blonde poker forum

Community Forums => The Lounge => Topic started by: TightEnd on March 25, 2013, 01:42:39 PM



Title: Interview of the year
Post by: TightEnd on March 25, 2013, 01:42:39 PM
Not looking for party political debates but

a) what a superb filleting of a politician

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj686CmGGSA

b) really liked what Boris said after

"Eddie Mair did a splendid job. There is no doubt that is what the BBC is for - holding us to account.

"He was perfectly within his rights to have a bash at me - in fact it would have been shocking if he hadn't. If a BBC presenter can't attack a nasty Tory politician what's the world coming to?"


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Acidmouse on March 25, 2013, 01:50:53 PM
Wowzer he really did get owned, fair play he handled it superb.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 25, 2013, 02:04:30 PM
I'd rather support someone who has made mistakes and learnt from them than support someone who hasn't. Obv thats assuming he's learnt.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: redarmi on March 25, 2013, 02:15:14 PM
I'd rather support someone who has made mistakes and learnt from them than support someone who hasn't. Obv thats assuming he's learnt.

He definitely falls into the camp of those handful of Tory politicians that I cannot help but like despite being pretty much diametrically opposed to a lot of his policies.  He reminds me a bit of Ken Clarke in that irrespective of his policies you can't help but think he is decent and fair minded bloke.  Pretty much the opposite of Ed Milliband unfortunately and almost the entire Labour shadow cabinet unfortunately!


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Graham C on March 25, 2013, 02:20:02 PM
I like Boris, but I can't help but feel it's a good thing that he's not my mayor.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: AndrewT on March 25, 2013, 02:24:21 PM
Boris plays the game very well. Despite the headlines of 'disastrous interview' it was nothing we haven't seen before. Anyone who didn't already know that he was dodgy as fuck doesn't care/won't remember in any election - all they'll know is that he comes across a million times better than nearly every single other politician.

Just watch Question Time on a Thursday night - I'd still rather have the narcissistic, manipulative, bullying eel that is Boris as PM than any of the clueless politibots that are served up for Dimbleby to visibly tire of.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Tal on March 25, 2013, 09:54:26 PM
There's an article on this month's GQ, explaining why he could be PM. His own unique brand of half hubris/half humility is oddly endearing and that might extend across the UK better than Big Dave.

He also seems to be doing a good job.

I absolutely love it when he gets on Paxman.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4ldiXhDrHw


YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgThJK8xfKw


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: The Camel on March 25, 2013, 10:17:21 PM
Bizarrely I feel sorry for Cameron having this goon sitting on the sidelines privately and publicly laughing and making jibes at the PM who is in the middle of of one of the toughest times to be in Government since WW2.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: tikay on March 25, 2013, 10:23:07 PM

".....the blessed sponge of amnesia has wiped the slate of memory......"


Too, too good.

I cannot imagine any other politician I would vote for given the chance.

God bless Boris.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Doobs on March 25, 2013, 10:23:46 PM
Just watched the BBC documentary on Boris Johnson.  It was a very good program, and despite a whole series of embarassing stories from his past, and one very embarassing sister, he didn't ever look like he really did get owned.

Redarmi nails it.  I am a natural Milliband supporter, but wouldn't waste 5 minutes watching a program about him.

Would recommend seaching it out on iplayer.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobby1 on March 25, 2013, 10:26:58 PM
is that even an interview tho, isn't it just a hatchet job?


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: BorntoBubble on March 25, 2013, 10:27:47 PM
I love boris! So much more interesting than other politicians. Plus hes an idiot that makes it better, hes like the old codger in the pub that talks bull .... all night long! So much more fun than people speaking the truth but its utter drivel!


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Tal on March 25, 2013, 11:12:08 PM
He's a very bright man. The Tory cabinet is full of them, but most of them are starch-collated blandmonsters. Boris is...not


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Nakor on March 26, 2013, 04:38:17 PM
The Toby Young Drama/Doc called "When Boris Met Dave" goes some way to explaining the rivalry between the two, how its all built around class, parents, social status and the expectation these things give to an Etonian.
Its a little sensationalist and I am sure contains some poetic licence but I found the whole thing fascinating and worth a watch.  I am defo part of team Boris but like others not particularly "Blue".
 


