policy.

Buying a way in to dictate Government policy would be much harder to do.

[D41]

But a government represents everybody, not just those who voted for it, but also those who voted for someone else, those who didn't vote, can't vote, etc.

[duke63]

But a government represents everybody, not just those who voted for it, but also those who voted for someone else, those who didn't vote, can't vote, etc.

How can a Government represent someone who didn’t vote for it? that is the problem, if you don’t vote for them then your views are not represented.

Which is why we ended up with the bullshit that is Brexit. Only approx a third of the population voted for it, yet the Government used it as a mandate to force it through. Nearly as many voted against it and as many again didn’t vote at all. Had we had PR then those people who voted against it would have had people arguing their cause in Parliament.

[D41]

But it's majority rule, and "nearly as many" is a classic example of how the system DOES work, not how it doesn't.

[Monty]

But it's majority rule, and "nearly as many" is a classic example of how the system DOES work, not how it doesn't.

That's exactly the point, parties are forced into coalitions if they want to form a government and by nature become more representative.

[D41]

Hey, BTW....is it majority rule on the aircraft carrier???

[Monty]

Hey, BTW....is it majority rule on the aircraft carrier???

Which one? Do you mean the one we lent you to fight the Japs*










*intentionally racist term for comedy effect

[D41]

When.... 80-frickin' years ago?

[Jack]

Hey, BTW....is it majority rule on the aircraft carrier???

Which one? Do you mean the one we lent you to fight the Japs*










*intentionally racist term for comedy effect

That was only a loan , we had to bribe them to aid us in ww2 , it cost us Radar , Jet Engines , Computers , the most efficient way of obtaining U235 , the VT fuse ,self sealing fuel tanks , plastic explosives and gyroscopic gunsights to name but a few , we also had to promise to give up our remaining colonial possessions and then we had to pay for everything we had , unlike France Germany and Russia whose wartime debts to the US were forgiven/forgotten . Special relationship my arse !

[Kwacky]

Sunak was in California meeting with us health care companies.