Thomas the Tank Engine for Transport
Professor Yaffle for Education
Major Clanger for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Nanny from Count Duckula for Health
Great Uncle Bulgaria for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
I'm sure making a joke out of a real question about job insecurity and corrupt bosses isn't exactly decent, caring politics that fits with May's One Nation Toryism, but it was effective. Blood everywhere. Also obviously May is a medium and is channeling the ghost of Thatcher pretty hard.
Corbyn started with a question about the cancelled inquiry into Orgreave, because that's top of his list of things to ask the new Prime Minister. The Guardian liveblog thinks it's about shoring up support with the Unions, which would explain it, but it's a strange choice with which to try and land a first blow on a new PM.
Holy shit. The grin on her face, the way she fucking gutted him like a fish and wore his entrails as a necklace, it's like watching a goddamn horror movie.
Honestly, I don't think the majority (ie the 52% who voted to leave) will understand it was an utter waste of time until the entire fucking deal explodes in the face of Davis, Johnson and Fox.
Apparently negotiate means "we get the good bits, fuck off with the responsibilities".
I'm sure that will work out
Same for the Corbyn supporters. They're just so belligerently sure they're correct, we must all be closet tories.
Except the PLP derives its support from the 9 million people who voted for them in the last GE.
If Corbyn was so fucking brilliant and winning voters over, why are they so desperate to get rid of him. Surely he's the meal ticket to them being the ruling party.
Oh wait, they don't live in the circle jerk/echo chamber that is the Labour party membership. They understand that elections are won in swing seats by voters who change their minds.
Diane Abbott on the radio this morning blaming Corbyn getting monstered at PMQs on, you guessed it, traitorous Labour MPs.
My local MP, Lilian Greenwood, is a great MP, so I'm happy to vote for her, but I honestly don't know if I can bring myself to vote Labour at the next GE if Corbyn is still there.
Diane Abbott on the radio this morning blaming Corbyn getting monstered at PMQs on, you guessed it, traitorous Labour MPs.
My local MP, Lilian Greenwood, is a great MP, so I'm happy to vote for her, but I honestly don't know if I can bring myself to vote Labour at the next GE if Corbyn is still there.
For that argument to hold any water, Corbyn's actions during the PMQ needed to be a lot better. Also why should they cheer? The MPs have made it clear that they have no confidence in Corbyn and would rather someone else take on the role of leader.
No, see, Corbyn is the leader, so they should support him. When Corbyn wasn't the leader it was OK to challenge, disobey and otherwise disparage the leader, but now Corbyn is the leader anything other than 100% loyalty is unacceptable.
I don't see why this is so difficult to understand.
So Labour MPs are going to have to go against their leader's wishes and side with the Conservatives, as it's the 1922 Committee that have been vocal about ensuring that MPs who's constituency forms 2/3 of a new constituency has protection from re-selection.
He's basically saying if you don't fall in line, you're out so you might as well go off and join/create another party.
I'd like Corbyn to talk about the detailed accounts of his failure to provide leadership to the PLP and deal with the criticism of his style, his team and the accusations of incompetence. But it doesn't seem likely we're going to get that. He'll just ignore it and his fan club will claim anyone who opposes him is a Blairite Red Tory Traitor who'll be first up against the wall come the glorious revolution.
I don't think he's said a single thing that dealt with or even addressed the criticisms of his actions over the past nine months.
Corbyn has done the impossible. He has made a government with a small majority look rock solid and untouchable. This is bad news for Labour as many of the conservative polices tend to hurt Labour voters the most.
I'd like Corbyn to talk about the detailed accounts of his failure to provide leadership to the PLP and deal with the criticism of his style, his team and the accusations of incompetence. But it doesn't seem likely we're going to get that.
This is what gets me, yes he may (or may not) have been undermined from the get go but the PLP cannot control his own actions. It wasn't the PLP that gave a weak showing in PMQT. It wasn't them who sat back and gave a quarter hearted campaign to stay in the EU. Or failed to land any blows on a conservative party that is vulnerable. Instead of tackling his critics head on he has preferred to shy away and mumble about his mandate and get his supporters to shout "they all have it in for it me" at anyone criticizing.
Diane Abbott on the radio this morning blaming Corbyn getting monstered at PMQs on, you guessed it, traitorous Labour MPs.
My local MP, Lilian Greenwood, is a great MP, so I'm happy to vote for her, but I honestly don't know if I can bring myself to vote Labour at the next GE if Corbyn is still there.
I'd like Corbyn to talk about the detailed accounts of his failure to provide leadership to the PLP and deal with the criticism of his style, his team and the accusations of incompetence. But it doesn't seem likely we're going to get that. He'll just ignore it and his fan club will claim anyone who opposes him is a Blairite Red Tory Traitor who'll be first up against the wall come the glorious revolution.
I don't think he's said a single thing that dealt with or even addressed the criticisms of his actions over the past nine months.
He doesn't really give many interviews, as he doesn't like the press. Abbott and other allies have characterised any criticism as plotting, and a 'Westminster kerfuffle'.
Apparently the 180,000 new members break 60/40 for Corbyn. This is before vetting removes the SWP and nutters who are trying to join, but it still points towards another Corbyn win.
I'd like Corbyn to talk about the detailed accounts of his failure to provide leadership to the PLP and deal with the criticism of his style, his team and the accusations of incompetence. But it doesn't seem likely we're going to get that. He'll just ignore it and his fan club will claim anyone who opposes him is a Blairite Red Tory Traitor who'll be first up against the wall come the glorious revolution.
I don't think he's said a single thing that dealt with or even addressed the criticisms of his actions over the past nine months.
Do the press ask him about stuff like that?
They do and the response is
"I have a mandate"
"But Mr Corbyn, you need to actually talk about polic-"
"MANDATE"
"Bu-"
"MAN. DATE."
"B-"
"Blarite plot"
It's amazing how the last few weeks have transitioned me from thinking Corbyn is a misguided but ultimately well meaning idiot to thinking he's actually a massive prick and a hypocrite.
His false flag campaign against the EU, his challenging of the NUC secret ballot, his half hearted condemnation of momentum physically intimidating Labour MP's, going back on a previous pledge not to use boundary changes to deselect non supportive MP's and finally his torpedoing of the greens PR voting reform bill... Like I said yesterday actions speak louder than words and while Corbyn talks the social justice talk basically every single one of his head line actions have been self serving and anti-democratic.
He's a liar and a snake with a self serving authoritarian streak masquerading as an old school socialist and the death of the Labour party to keep him away from real power at this point seems worth it.
What scares me the most about Corbyn is just how many people I know who see the havoc he's wreaking within the Labour party and the lack of impact he's making on politics in general, and still fervently support him.
The term gets thrown about a fair bit, but it almost feels cult-like.
0
Options
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
The anti PR stance is fucking disgraceful. How any person can honestly defend the current system of voting is completely beyond me.
The PR vote in question was on Additional Member System, where you have two votes, one for local MP and one for regional; currently used in Scotland, Wales & London, I think?
The regional MPs are not always best thought of, as they're often not beholden to voters in the local constituency. It also requires redrawing boundaries.
Further to this, the regional appointments are not straightforward, as exemplified by Scotland:
The SNP has 54 of 59 constituencies, and already wins on local MPs. They can actually have more wins on local MPs than they have proportion of the vote, and so regional votes going to them are impossible to fulfil.
The picture here isn't really just black and white.
What scares me the most about Corbyn is just how many people I know who see the havoc he's wreaking within the Labour party and the lack of impact he's making on politics in general, and still fervently support him.
The term gets thrown about a fair bit, but it almost feels cult-like.
It's about faith and nothing else right now. Do you believe in Our Lord Jeremy and the Promised Revolution, or are you a traitor? Polls, criticisms, realism, his woeful public performance, the reports of his woeful private performance: all irrelevant. It's faith.
The anti PR stance is fucking disgraceful. How any person can honestly defend the current system of voting is completely beyond me.
That's why I actually list that as his biggest betrayal. How can anyone with a shred of integrity talk about "open and inclusive politics" then refuse to support PR in favour of FPTP? That's the point at which I personally stop thinking of him as being well meaning but incompetent and start thinking of him as purposefully disingenuous and anti-democratic.
There is one reason and one reason only to support FPTP and that is if you care for your party benefiting from a rigged system more than democracy.
The anti PR stance is fucking disgraceful. How any person can honestly defend the current system of voting is completely beyond me.
The PR vote in question was on Additional Member System, where you have two votes, one for local MP and one for regional; currently used in Scotland, Wales & London, I think?
The regional MPs are not always best thought of, as they're often not beholden to voters in the local constituency. It also requires redrawing boundaries.
Further to this, the regional appointments are not straightforward, as exemplified by Scotland:
The SNP has 54 of 59 constituencies, and already wins on local MPs. They can actually have more wins on local MPs than they have proportion of the vote, and so regional votes going to them are impossible to fulfil.
The picture here isn't really just black and white.
I'm a little confused on the bolded point. What is it about them having more MPs than their proportional representation makes it impossible to fulfil regional votes?
I'm a little confused on the bolded point. What is it about them having more MPs than their proportional representation makes it impossible to fulfil regional votes?
Sorry, badly worded.
The regional votes aren't actually more proportional than FPTP in this case. They only become more proportional if your regional vote is something other than the party winning via the FPTP part of AMS. Otherwise, they're redundant fluff.
This is sometimes called an "overhang"; a party wins more seats on the constituency vote than on the proportions, but also holds regional votes for the constituencies it holds, and trying to actually assign the proportional parties' additional MPs is difficult and provocative.
I'm a little confused on the bolded point. What is it about them having more MPs than their proportional representation makes it impossible to fulfil regional votes?
Sorry, badly worded.
The regional votes aren't actually more proportional than FPTP in this case. They only become more proportional if your regional vote is something other than the party winning via the FPTP part of AMS. Otherwise, they're redundant fluff.
This is sometimes called an "overhang"; a party wins more seats on the constituency vote than on the proportions, but also holds regional votes for the constituencies it holds, and trying to actually assign the proportional parties' additional MPs is difficult and provocative.
So the issue is that the party that is winning the old FPTP constituency seats will also win a significant (majority) number of PR seats also? Though the underrepresented party/s would at least have a few MPs on the PR compared to zero, even if the winningest party ends up with more.
As for assigning the actual MPs, isn't this quite easily sorted out by each party producing a precise and exhaustive list of the order of the MPs that they would seat if they win PR votes? Or has this been shown to be a thorny issue elsewhere in the world?
I'm a little confused on the bolded point. What is it about them having more MPs than their proportional representation makes it impossible to fulfil regional votes?
Sorry, badly worded.
The regional votes aren't actually more proportional than FPTP in this case. They only become more proportional if your regional vote is something other than the party winning via the FPTP part of AMS. Otherwise, they're redundant fluff.
This is sometimes called an "overhang"; a party wins more seats on the constituency vote than on the proportions, but also holds regional votes for the constituencies it holds, and trying to actually assign the proportional parties' additional MPs is difficult and provocative.
Depending on the way it's implemented it can lead to some weird cases.
The anti PR stance is fucking disgraceful. How any person can honestly defend the current system of voting is completely beyond me.
The PR vote in question was on Additional Member System, where you have two votes, one for local MP and one for regional; currently used in Scotland, Wales & London, I think?
The regional MPs are not always best thought of, as they're often not beholden to voters in the local constituency. It also requires redrawing boundaries.
Further to this, the regional appointments are not straightforward, as exemplified by Scotland:
The SNP has 54 of 59 constituencies, and already wins on local MPs. They can actually have more wins on local MPs than they have proportion of the vote, and so regional votes going to them are impossible to fulfil.
The picture here isn't really just black and white.
I'm a little confused on the bolded point. What is it about them having more MPs than their proportional representation makes it impossible to fulfil regional votes?
The MMP method aims to make the assembly proportionally representative, so the methodology is:
1. Provisionally Assign all seat in the region to parties based on voting proportion
2. deduct the constituency seats won by FPTP by each party
3. If the party has proportional seats left over after constituency seats are assigned, top up from the party list (list seats)
In the 2011 election the SNP won more constituency seats in some regions than the total number they should get based on proportional vote - something called overhang seats. Other systems with MMP (see Germany) have explicit methods to resolve overhang seats against the party that generates the overhang but the Scottish system does not so the SNP snatches up a seat that would have gone to a smaller party.
So people grumble but in general only one or two seats or so out of the whole parliament is allocated 'unfairly'. But this is an effect that always happens to some extent due to there being a discrete number of seats in a region; someone loses out on fractions. Its just the way the system works, and its still much more friendly to small parties than pure FPTP.
Posts
Henry the Green Engine for Fisheries
New Clangers is indeed a gem. Narration is by Michael Palin though, which is also awesome.
Holy shit. The grin on her face, the way she fucking gutted him like a fish and wore his entrails as a necklace, it's like watching a goddamn horror movie.
Ah, the rumours were true then? I'd heard his speech wasn't going to endorse Trump, nor even mention him.
So far out of his depth he's practically subterranean.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Apparently negotiate means "we get the good bits, fuck off with the responsibilities".
I'm sure that will work out
Same for the Corbyn supporters. They're just so belligerently sure they're correct, we must all be closet tories.
Except the PLP derives its support from the 9 million people who voted for them in the last GE.
If Corbyn was so fucking brilliant and winning voters over, why are they so desperate to get rid of him. Surely he's the meal ticket to them being the ruling party.
Oh wait, they don't live in the circle jerk/echo chamber that is the Labour party membership. They understand that elections are won in swing seats by voters who change their minds.
My local MP, Lilian Greenwood, is a great MP, so I'm happy to vote for her, but I honestly don't know if I can bring myself to vote Labour at the next GE if Corbyn is still there.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
For that argument to hold any water, Corbyn's actions during the PMQ needed to be a lot better. Also why should they cheer? The MPs have made it clear that they have no confidence in Corbyn and would rather someone else take on the role of leader.
I don't see why this is so difficult to understand.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Whelp. Labour 1900 - 2018 RIP.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Like our own idiot with bad hair getting elected and ending the world in nuclear fire!
......
I wonder if Corbyn is as popular in Islington as he thinks he is.
I wonder what the new Lib Dem/Centrist Labour party will call themselves?
So Labour MPs are going to have to go against their leader's wishes and side with the Conservatives, as it's the 1922 Committee that have been vocal about ensuring that MPs who's constituency forms 2/3 of a new constituency has protection from re-selection.
He's basically saying if you don't fall in line, you're out so you might as well go off and join/create another party.
I don't think he's said a single thing that dealt with or even addressed the criticisms of his actions over the past nine months.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Nope, the whip was to abstain.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
The Ancient Mystic Society of No Corbyns
This is what gets me, yes he may (or may not) have been undermined from the get go but the PLP cannot control his own actions. It wasn't the PLP that gave a weak showing in PMQT. It wasn't them who sat back and gave a quarter hearted campaign to stay in the EU. Or failed to land any blows on a conservative party that is vulnerable. Instead of tackling his critics head on he has preferred to shy away and mumble about his mandate and get his supporters to shout "they all have it in for it me" at anyone criticizing.
Leadership!
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Wait, what? Is secretly a Labour MP now?
Do the press ask him about stuff like that?
Apparently the 180,000 new members break 60/40 for Corbyn. This is before vetting removes the SWP and nutters who are trying to join, but it still points towards another Corbyn win.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
They do and the response is
"I have a mandate"
"But Mr Corbyn, you need to actually talk about polic-"
"MANDATE"
"Bu-"
"MAN. DATE."
"B-"
"Blarite plot"
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
It's amazing how the last few weeks have transitioned me from thinking Corbyn is a misguided but ultimately well meaning idiot to thinking he's actually a massive prick and a hypocrite.
His false flag campaign against the EU, his challenging of the NUC secret ballot, his half hearted condemnation of momentum physically intimidating Labour MP's, going back on a previous pledge not to use boundary changes to deselect non supportive MP's and finally his torpedoing of the greens PR voting reform bill... Like I said yesterday actions speak louder than words and while Corbyn talks the social justice talk basically every single one of his head line actions have been self serving and anti-democratic.
He's a liar and a snake with a self serving authoritarian streak masquerading as an old school socialist and the death of the Labour party to keep him away from real power at this point seems worth it.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
The term gets thrown about a fair bit, but it almost feels cult-like.
The regional MPs are not always best thought of, as they're often not beholden to voters in the local constituency. It also requires redrawing boundaries.
Further to this, the regional appointments are not straightforward, as exemplified by Scotland:
The SNP has 54 of 59 constituencies, and already wins on local MPs. They can actually have more wins on local MPs than they have proportion of the vote, and so regional votes going to them are impossible to fulfil.
The picture here isn't really just black and white.
Lab Dem
The final form of #DogsAtPollingStations
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
It's about faith and nothing else right now. Do you believe in Our Lord Jeremy and the Promised Revolution, or are you a traitor? Polls, criticisms, realism, his woeful public performance, the reports of his woeful private performance: all irrelevant. It's faith.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Corbyn Labour Is Totally Off Rocker, In Shambles
or
Corbyn Understands Never Taking Full Leadership Assumes Parliamentary Success.
Steam | XBL
That's why I actually list that as his biggest betrayal. How can anyone with a shred of integrity talk about "open and inclusive politics" then refuse to support PR in favour of FPTP? That's the point at which I personally stop thinking of him as being well meaning but incompetent and start thinking of him as purposefully disingenuous and anti-democratic.
There is one reason and one reason only to support FPTP and that is if you care for your party benefiting from a rigged system more than democracy.
Corbyn thinks that medical research shouldn't be "farmed out" to big pharmaceutical companies.
Flabbergasting.
I'm a little confused on the bolded point. What is it about them having more MPs than their proportional representation makes it impossible to fulfil regional votes?
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
They'll have a strong dogdate.
The regional votes aren't actually more proportional than FPTP in this case. They only become more proportional if your regional vote is something other than the party winning via the FPTP part of AMS. Otherwise, they're redundant fluff.
This is sometimes called an "overhang"; a party wins more seats on the constituency vote than on the proportions, but also holds regional votes for the constituencies it holds, and trying to actually assign the proportional parties' additional MPs is difficult and provocative.
So the issue is that the party that is winning the old FPTP constituency seats will also win a significant (majority) number of PR seats also? Though the underrepresented party/s would at least have a few MPs on the PR compared to zero, even if the winningest party ends up with more.
As for assigning the actual MPs, isn't this quite easily sorted out by each party producing a precise and exhaustive list of the order of the MPs that they would seat if they win PR votes? Or has this been shown to be a thorny issue elsewhere in the world?
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
Depending on the way it's implemented it can lead to some weird cases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overhang_seat
The MMP method aims to make the assembly proportionally representative, so the methodology is:
1. Provisionally Assign all seat in the region to parties based on voting proportion
2. deduct the constituency seats won by FPTP by each party
3. If the party has proportional seats left over after constituency seats are assigned, top up from the party list (list seats)
In the 2011 election the SNP won more constituency seats in some regions than the total number they should get based on proportional vote - something called overhang seats. Other systems with MMP (see Germany) have explicit methods to resolve overhang seats against the party that generates the overhang but the Scottish system does not so the SNP snatches up a seat that would have gone to a smaller party.
So people grumble but in general only one or two seats or so out of the whole parliament is allocated 'unfairly'. But this is an effect that always happens to some extent due to there being a discrete number of seats in a region; someone loses out on fractions. Its just the way the system works, and its still much more friendly to small parties than pure FPTP.