Jump to content

news & politics:discussion

zahidf

By zahidf,
in Discussions

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Neil

    4946

  • steviewevie

    13383

  • Crazyfool01

    2320

  • fraybentos1

    1312

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Kurosagi
Kurosagi

Don't post on here often, but read it every day. Can't sit by and watch @Ozanne getting picked on for doing little other than make a polite 'point of order' request without my saying something. F

Justiceforcedave
Justiceforcedave

I made a playlist.

maelzoid
maelzoid

Obviously horrible news. But I think pointing the finger at Rayner is not only unfair to her, but also serves to help silence critics of the Tories. Don't forget that over the years, BJ's words h

Posted Images

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Plus with the media so ready to jump down any Labour leaders throat over the smallest thing Labour have to be pragmatic and essentially play the game. They have to go closer to where the public to have any chance of winning an election.

Obviously under PR this would still happen but wouldn’t have the same effect as every vote would count and a Tory majority would be much harder for them to achieve so Labour wouldn’t have to worry as much (although there would be other issues to deal with).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurosagi Experienced

Kurosagi

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I think there would be. Bear in mind the Lib Dems' position is to be economically centre-right, while being liberal on social issues.

Actually I take your point. There will always be a centrist party that try to get a majority of their own. Yep, I get that.

13 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

If it's a coalition between different parties, then a compromise on policy is purely pragmatic, and can be done without sacrificing your own ideology for campaigning purposes.

Except when it's a compromise between parties then *within* purist parties you'll have members arguing about the extent of being 'pragmatic' and how much it dilutes one of their purist policies versus getting another policy adopted. Parties will still need to make that balance between keeping their members happy versus selling their souls.

15 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

I think there is always room for a liberal party in PR systems. If PR did happen you'd probs have something like:

-Socialist Party

There will definitely be more splinter groups than that on the left I reckon!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steviewevie Grand Master

steviewevie

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Plus with the media so ready to jump down any Labour leaders throat over the smallest thing Labour have to be pragmatic and essentially play the game. They have to go closer to where the public to have any chance of winning an election.

Obviously under PR this would still happen but wouldn’t have the same effect as every vote would count and a Tory majority would be much harder for them to achieve so Labour wouldn’t have to worry as much (although there would be other issues to deal with).

they have to appeal to the horrible little englander racist stereotype.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fraybentos1 Grand Master

fraybentos1

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Kurosagi said:

 

There will definitely be more splinter groups than that on the left I reckon!

Quite possibly aye, just a case of what ones would make the breakthrough. Personally don't see much need for anything more than Socialist, Green, Soc Dem- not sure who wouldn't fit into them on the left

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...