The Autism Spiral? (obligatory loluk thread)

[Rodj Blake]

It doesn't even mention FPTP once in fact.

No shit, oh master of verbal diarrhoea. However, The Telegraph supports the Tories and is also pretty fucking pro FPTP.

What it does say is that the author of the blog finds it deplorable that Galloway, as is his wont, pandered to the Muslim vote in that district to no end. Importing geopolicital stances from Pakistan in particular into local British government, even growing a beard to look like one. And frankly, I sympathise with that view. Galloway went out of his way to talk like, act like, and look like a Muslim, for not other reason to get elected. And it worked. This is not a victory to shout about. No victory by panderers is. Whether it is Galloway that wins or someone else.

Ah, so he got 125% of the Muslim vote, pretty epic. And who'd have thought that pandering to a geographically concentrated group in our electoral system would work, truly a master stroke.

He received over 50% of the votes cast.

He would have won under STV, AV and SV.

[El Capitano]

And Cameron still couldn't win an outright majority against a massively unpopular Labour government. Still, he did give us some gems like chaining his bike to a bollard and then being surprised it got nicked.

[Sykes]

To be fair, if Labour were out on every street corner promising to return to the moderate Keynsian policies of Clem Attlee, then I think they would have a convincing argument that they were acting in the interests of the majority instead of whichever bunch of dodgy millionaires currently supports them.

They'd have to publicly repudiate Blair and everything he stands for in the minds of the public, to have the tiniest chance of being believed though.

[Sykes]

<snip> Ah, so he got 125% of the Muslim vote, pretty epic. And who'd have thought that pandering to a geographically concentrated group in our electoral system would work, truly a master stroke.

It's not totally clear to what extent imaginary sky-pixies played a role in Galloway's victory though.

Some of the quote you were objecting to earlier for example, suggests that at least some of the actual issues were straightforward class politics. 'Look after our kids education before your mates' businesses' etc.

I'm not at all sure what the proportion of sky-pixie vs real issues was, but that's partly why I'm keen to dig out and present potential evidence one way or the other.

[El Capitano]

He received over 50% of the votes cast.

He would have won under STV, AV and SV.

True, fair point, but if you're a proponent of a system that benefits from pandering to a geographically concentrated group, then you have no business complaining when somebody does it. It's why I'm not keen on having geographical constituencies for national government.

[elmicker]

They'd have to publicly repudiate Blair and everything he stands for in the minds of the public, to have the tiniest chance of being believed though.

That'd be one of the stupider things Labour could do. Aside from whatever ideology you hold, by framing your new political strategy in terms of the blair/brown era, rather than in terms of the achievements of that era, you immediately label your ideology as blairite or brownite, immediately reminding people of the chaos, in-fighting and ineffectiveness that resulted. That's the problem with Labour's relics, they're too hung-up on DISTANCING THE PARTY FROM NULABOUR, rather than really pushing the party forward.

[El Capitano]

I'm not at all sure what the proportion of sky-pixie vs real issues was, but that's partly why I'm keen to dig out and present potential evidence one way or the other.

Feel free to do that, but the whole point of links is so that they can be easily followed, removing the need to ctrl-A, ctrl-C, ctrl-V.

[Rodj Blake]

He received over 50% of the votes cast.

He would have won under STV, AV and SV.

True, fair point, but if you're a proponent of a system that benefits from pandering to a geographically concentrated group, then you have no business complaining when somebody does it. It's why I'm not keen on having geographical constituencies for national government.

The problem is that the alternative would be something like using party lists which means you end up with parliament being filled with yes men who do nothing but tow the party line.

[Sykes]

They'd have to publicly repudiate Blair and everything he stands for in the minds of the public, to have the tiniest chance of being believed though.

That'd be one of the stupider things Labour could do. Aside from whatever ideology you hold, by framing your new political strategy in terms of the blair/brown era, rather than in terms of the achievements of that era, you immediately label your ideology as blairite or brownite, immediately reminding people of the chaos, in-fighting and ineffectiveness that resulted. That's the problem with Labour's relics, they're too hung-up on DISTANCING THE PARTY FROM NULABOUR, rather than really pushing the party forward.

