Re: labour madness

On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 22:18:58 +0000, kj <kevinjay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Daytona wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:37:51 +0000, kj <kevinjay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Daytona wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 11:35:59 GMT, "Zoab" <grandad1353@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

"Starbuck" <starbuck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:TtBBh.12221$Zl6.4226@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Exactly, which is why I wouldn't care if a Pratt like joined all the
other Pratt's in your Government
'your Government', are you saying you do not live in the UK


No, I am not saying that, I live in Hampshire. My reference to " your
Government " was to indicate that I did not vote them in, but ky obviously
did.
I haven't voted for decades either as no party sufficiently matches my
requirements. I would if there was a 'none of the above' option, which
meant in practice that that proportion of the seats in the commons was
covered with dust sheets to visibly highlight the issue and the votes
were counted as 'no change' to whatever was proposed.

....or since it's the 21st century, perhaps we should just allow
members of the public to vote on every issue day by day.

In the last election, Labour was voted for by 22% of the total
electorate, 39% of whom didn't vote.

Labour received 36% of votes cast, and received 55% of seats, and
therefore votes, in parliament.

2005 Parliamentary Election

Parliamentary Election
Party Seats % Votes % Divergence

Labour 356 55% 9,556,183 36% +19
Conservative 197 31% 8,772,598 33% -3
Lib Dem 62 10% 5,982,045 23% -13

It's a ridiculous state of affairs for which the solution is simple -
proportional representation, as used in many other countries, and
which has the rather novel approach of ensuring that parliamentary
power accurately reflects votes cast by an electorate.

Daytona

Catch 22....you didn't vote - then moan about labour getting in on a low
turn-out..................sigh!!!!!!!!!

What an idiotic statement. The kind of comment a politician would make
in an attempt at 'divide and rule'.

Not voting doesn't preclude anyone from expressing their opinions on
the fairness or otherwise of the electoral system.

Daytona
your first statement was about the low turnout, not about the
system....

Your making assumptions. Why do you think that low turnout isn't
connected to the electoral system ?

you are part of that problem

So why do you think that I should vote given my first statement ?

I am personally in favour of PR. Then the lazy people who can't be
bothered to vote have no get out clause and are just lazy

I agree. There is little prospect of it being implemented though as
the 2 largest parties have rejected it.

Daytona
.