Bercow defects to Labour - Did not see that coming

indeedido said:
Are you really saying that people are too stupid to be entitled to vote and that it should only be for really really clever people like you, Adi and Boromart?
Or unless of course they vote how you want?

There are disadvantages with every form of voting system, if you look for them.
There are imperfections with FPTP, but it is clear and simple, is understood and does give a result that more people voted FOR than anything else.
Click to expand...

This sort of generalised, lowest common denominator argument is beneath you. Nobody has said or is saying that. And nobody is, as you imply, simply looking for disadvantages. The arguments put forward are really clear and you don’t have to go looking for disadvantages. Instead of addressing the points you’re choosing to put up a straw man that ‘only voting systems that give the right result’ or ‘are for clever people’ will satisfy us. And still no counter has been put forward.

‘Imperfections’ is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. It’s a grossly undemocratic system of a kind that nowhere in any modern forward thinking society has. And it absolutely does not provide a result that more people voted for than anything else. Just the opposite. More people voted for something other than a Conservative government and yet we ended up with a Conservative government with unassailable power. That’s not democracy I’m afraid.
 
Ziggy said:
It helps to have read the book at least 15 times too.
Click to expand...
My favourite novel of all time, loved it from the first page, I've read it dozens of times and used to open it anywhere and start reading.ironically misplaced my copy. I was going to have yossarian has a user name but pumped for this, too many on here have their prose was to prolix. You still nicked the description of ex PFC wintergreen off wiki though.😎
 
Last edited:
Adi_Dem said:
This sort of generalised, lowest common denominator argument is beneath you. Nobody has said or is saying that. And nobody is, as you imply, simply looking for disadvantages. The arguments put forward are really clear and you don’t have to go looking for disadvantages. Instead of addressing the points you’re choosing to put up a straw man that ‘only voting systems that give the right result’ or ‘are for clever people’ will satisfy us. And still no counter has been put forward.

‘Imperfections’ is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. It’s a grossly undemocratic system of a kind that nowhere in any modern forward thinking society has. And it absolutely does not provide a result that more people voted for than anything else. Just the opposite. More people voted for something other than a Conservative government and yet we ended up with a Conservative government with unassailable power. That’s not democracy I’m afraid.
Click to expand...
Your verbosity is matched only by your inaccuracies,. Did you complain about labour winning in the Blair years.
 
Ex pfc wintergreen said:
Your verbosity is matched only by your inaccuracies,. Did you complain about labour winning in the Blair years.
Click to expand...

There are zero inaccuracies, which is why you repeatedly fail to point them out. And yes, I have always complained about the voting system in this country. I find it amusing that you assume I voted Labour back then.
 
Adi_Dem said:
There are zero inaccuracies, which is why you repeatedly fail to point them out. And yes, I have always complained about the voting system in this country. I find it amusing that you assume I voted Labour back then.
Click to expand...
I'm amused you thought I thought you voted labour, I asked did you contest the result, nothing more.
 
Adi_Dem said:
Without that assumption your question makes no sense. At least be honest in the discussion.
Click to expand...
Stop Deflecting because you were caught out ,going on your assertion about the voting process, all elections are null and void. Apart from the rest of the country where the result is acted upon..
 
Ex pfc wintergreen said:
Stop Deflecting because you were caught out ,going on your assertion about the voting process, all elections are null and void. Apart from the rest of the country where the result is acted upon..
Click to expand...

Caught out with what, exactly? I‘m sure it makes sense in your head but maybe you could let the rest of us in on it.

As for the rest of your post, I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you. So here we go. Nobody is arguing that any previous election is null and void. They were all carried out using the FPTP system and the results implemented correctly in accordance with that system. So that’s the first thing: the assertion is not that any previous election is null and void. With me so far?

What is being argued is that the system itself isn’t democratic, is grossly unfair and ought to be replaced moving forward. In other words, we want reform of the system *in the future*, not the unpicking of previous results retrospectively. Got that bit?

Now I know that’s slightly nuanced but I’m not sure I can make it any clearer for you. You’re going to have to meet me halfway and at least try and get your head around it.
 
BoroMart said:
Open to massive corruption through gerrymandering, and is not representational of the electorate as a whole, but of the biggest minority only.
Click to expand...

And that biggest minority gets unassailable and absolute power. 57% of the people voting have zero power or influence.
 
Adi_Dem said:
Caught out with what, exactly? I‘m sure it makes sense in your head but maybe you could let the rest of us in on it.

As for the rest of your post, I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you. So here we go. Nobody is arguing that any previous election is null and void. They were all carried out using the FPTP system and the results implemented correctly in accordance with that system. So that’s the first thing: the assertion is not that any previous election is null and void. With me so far?

What is being argued is that the system itself isn’t democratic, is grossly unfair and ought to be replaced moving forward. In other words, we want reform of the system *in the future*, not the unpicking of previous results retrospectively. Got that bit?

Now I know that’s slightly nuanced but I’m not sure I can make it any clearer for you. You’re going to have to meet me halfway and at least try and get your head around it.
Click to expand...
Get in the real world son, all semantics and pedantry you spout on here can't be doing you any good.
 
Adi_Dem said:
More people voted for something other than a Conservative government and yet we ended up with a Conservative government with unassailable power. That’s not democracy I’m afraid.
Click to expand...
No, the people were asked to vote FOR a candidate, usually representing a party.
The rules are unmistakably clear.
More people voted for something other than a Conservative government when Cameron first got in and there was still a Con ruled govt. As part of a coalition that is inevitable in PR, where there is virtually always a government where more people voted FOR something other than for it.
 
BoroMart said:
I don't actually agree that people shouldn't have the vote based on intelligence, although I do believe everyone should have to have training on political ideology to understand what they are voting for. To reduce manipulation.
Click to expand...
But who does the training? What would be the safeguards for "training" to not become "brainwashing" or manipulating.
 
indeedido said:
There are disadvantages with every form of voting system, if you look for them.
There are imperfections with FPTP, but it is clear and simple, is understood and does give a result that more people voted FOR than anything else.
Click to expand...
That is a ludicrous statement. It is clear and simple and clearly unfit for purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top