I sort of see your point but I don't see how else you convince people that nuLabour no longer stands for ... well pretty much the same things the Lib Dems do ... broken promises and putting business interests ahead of those of ordinary people.

[El Capitano]

The problem is that the alternative would be something like using party lists which means you end up with parliament being filled with yes men who do nothing but tow the party line.

It is a problem, but the current system results in influential members being parachuted into safe seats and a whip system that enforces the party line when necessary. It also encourages ignoring special interests that are geographically disparate in favour of ones that are geographically concentrated.

[elmicker]

What do you think of top-up systems, like that used for Holyrood? Best or worst of both systems?

[El Capitano]

What do you think of top-up systems, like that used for Holyrood? Best or worst of both systems?

It seems to work pretty well in practice, so I guess best, although I've read the system our regional assemblies used are flawed compared to similar versions on the continent. Still, it's a big step above what Westminster has now.

[Sykes]

doublepost

[Sykes]

It doesn't even mention FPTP once in fact.

No shit, oh master of verbal diarrhoea. However, The Telegraph supports the Tories and is also pretty fucking pro FPTP.

What it does say is that the author of the blog finds it deplorable that Galloway, as is his wont, pandered to the Muslim vote in that district to no end. Importing geopolicital stances from Pakistan in particular into local British government, even growing a beard to look like one. And frankly, I sympathise with that view. Galloway went out of his way to talk like, act like, and look like a Muslim, for not other reason to get elected. And it worked. This is not a victory to shout about. No victory by panderers is. Whether it is Galloway that wins or someone else.

Ah, so he got 125% of the Muslim vote, pretty epic. And who'd have thought that pandering to a geographically concentrated group in our electoral system would work, truly a master stroke.

He received over 50% of the votes cast.

He would have won under STV, AV and SV.

Approximately a 37% swing, to the left or something very like it.

Labour were the ones running a Pakistani candidate with ties to all the local old boy networks.

Interesting times.

[Sykes]

Oh this is hilarious. GG, ever modest in victory, gives his triumphal address to the nation

The Bradford spring. No matter how seemingly powerful, no corrupted, out-of-touch elite can last forever. The people of Bradford West have spoken, and politics in the city and in this country will never be the same again. Anyone who took part in this historic campaign, or who observed it dispassionately, knew by last weekend that something spectacular was going to take place.

A 5,000 Labour majority was transformed into a 10,000 majority for Respect – the same total vote for me as the outgoing MP had in a general election – winning across every ward in the constituency. It was the most spectacular byelection result in British political history.

The word revolution was on many lips in this deprived and hitherto disenfranchised city well before Friday morning's result. And, like the Arab revolutions, this is a movement, above all, of the young. Bradford has a young population. By 2020 half the population will be under 25. They have grown up in the years when Tony Blair and his successors murdered the real Labour tradition, taking for granted the loyalty of working people – nowhere more so than in this city, where the precursor to the Labour party, the Independent Labour party, was founded in 1893.

A rotten combination of complacency, incompetence, opportunism and rule by clique has presided over Bradford's decline. It was going down even during the 13 years of New Labour government, which included the richest decade in British history. Now it is in danger of sinking under the sado-monetarist austerity of the Con-Dem coalition.

Labour's opposition in parliament is feeble to the point of paralysis, because so many share so much of the grim orthodoxy that has plunged the world into the great recession.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...rsion-of-riots

[Sykes]

He's obviously keen to claim it as a 37% swing to the left of Labour.

Interesting times indeed.

[Sykes]

Chunkymark the taxi driver tells it like it is ...

  Spoiler:

[Azure]

Chunkymark the taxi driver tells it like it is ...

Knows his shit that lad...............

[Sykes]

More people believe fucking Elvis is still alive than vote Lib Dem

source above

[GeromeDoutrande]

Meanwhile in Germany:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...82U03Q20120331