Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 57

Thread: Media on politics

  1. #21
    Ultra King Martin Carpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,835


    Italy's politics really shouldn't be used as an example of anything. Except maybe a cautionary tale!

    We do already have coallition government in this country at normal times. The Conservative and Labour parties really aren't especially coherent blocks of opinion.

    I was actually half serious about a Lab/Con coallition If you had PR then both parties would (hopefully!) eventually spin off their more seriously left/right wing elements, leaving two big centre left/center right party and a bunch of smaller ones.

    What you'd then do under the current circumstances is have the two big centrist parties form a big coallition. Very stable and entirely capable of doing the sort of unpopular stuff needed in a reasoned manner.

    (assuming the politicans were sane enough to work together that is.).

    Actually it'd be fascinating to see where the Lib Dems ended up long term. At the moment they're inevitably somewhat defined as against the other two parties, differing markedly on which part of the country they're coming from.

    I suppose they'd ideally prefer to get the center/ softly center left ground. No idea whether they or Labour would do so though.

  2. #22
    Initiate Weevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    820
    the idea of a labour / conservative coalition isn't daft. just no-one's proposing it. the more progressive tories are indistinguishable from the social democratic labour. the best benefit from this might be it'd clear the air and the space for the development of a socialist movement, a credible progressive alternative.

  3. #23
    Initiate Ben Turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    825


    Back to the subject of the OP, what annoys me most is when the journalists keep asking Lib or Lab politicians: "Surely the electorate would be outraged if you formed a Lib-Lab government of "losers?""

    Ermmm... presumably not the 15m members of the electorate that voted Lib or Lab?

  4. #24
    Goon
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    263
    The media have dominated this election by their aggressive,often irresponsible reporting. While I was in favour of the three leaders debates I think it turned into a circus and I now wonder if it was a mistake. Maybe it would have been better if their had been a panel of three from each party, two senior members by right and one backbencher drawn at random and if their were three debates having one or more members of each team being replaced for each debate.As for voting patterns. Their was a clear division shown in our area. We voted for the local elections as well as the National one in a boundary change area. The local ballot in the town areas showed a turn out of between 40 and 56%. The country and more affluent areas brought in by the boundary changes showed a turn out of between 60 and 70%. Translated to a National vote this meant a change of party for the town, while the country still retained the party it has always voted in, even though the town electorate is greater than the country one. Maybe a form of PR would have changed this at least in our area.

  5. #25
    Ultra King Martin Carpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,835


    Oh the only people who have a reason to be truly unhappy with whatever goverment (assuming it functions that is) we get will be people obsessed with a narrow implementation of either Labours or the Conservatives manifestos.

    Otherwise lib dems are getting a little bit of power and sane Lab/Con folk would have to admit the other party will end up in power often enough over time, and be happy with getting a 'kind' version of them

  6. #26


    If the boundries and constitunency population sizings didn't favour inner cities the Tories would havea working majority nowanyway.

    So the change probably addressed an unfair balance anyway!

    But more to the point 8 million people voted for the Labour party and 6 million for the Lim-Dems. I'm almost 100% sure that no one voted for a Lib-Lab coalition. Or a torie-lib one for that matter.

    Of course the irony is the only way that such a coalition could get bills through parliment is with the support of the SNP, PC etc.and Labour have already said they won't work with the SNP. Not withstanding this the power this hands to parties whose combined share of the national vote is less than 2% is staggering. So much for a 'new fairer society'!

  7. #27
    Ultra King Parky Again's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    14,005


    we should have an election every week and only stop having them when a "government" of our personal liking is elected

    wouldn't have this problem with a proper system likedictatorship.

  8. #28
    Initiate
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    785


    The beebs election night coverage included a celeb barge and Bruce Foryth.What a load of tosh.

    Newspapers lived upto there usual low standards ,I wonder if the average "sun"reader is persuaded by the mega obnoxious,such as simon Cowelltelling them how to vote?

  9. #29
    Ultra King
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    12,456
    The Lib Dems ain't getting any power except to delay the date of the rerun of this general election by a few months or so. People will then wake up to their irrelevance in the presently configured political system and they will lose seats. The next election will be a pointer as to whether the electorate actually do want electoral reform. So far, they have shown no such inclination. If it was a need deeply felt by the majority of the electorate the LDs would have had a parliamentary majority.

  10. #30
    Ultra King Martin Carpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,835


    No they're getting at least some power. Not enough to pass lots of their manifesto of course, but if nothing else they can vote down anything too silly.

    And they're probably getting more than that, we'll have to see.

    What we need for real fun is the lib dems to reject a deal They've got some pretty strict conditions about coallitions which potentially include balloting their membership and needing quite a big majority....