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: mulhuzz on March 26, 2013, 04:46:33 PM
I love that Boris freely admits that his whole 'dumb as a stump' thing is a complete act designed to win votes and still nobody cares. They still think he's a lovable rogue.

Guy that smart could be my mayor, no problem.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kinboshi on March 26, 2013, 05:58:50 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TightEnd on March 26, 2013, 06:06:02 PM
Of course it matters what his policies would be, but not for a lot of voters I suspect

the excellent programme last night - full of probing questions desgined to stitch him up - actually did the exact opposite

It made the very fair point that he is the only "feel good" politician we have in any party, in a very tough era for many people

Of course he is untrustworthy, duplicitious and ruthless, but his art for self-promotion and a very sure light touch are real electoral winners

As we have seen in two London mayoral elections


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Doobs on March 26, 2013, 06:12:30 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.

This thread isn't for discussing Ed Milliband.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: The Camel on March 26, 2013, 06:48:37 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.

This thread isn't for discussing Ed Milliband.

Why the Ed hate?

I think he's a really good politician, 10000 times better leader than the last two Labour have been saddled with.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kukushkin88 on March 26, 2013, 07:17:41 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.

This thread isn't for discussing Ed Milliband.

Why the Ed hate?

I think he's a really good politician, 10000 times better leader than the last two Labour have been saddled with.

He has a political ideology that he believes in, that´s a good start in my book. Blair´s specialty was being popular and his strategy was driven by populist policies, kind of ironic the way things turned out (although inevitably all leaders will become unpopular in the end).


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Tal on March 26, 2013, 07:36:23 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.

This thread isn't for discussing Ed Milliband.

Why the Ed hate?

I think he's a really good politician, 10000 times better leader than the last two Labour have been saddled with.

The Red Left is highly divisive and he was the Unions' choice. He pretends to be focusing on the centre but he just doesn't sell to those people. People vote for him because they'll never vote Tory. That doesn't make you a good leader.

He also comes across to me as a lost boy, awaiting collection from a shopping centre kiosk. I wouldn't trust him to run a bath.

Even Alan Johnson would have been a better choice. Big union man and genuinely charismatic.

For balance, I should add the Tories are very smart but eternally slimy.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: The Camel on March 26, 2013, 07:52:31 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.

This thread isn't for discussing Ed Milliband.

Why the Ed hate?

I think he's a really good politician, 10000 times better leader than the last two Labour have been saddled with.

The Red Left is highly divisive and he was the Unions' choice. He pretends to be focusing on the centre but he just doesn't sell to those people. People vote for him because they'll never vote Tory. That doesn't make you a good leader.

He also comes across to me as a lost boy, awaiting collection from a shopping centre kiosk. I wouldn't trust him to run a bath.

Even Alan Johnson would have been a better choice. Big union man and genuinely charismatic.

For balance, I should add the Tories are very smart but eternally slimy.

To me Ed looks like a sincere, caring and hard working politician.

First Labour leader I've trusted since John Smith.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: titaniumbean on March 26, 2013, 07:54:46 PM
Frightening that he could be PM.  Does anyone who would vote for him actually know any of his policies? Does he know any of his policies?

I like Rhod Gilbert, and think he's funny when he's interviewed.  Not sure he'd make a great PM though...on second thoughts.

This thread isn't for discussing Ed Milliband.

Why the Ed hate?

I think he's a really good politician, 10000 times better leader than the last two Labour have been saddled with.

The Red Left is highly divisive and he was the Unions' choice. He pretends to be focusing on the centre but he just doesn't sell to those people. People vote for him because they'll never vote Tory. That doesn't make you a good leader.

He also comes across to me as a lost boy, awaiting collection from a shopping centre kiosk. I wouldn't trust him to run a bath.

