Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Labour leadership

And the self righteous attitude im seeing from a lot of labour supporters basically confirms this view like someone was banging on about why i should support labour as a progressive force because the winter of discontent only happened because of 'right wingers' 40 years ago. In other words labour has been shit for 40 years but we should still support corbyn. Fuck off. Its like someone saying we should support cameron because of ted heath and benjamin disreali.
Actually, Labour's been shit for longer. The Wilson years weren't entirely great.
 
Drivel. What do you mean by the "modern world"? Better still, what is "modernity"?
Important question.
Corbynmania might be properly understood as evidence that growing numbers of people have, or are beginning to, rumble that social democracy designed to negotiate with capital the 'social contract' of the welfare state no longer has any meaning or purpose.
 
You know as well as I do that is an unwritten constitution.
That isn't quite the case though, is it? The constitution is a collection of statutes outlining the roles and functions of the monarchy and the government. To claim it's "unwritten" is to suggest that it exists entirely in the imagination.

I can do pedantry too. :D
 
Important question.
Corbynmania might be properly understood as evidence that growing numbers of people have, or are beginning to, rumble that social democracy designed to negotiate with capital the 'social contract' of the welfare state no longer has any meaning or purpose.

This is the good thing about 'Corbynmania' though: it has opened up a field of strategic possibilities (to borrow from Bourdieu). Social democracy is a massive confidence trick, though.
 
No he's not. But you appear to be confusing the term popular majority with the notion of a relative majority. Having the plurality, (or, like the tories, the largest number of total votes), does not represent a popular majority, merely a relative majority.

In other words - a simple majority = a popular majority, unless the voting constitution specifies otherwise...
 
There are no circumstances in which 36% is a majority. None.

They were the largest single party both in seats and in terms of the popular vote, but they did not have a majority of the popular vote. Come on, this is the real basics.

Imagine there are a hundred apples. Johnny has 36. Bill has 29. The other 35 apples are divided between several other children.

A. Who has the larger number of apples between Johnny and Bill?

B. Does anyone have a majority of apples?

C. If Bill and the others pooled their apples is their hoard greater or less than Johnny's?

I know this might be a bit tricky for someone a bit too simple but are you aware of the idea of a simple majority?
 
In popular elections a majority of the ballots cast, this is really very basic stuff, results usually in a majority.

Sometimes, although rarely in a field with more than more two candidates, you might get an absolute majority - i.e. 50% + - but usually, in almost every election in the UK, you get someone who has a simple majority, otherwise commonly known as a popular majority.

Driving the point home - this means that they have received more ballots from those who have voted than anyone else in the field - i.e. you are the most popular therefore you have a popular majority.

The Tories have a popular majority.

You may not like it, I certainly don't like it but that is the reality.

If Labour ignores that, then they are fools.
 
I know this might be a bit tricky for someone a bit too simple but are you aware of the idea of a simple majority?
I rarely comment in P&P threads but you are aware that you're getting one hell of a kicking, aren't you? It reminds me of the bit in Raging Bull where De Niro's cumbersome slugger just keeps on walking forward onto the rapier jabs and uppercuts of Sugar Ray Robinson. It's all he can do even though his face is a mess. Just sayin' :)
 
Last edited:
OT are those leatherette elbow patches for tweed jackets still available?

How should I know?





(PM me).

Available from all good retailers that also sell these:

31xaDU%2BePYL.jpg
 
I rarely comment in P&P threads but you are aware that you're getting one hell of a kicking, aren't you? It reminds me of the bit in Raging Bull where De Nero's cumbersome slugger just keeps on walking forward onto the rapier jabs and uppercut of Sugar Ray Robinson. It's all he can do even though his face is a mess. Just sayin' :)

This is "a hell of a kicking"!

You must lead a very sheltered and dull life old man.
 
In other words - a simple majority = a popular majority, unless the voting constitution specifies otherwise...
The tories won the largest number of votes (a simple majority of the votes cast) in the 2015 GE, but that does not support your assertion that "the country wants a tory government".

You can say that 11,334,576 people voted Conservative which was 36.9% of the turnout on the day, 24.39% of the registered electorate or about 1 in 5 adults in the UK. But none of that represents a popular majority in any form other than relative.
 
The tories won the largest number of votes (a simple majority of the votes cast) in the 2015 GE, but that does not support your assertion that "the country wants a tory government".

You can say that 11,334,576 people voted Conservative which was 36.9% of the turnout on the day, 24.39% of the registered electorate or about 1 in 5 adults in the UK. But none of that represents a popular majority in any form other than relative.
about 1 in 4 adults
 
The tories won the largest number of votes (a simple majority of the votes cast) in the 2015 GE, but that does not support your assertion that "the country wants a tory government".

You can say that 11,334,576 people voted Conservative which was 36.9% of the turnout on the day, 24.39% of the registered electorate or about 1 in 5 adults in the UK. But none of that represents a popular majority in any form other than relative.

No - that is a simple majority and a popular majority.

The country was quorate, the vote happened and the result stands - the popular vote went with the Tories.

To pretend otherwise is quite frankly ridiculous.
 
In popular elections a majority of the ballots cast, this is really very basic stuff, results usually in a majority.

Sometimes, although rarely in a field with more than more two candidates, you might get an absolute majority - i.e. 50% + - but usually, in almost every election in the UK, you get someone who has a simple majority, otherwise commonly known as a popular majority.

Driving the point home - this means that they have received more ballots from those who have voted than anyone else in the field - i.e. you are the most popular therefore you have a popular majority.

The Tories have a popular majority.

You may not like it, I certainly don't like it but that is the reality.

If Labour ignores that, then they are fools.
I'm sorry, you have failed the exam.
 
This is quite frankly absurd - a loss of an election is not a loss, it's merely a misrepresentation!

Bonkers, absolutely bonkers!
 
Back
Top Bottom