danny la rouge
I have a cheese grater in the dishwasher.
Not the point. Clegg talked of seats and popular vote in deciding who to prop up in government. He trumpeted his own popular vote.i actually agree with them. PR is the only way to go.
Not the point. Clegg talked of seats and popular vote in deciding who to prop up in government. He trumpeted his own popular vote.i actually agree with them. PR is the only way to go.
I voted LibDem to upset Butchers, and feel no shame.
But seriously, this is bullshit, what was the alternative, not vote for them and get pure Tory, fucked if I'm feeling ashamed.
i think this thread proves that no matter which way you voted, or didn't, you would get the Urban flak.
not heard much about those voting for New Labour aka mass murderers and big brother party? I take it those who slag me off were entirely blameless in their voting habits?
Danny's the one going on about percentages, though. It seems to be important to him.No, the lib-dems sold out PR, remember?
No, because they don't measure % against total voting population, they measure it against the number of votes cast.No, I've increased the percentage who refused to endorse any of them.
Not the point. Clegg talked of seats and popular vote in deciding who to prop up in government. He trumpeted his own popular vote.
That's right. To put it another way -- they need 326 plus another 10% of 326, which is an extra 32.6.Have I got this right? Under the simple majority rule, you need 326 votes for a vote of no confidence (650 seats -- so half of them plus one). To get a 55% majority would require 358 votes (55% of 650 is 357½, so round up to the nearest whole). So that's an additional 32.*
Fuck me. I hope my maths is out.
* Of course, this doesn't take into account abstentions.
Danny's the one going on about percentages, though. It seems to be important to him.
No, because they don't measure % against total voting population, they measure it against the number of votes cast.
By not voting, you increased the percentage of all three major parties. And that means that you increased the percentage of the Tories and the Lib Dems collectively more than you increased the percentage of the non-ConDems.
Sorry, but that's a simple fact. If you want to talk about percentages then you have to play fair and look at the percentages that have actually been discussed. On that basis, you are even more guilty than trev -- at least he decreased the Tory % by as much as he increased the Lib Dem %.
Add in seats, geographic spread and history if you want to play that game - whilst missing the point that this was Clegg's game and all you mugs got used as a battering ram into the tory gates.
That's their problem.No, because they don't measure % against total voting population, they measure it against the number of votes cast.
There are four main parties in Scotland, although the Tories aren't so main as the others. I didn't endorse any of them.By not voting, you increased the percentage of all three major parties.
That's right. To put it another way -- they need 326 plus another 10% of 326, which is an extra 32.6.
That's right. It used to be 1 was enough. Stinks, doesn't it?Have I got this right? Under the simple majority rule, you need 326 votes for a vote of no confidence (650 seats -- so half of them plus one). To get a 55% majority would require 358 votes (55% of 650 is 357½, so round up to the nearest whole). So that's an additional 32.*
Fuck me. I hope my maths is out.
No, it's all of our problem if you are to be believed. Because you are saying that they used those percentages as part of their bargaining chips. You can't have this one both ways.That's their problem.
And yet, paradoxically, by not voting for any of them, you actually increased all of their share.There are four main parties in Scotland, although the Tories aren't so main as the others. I didn't endorse any of them.
How did you vote in the locals, Trev?
They used popular vote. I didn't contribute to the popular vote.No, it's all of our problem if you are to be believed. Because you are saying that they used those percentages as part of their bargaining chips. You can't have this one both ways.
they weren't on round here but it woulda probably been Labour as they (locally at least) are the best for services ...
They used the vote as a % of total votes cast.They used popular vote. I didn't contribute to the popular vote.
Had I voted, I would have been seen by the recipient as endorsing their candidacy. I could not do that.They used the vote as a % of total votes cast.
And you DID contribute to that. If you had voted for someone -- anyone -- then all of the voting percentages would have been different.
Had I voted, I would have been seen by the recipient as endorsing their candidacy. I could not do that.
That's a completely different point.
If you want to say now that voting percentages are irrelevant then stop trying to hang trev with them.
If you want to say that they are not irrelevant then you need to accept your own culpability just as much.
Has this vote of no confidence thing actually been passed ?
these losers sour grapes threads are very tidieous and also graceless...
There's a reason Labour didn't get a majority and didn't win.
it'd be far better to focaus on that than why a minor party did a deal with the party who were elected by the majority of the country to run it. (all be it not by the majority of urban or by very much nationally) or is democracy only ok when it's a left wing win for those 'approved' parties...
A lot of bluster and bollocks being talked around urban at present and yet what the fuck did any of you blow hards and posturing politico snobs do to encourage voters not to vote in the tories??
you know like the effort you went to to inform the masses of they soon to be foolish decision?
but it's all the fault of people who used their vote to vote in a group which you don't approve of...
This election was labours to lose not the tories to win and boy did they lose it...
but this too is the lib dems fault innit...
nothing to do with corrupt policies or shitty surveillance nannying state actions or indeed the unelected unrepresentative PM with a persecution complex and anger management issues, the aloof and disconnected parliamentarians or their poacher turned game keep stance on everything ... oh no all the lib dems fault...
have a fucking word with yourselves you bunch of sanctimonious knobs...
no matter who you vote for the government gets in,... meet the new boxx same as the old boss...
oh noez the puppet on this hand is nasty where as the puppet on this hand is good... we'll ignore the intentions of the puppeteer eh....
muppets...