Even Alan Johnson would have been a better choice. Big union man and genuinely charismatic.

For balance, I should add the Tories are very smart but eternally slimy.


this, could accept his brother, but not him.




Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: AndrewT on March 26, 2013, 08:06:58 PM
Ed Milliband would have made a perfectly fine assistant manager at a bank in a large town.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Acidmouse on March 26, 2013, 08:21:02 PM

For balance, I should add the Tories are very smart but eternally slimy.


I would say they are fuking clueless esp. when it comes to running the country.

I have to reserve my judgment on Ed, he committed the ultimate snide move on his brother which is not good.

Ed's Dad was a remarkable man though, :)


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TightEnd on March 26, 2013, 08:26:10 PM


I would say they are fuking clueless esp. when it comes to running the country.



2010 was a nasty election to win

no money, have to cut, not likely to get better quick

not many options for any party to do anything different


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 26, 2013, 08:29:24 PM


I would say they are fuking clueless esp. when it comes to running the country.



2010 was a nasty election to win

no money, have to cut, not likely to get better quick

not many options for any party to do anything different


If I was a party leader for the last election I doubt I would have wanted the job. Whoever was going to win was going to be doomed after the extraordinary mess left behind Blair/Brown and Brown/Darling


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TightEnd on March 26, 2013, 08:33:22 PM
Precisely

The Banking Industry made it far worse, but over-spending by governements of whatever party since the 80s meant this government had a really tough gig


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kinboshi on March 26, 2013, 09:11:36 PM
Dismantling the NHS isn't necessary though.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TightEnd on March 26, 2013, 09:14:02 PM
 I Don't want to get you on a hobby horse so I will demur


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: The Camel on March 26, 2013, 09:26:17 PM
David Milliband has just announced he is standing down at the next election.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TightEnd on March 26, 2013, 09:29:24 PM
David Milliband has just announced he is standing down at the next election.

South Shields is the only constituency in the country never to have had a Tory MP since the Great Reform Act of 1832

Its so safe, UKIP didn't even field a candidate in the general election

Nice gig for someone, that seat


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Tal on March 26, 2013, 09:31:49 PM
David Milliband has just announced he is standing down at the next election.

South Shields is the only constituency in the country never to have had a Tory MP since the Great Reform Act of 1832

Its so safe, UKIP didn't even field a candidate in the general election

Nice gig for someone, that seat

He's reportedly raking it in from his various jobs in the private sector.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 26, 2013, 10:14:11 PM
Dismantling the NHS isn't necessary though.

It needs sorting out though.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Acidmouse on March 26, 2013, 10:19:23 PM


I would say they are fuking clueless esp. when it comes to running the country.



2010 was a nasty election to win

no money, have to cut, not likely to get better quick

not many options for any party to do anything different


100% agree, it was a thankless task to win it. I do however think not having a clue on how to set the budgets to promote spending post 2010 is key to their downfall, no real plan, or backup plan when its failing. Not saying Labour would have done better.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: tikay on March 26, 2013, 10:40:21 PM
For a better understanding of Boris, & what goes in inside his head, I strongly recommend his book, "Have I got views for you".

Published by Harper Perennial, first published 2003, with several reprints since.

Tremendous read, & very insightful as to the real Boris.

Very funny, too.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Tal on March 26, 2013, 10:41:54 PM


I would say they are fuking clueless esp. when it comes to running the country.



2010 was a nasty election to win

no money, have to cut, not likely to get better quick

not many options for any party to do anything different


100% agree, it was a thankless task to win it. I do however think not having a clue on how to set the budgets to promote spending post 2010 is key to their downfall, no real plan, or backup plan when its failing. Not saying Labour would have done better.

In 2010, we had no idea just how awfully some of the other countries had been managing their accounts. European growth has been unable to get going since then, as Germany has been left with the bar bill so often.

It is difficult because I have such an unnatural dislike of Ed Balls who has a 1980s Tory level of smugness. It probably clouds my judgment.