  11. #31
    Ultra King Mikel el Bastardo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    30,833
    One rule i would like to see is the banning of opinion polls in the4 weeks prior to any election. Maybe even ban them altogether?

  12. #32
    Ultra King
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    12,456
    "...Not enough to pass lots of their manifesto of course, but if nothing else they can vote down anything too silly..."
    Exactly. The first time they do that though, they will trigger a vote of no confidence in the government which will likely be affirmed by parliament. So effectively, they will have no power other than, as I said above, to delay the rerun of the general election.

  13. #33
    Goon
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    263


    Maybe they will hold back and while never forcing a vote of no confidence, let Cameron and co know that they will if they need too. Strangly I am not concerned with the present leadership of the Toriesbecause the old guard who will get rid of Cameron and co as soon as they can find someone who suites them more. Remember how Thatcher stabbed Heath in the backand Major done the dirty on Thatcher and so it will be with Cameron and probably sooner rather than later and a strong right wing Torie party does worry me

  14. #34
    Ultra King
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    12,456
    Major did the dirty on Thatcher? Where/when was that, in a parallel universe?

  15. #35
    Ultra King
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    8,732


    All I say is may God/Allah, your god, help us.!!!

    We need a stable government that can tackle the economy, unemployment, etc. with out cutting "front line" services.

    IMHO. there are to many 'backroom' staff, driven by "targets"

    Yes, we need a way of insuring that things like the NHS make the best use of resources, but that should not mean cutting front line staff, who allways seem to suffer the most, at the expense of mid and upper staff!!!

  16. #36
    ‹bermensch Jester*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Tack(2) View Post

    Of course the irony is the only way that such a coalition could get bills through parliment is with the support of the SNP, PC etc.and Labour have already said they won't work with the SNP. Not withstanding this the power this hands to parties whose combined share of the national vote is less than 2% is staggering. So much for a 'new fairer society'!

    The SNPs policy is not to vote on English only matters, so much of that would have been dead in the water anyway.

    Having said that, Labour had the opportunity and were offered that olive branch by SNP and said no. Putting their pride first meant letting the Tories in, when they could have blocked them.

  17. #37
    ‹bermensch Jester*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Metric Kate View Post



    Two things irritate me especially: criticism of Gordon Brown for staying in Downing Street. It's his (unwritten) constitutional duty to remain as PM until we've got a new one. And howls of protest that we might end up with a second 'unelected PM'. We don't elect the PM, ffs, we don't have a presidency (though one might be forgiven for thinking that towards the latter end of the Blair years). Is the media advocating the establishment of a Republic and election of a head of state?!



    /rant mode
    Then why did they take part in a presidential style debate? What was Cleggmania?

    We cast our vote with one eye on the local picture, and one on the big picture. The parties stand for election with a leader who will, if they win, become Prime Minister. By ditching leaders and substituting them for others, they break trust with the electorate.

  18. #38
    Goon
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    263
    Bollocks, the leader can be replaced by the party at any time and is just the mouth piece, the party and what it stands for is what we should vote for.

  19. #39
    Ultra King AT (http://AyrshireTiger.wordpress.com/)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel. View Post
    Having said that, Labour had the opportunity and were offered that olive branch by SNP and said no. Putting their pride first meant letting the Tories in, when they could have blocked them.
    Surely it was the Lib Dems who were offering an olive branch and not the SNP!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel. View Post
    Then why did they take part in a presidential style debate? What was Cleggmania?

    We cast our vote with one eye on the local picture, and one on the big picture. The parties stand for election with a leader who will, if they win, become Prime Minister. By ditching leaders and substituting them for others, they break trust with the electorate.
    As Cush says, bollocks. Both Tory and Labour have change leaders mid-term over the years. You vote for an MP, presumably on the back of their party affiliation. The debates were meant to be about policy but admittedly turned out to be as much about personality. However it doesn't change the fact that we do not have a presidential style elections!

  20. #40
    Goon
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    263
    and God forbid we ever do have to elect a president, its bad enough getting a good one to run a walking group or association never mind a Country

Similar Threads

  1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27536800
    By Metric Kate in forum Walking and Climbing
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23-05-2014, 01:11 PM
  2. POLITICS
    By rocket in forum Soapbox
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 26-03-2012, 07:26 PM
  3. OMM In Eye Of Media Storm
    By Paul Burke 2 in forum Walking and Climbing
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 01-12-2008, 07:10 PM
  4. Media
    By Robbie Williams in forum Soapbox
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 20-03-2004, 09:43 PM
  5. Outdoors Media
    By Ben Hedley in forum Soapbox
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 01-10-2002, 12:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •