PatrickS- Location: Marine Parade, Dover
- Registered: 19 Sep 2015
- Posts: 447
Next round of contest will see tactical voting, Howard.
May and her supports will meet to decide which of Gove or Leadsom presents the biggest risk and shift enough of their votes to the other.
This ensures that the biggest threat never gets to the Party membership vote.
A process of disengagement designed to keep power away from the people (or at least some of them).
It will be interesting to see if Tory party members go for a 'Remainer' or a 'Brexiter' given the Referendum result.
Either way could prove disasterous but at least the 'Leavers' had the backing of 52% of the Country that voted.
howard mcsweeney1 likes this
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
I think you mean 48% Patrick, not too sure how the voting works. Would the candidate that finishes second automatically become deputy Prime Minister or could the winner choose who they preferred?
PatrickS- Location: Marine Parade, Dover
- Registered: 19 Sep 2015
- Posts: 447
Well spotted Howard.
Of course I meant the 'Leavers' had 52%. Post corrected.
Many thanks. An age thing you know.
PatrickS- Location: Marine Parade, Dover
- Registered: 19 Sep 2015
- Posts: 447
I do not believe there is any obligation on a newly elected Leader to give any job to the loser. Negotiable scenario after election (or even before the final vote).
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,681
Conversely 67.5% of the electorate did not vote for Leave (or did not vote...)
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Looks like Mrs May has urged many of her supporters to vote for Michael Gove in the next round of voting to keep Mrs Leadsom out.
Reginald Barrington- Location: Dover
- Registered: 17 Dec 2014
- Posts: 3,206
Out?
howard mcsweeney1 likes this
Arte et Marte
PatrickS- Location: Marine Parade, Dover
- Registered: 19 Sep 2015
- Posts: 447
Ross, I have never subscribed to the view that those that do not vote are included in the "for" or "against" arguements. In a democracy people are asked to express their free choice. If they decline to do so, that is their right, but it cannot be correct that the 67.5% is in any way a valid way of expressing the views - here of a majority - if some of them declined to take part in the first place. And those that did not vote should not complain about the outcome.
As the saying goes you have to be "In It To Win It". There was no box on the voting slip that said "Don't Know" (or "Who cares") - maybe there should have been!!
Guest 1621, Paul M, John Buckley and
1 more like this
Guest 1621, Paul M, John Buckley and howard mcsweeney1 like this
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,681
I tend to agree but my underlying complaint is that in matters of such supposed import to the country it behoves us to ensure it is a genuine majority of the nation that is in favour by setting a suitable hurdle rate, for the vote to be carried. Like many clubs etc have to pass constitutional amendments.
But maybe this vote was unimportant to those who own/run the country as they were quite happy to hold it on a FPTP basis. Given that big money makes money whichever way the markets move they are all considerably richer and will get richer still as the turmoil continues.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Nobody asked us about the treaties of Maastricht, Nice or Lisbon. Perhaps if they had, we wouldn't be where we are now.
Guest 1621 and PatrickS like this
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
The 52% against 48% is the reason that the sore losers are complaining about but Governments only need 37% to run free for 5 years at a general election.
PatrickS- Location: Marine Parade, Dover
- Registered: 19 Sep 2015
- Posts: 447
Perhaps we should have a vote on changing the system then ............ or not - I see circles within circles here!
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,681
My personal preference is some form of PR but that was not to be thanks to Clegg.
We have to make the best of what we have as Churchill said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I would be in favour of the two-thirds majority for constitutional changes (including this one) if the same test had originally been applied to the ratification (or not) of the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties which were enthusiastically entered into by governments over the heads of us ignorant peasants.
Ross Miller likes this
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 977- Registered: 27 Jun 2013
- Posts: 1,031
PatrickS wrote:Perhaps we should have a vote on changing the system then ............ or not - I see circles within circles here!
We had a vote to change to one particular alternative system and it was an overwhelming No! Perhaps people thought the effort of ticking 2 boxes was too much
http://www.dover.gov.uk/Council--Democracy/Elections/Election-Results/DeclarationofReferendumResult-5May2011.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vote_referendum,_2011howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
The AV system was never going to be voted for as most people support one of the two main parties and any form of proportional representation would they never get power outside of a coalition. I rather like the idea of parties being forced to ditch their excesses and work together for the overall benefit of the country.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
We hear so much more of people denigrating politicians than bigging them up. Perhaps then we should have a system where we stick an x against the name of the candidate we LEAST want to see elected. The one with fewest votes wins. Simples!
Ross Miller likes this
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Mrs May won't be too happy with going head to head against Mrs Loathsome who has been expounding on her vision which is much in tune with party members.
Paul M likes this
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
In response to post 37 I have been doing something similar for about 15 years now. I simply vote for the candidate or party that would do the least damage. Cynical I know but it is not just an age thing but I don't see any statesman or women that I can respect even though my political views might differ with theirs. I used to have PMQ on in the background each Wednesday and the PM just came across as a posh bully even turning the octagenarian Denis Skinner at one time. as for the rest of the Commons most sounded drunk and would be sacked from any normal job by behaving in that way.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352