There has to be logic in saying, if you owe a lot of money, you should not be borrowing more to pay for it, else HBOS would be being bought out by Wonga.com.

I can't pretend I understand macroeconomics as well as these chaps.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: technolog on March 26, 2013, 10:53:30 PM
I Don't want to get you on a hobby horse so I will demur

It's not getting him on it that's the problem :)


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: MANTIS01 on March 26, 2013, 11:08:33 PM
Ed Milliband strikes me as a wannabe politician who avidly watched prime minister's questions as a kid and is trying to replicate that same old style in modern politics. All I ever hear him do is chastise the government and hurl insults about failing this and downgraded that. People may say that's his job but I think politics is crying out for leaders who provide positive solutions in opposition. The reason Boris is so popular is because he has a freshness in his approach and indeed can provide a little feel good in what are trying times.

I never see Milliband embrace that fresh approach. He is not fresh, original or creative in opposition. The coalition are working together to try and clean up this tragic mess Labour left behind and it's a thankless task. If Milliband had a touch of humility about the situation and proposed positive solutions moving forward he could be a breath of fresh air and a force to be reckoned with. As it is he bores me to tears with his fake anger and disgust at every last word from a government faced with an impossible task. Pls realise it's 2013 Ed and people are tired of this same old bullshit. In fact pls don't realise.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: nirvana on March 26, 2013, 11:31:19 PM
Dismantling the NHS isn't necessary though.

It needs sorting out though.

Fear not kids, I visited a hospital today, the NHS was still there, seemingly quite mantled. Got loadsa free (at the point of delivery) stuff too.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TommyD on March 27, 2013, 02:04:35 AM
David Milliband is to head the International Rescue Committee.

Well that's just FAB.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: redarmi on March 27, 2013, 02:34:45 PM
David Milliband is to head the International Rescue Committee.

Well that's just FAB.
?????


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: DungBeetle on March 27, 2013, 02:42:04 PM
The Tories have been beyond useless so far, but Miliband strikes me as a vote loser.  Just comes across robotic and weird.  Those speeches when he constantly repeats "One Nation" make me squirm.  Think Labour will win the next election despite him, as opposed to because of him.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: TommyD on March 27, 2013, 04:08:24 PM
David Milliband is to head the International Rescue Committee.

Well that's just FAB.
?????

Sigh

International Rescue was the fictional organisation from Thunderbirds (The International Rescue Committee is a real life charity).

David Milliband was nicknamed 'Brains' in the media due to looking like that character from Thunderbirds, who used to say F-A-B when ready to go.

Thought it was a bit of an open goal tbh but obviously not as well known a reference as I thought.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: DungBeetle on March 27, 2013, 04:36:37 PM
I think F-A-B was used instead of "copy" or "roger"?



Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: MintTrav on March 28, 2013, 06:30:45 AM
It made the very fair point that he is the only "feel good" politician we have in any party

Is he? I'd have thought that, whatever their political views, a lot of people feel favourably disposed towards Ming Campbell, Vince Cable, David Laws, David Steel, Ken Clarke, Francis Maude, Oliver Leftwing, William Hague, Hilary Benn, Alan Johnson, David Miliband, Andy Burnham...............


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: rfgqqabc on March 28, 2013, 12:25:50 PM
It doesn't matter who votes for what anyway, we just rotate leadership every 8-12 years anyway. Flawed system in Britain in my opinion. It barely matters anyway as everyone's policies are merged down the centre but I guess that's always going to happen when you design a political system that encourages this, due to the vast majority of people being in the middle.

Boris is an interesting character. I like that he is different but not really sure that's what I want in a politician


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: redarmi on March 28, 2013, 02:23:46 PM
It doesn't matter who votes for what anyway, we just rotate leadership every 8-12 years anyway. Flawed system in Britain in my opinion. It barely matters anyway as everyone's policies are merged down the centre but I guess that's always going to happen when you design a political system that encourages this, due to the vast majority of people being in the middle.

Isnt that system democracy?  You have a better idea?


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: mulhuzz on March 28, 2013, 02:32:22 PM
It doesn't matter who votes for what anyway, we just rotate leadership every 8-12 years anyway. Flawed system in Britain in my opinion. It barely matters anyway as everyone's policies are merged down the centre but I guess that's always going to happen when you design a political system that encourages this, due to the vast majority of people being in the middle.

Isnt that system democracy?  You have a better idea?

there are lots of other alternatives that one might still call democratic.

In any event, in a truely democratic system, you'd have no MPs at all -- everyone would vote on every issue and the majority rules -- that's democracy 'pur' and I'm not sure I like that any more than I like the current system.

Would be interesting if we banned newspapers from reporting on immigration, poltics in general though -- I do rather think it'd lead to a more well informed electorate.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Jon MW on March 28, 2013, 02:33:45 PM
It doesn't matter who votes for what anyway, we just rotate leadership every 8-12 years anyway. Flawed system in Britain in my opinion. It barely matters anyway as everyone's policies are merged down the centre but I guess that's always going to happen when you design a political system that encourages this, due to the vast majority of people being in the middle.

Isnt that system democracy?  You have a better idea?

I was talking politics with my boss the other day and we both agreed that second question is the difficult part.

When people look at various aspects of any political system it's easy to find what's wrong with it, what doesn't make sense and peculiarities it throws up - it's even easy to find alternatives which 'fix' those problems - the difficult part is that the alternatives then just throw up their own set of problems and peculiarities.

It's easy to fix what we have - but then you'd have to fix what we replace it with.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Jon MW on March 28, 2013, 02:35:26 PM
...
In any event, in a truely democratic system, you'd have no MPs at all -- everyone would vote on every issue and the majority rules -- that's democracy 'pur' and I'm not sure I like that any more than I like the current system.
...

like the Athenians had

They democratically voted to go to war every other year as well democratically voting to enslave an entire country they'd conquered once.

I'm really not confident that mankind has progressed any further since then so I'd expect the same or worse problems if any country managed to recreate their system.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: redarmi on March 28, 2013, 02:45:41 PM
It doesn't matter who votes for what anyway, we just rotate leadership every 8-12 years anyway. Flawed system in Britain in my opinion. It barely matters anyway as everyone's policies are merged down the centre but I guess that's always going to happen when you design a political system that encourages this, due to the vast majority of people being in the middle.

Isnt that system democracy?  You have a better idea?

I was talking politics with my boss the other day and we both agreed that second question is the difficult part.

When people look at various aspects of any political system it's easy to find what's wrong with it, what doesn't make sense and peculiarities it throws up - it's even easy to find alternatives which 'fix' those problems - the difficult part is that the alternatives then just throw up their own set of problems and peculiarities.

It's easy to fix what we have - but then you'd have to fix what we replace it with.

Spot on.  I don't particularly like democracy as a system but it is possibly the best of a bad bunch in that it is possible to reach a very broad consensus through it.  As much as I don't like our political system with the exception of a handful of relatively minor changes I have never been able to come up with a better idea.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 03:31:14 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Jon MW on March 28, 2013, 03:32:56 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

so about 99% of the population didn't march against the war in Iraq then?


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 03:36:59 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

so about 99% of the population didn't march against the war in Iraq then?

The point I'm trying to make is in this country we do not stand up for what we want very often and never to try and oust a shitty government.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 03:39:24 PM
...and besides, I'm willing to hazard a guess that the majority of people in this country didn't see the point of th e UK going to war in Iraq.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kinboshi on March 28, 2013, 03:51:57 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

so about 99% of the population didn't march against the war in Iraq then?

The point I'm trying to make is in this country we do not stand up for what we want very often and never to try and oust a shitty government.

It's not that though is it.  100% of people in one constituency can vote one way, but that only gives that party one seat in parliament.  It's like Man City winning every match left in this season 10-0, it won't win them the league.

That's definitely an 'issue' with the present system - a lot of votes don't 'count'.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 03:56:31 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

so about 99% of the population didn't march against the war in Iraq then?

The point I'm trying to make is in this country we do not stand up for what we want very often and never to try and oust a shitty government.

It's not that though is it.  100% of people in one constituency can vote one way, but that only gives that party one seat in parliament.  It's like Man City winning every match left in this season 10-0, it won't win them the league.

That's definitely an 'issue' with the present system - a lot of votes don't 'count'.

When was the last time you heard of a constituency kicking out their MP?

I understand what you mean but it's such a big discussion and I can't type that well. :)


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: DungBeetle on March 28, 2013, 03:56:43 PM
Yep.  My consitituency is a Tory stronghold.  I've voted Tory in the past, but my point is that is it utterly pointless me showing up to vote even if I voted differently (as I did last time out).

But then the power given to minority parties under PR feels unfair to me also.  No idea what the answer is.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Jon MW on March 28, 2013, 04:03:31 PM
...

But then the power given to minority parties under PR feels unfair to me also.  No idea what the answer is.


exactly just like I suggested, any one particular aspect can be dissected and solutions can be found.

But the solutions will just have their own problems, and they won't be any better or worse - they'll just be different.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: Doobs on March 28, 2013, 04:31:03 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

 



Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 05:56:11 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kinboshi on March 28, 2013, 05:56:54 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar

Hope that was intentional and not a typo.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 05:59:31 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar

Hope that was intentional and not a typo.

It was Kin, it was. IMO Bliar was a c##t through and through.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kinboshi on March 28, 2013, 06:04:54 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar

Hope that was intentional and not a typo.

It was Kin, it was. IMO Bliar was a c##t through and through.

Can't argue with that.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 06:13:48 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar

Hope that was intentional and not a typo.

It was Kin, it was. IMO Bliar was a c##t through and through.

Can't argue with that.

It's comments like this that make me think that you're alright Kin, regardless of what everyone else says.
:)up


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: kinboshi on March 28, 2013, 06:18:45 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar

Hope that was intentional and not a typo.

It was Kin, it was. IMO Bliar was a c##t through and through.

Can't argue with that.

It's comments like this that make me think that you're alright Kin, regardless of what everyone else says.
:)up


I'd go with the majority. We do live in a democracy after all.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: bobAlike on March 28, 2013, 06:22:19 PM
With the current system we vote for the MP's who we think will do the best for us. We vote them into government but as a country we hardly do anything about them if we don't like what they are doing other than not vote for them at the next election.

One thing that always puzzled me was how Tony Blair stayed as PM after the 2003 march against war in Iraq? I was in London that weekend staying at County Hall and there was easily 1million people about and yet he survived.

Surely the people were marching against the war in Iraq and were not marching because they wanted Tony Blair to make way for Iain Duncan Smith or, perish the thought, Gordon Brown?

But if you feel so strong about it then that must be a vote of no confidence in Bliar

Hope that was intentional and not a typo.

It was Kin, it was. IMO Bliar was a c##t through and through.

Can't argue with that.

It's comments like this that make me think that you're alright Kin, regardless of what everyone else says.
:)up


I'd go with the majority. We do live in a democracy after all.

Yes but we should exercise diplomacy.


Title: Re: Interview of the year
Post by: rfgqqabc on March 28, 2013, 08:48:48 PM
It doesn't matter who votes for what anyway, we just rotate leadership every 8-12 years anyway. Flawed system in Britain in my opinion. It barely matters anyway as everyone's policies are merged down the centre but I guess that's always going to happen when you design a political system that encourages this, due to the vast majority of people being in the middle.

Isnt that system democracy?  You have a better idea?
Well yes and no, its a form of democracy. Yes but it would never work. There is no perfect system due to humans having flaws. An intellectual elite that lasted for twenty years or so, had no focus on retaining power but a lot more on actual improvements would be ideal. But no way of safeguarding against the power hungry and greedy. The world is riddled with issues. When we consider the fact that enough food for everyone exists but people starve to death. A society where knowledge, resources and pleasure are shared equally ala Utopia (original book) would be ideal but ultimately impossible.