News1 min ago
Percentages
41 Answers
In today’s Sun http://
A reasonable idea one might think, at least until one grasps that Johnson himself became London Mayor in 2012 when the turnout was only 38% of the capital’s electorate!
Apart from the usual Tory “one rule for us and another rule for them” policy, what conceivable grounds can there be for supporting his view or considering it any less farcical? Surely what's good for the Tory goose should be equally good for the Union gander.
A reasonable idea one might think, at least until one grasps that Johnson himself became London Mayor in 2012 when the turnout was only 38% of the capital’s electorate!
Apart from the usual Tory “one rule for us and another rule for them” policy, what conceivable grounds can there be for supporting his view or considering it any less farcical? Surely what's good for the Tory goose should be equally good for the Union gander.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Quizmonster. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If all have been given a reasonable opportunity to vote, than those who abstain have to be considered those who have no preference and the majority of actual voters should win the day. No other vote, to my knowledge, works in a different manner. Were it so no one would be elected to parliament to make foolish statements. Which may be a good thing come to think of it.
i suspect it is just another attempt to try to prevent all strikes in practice. Tories traditionally want the masses to just do as they're told without protest.
i suspect it is just another attempt to try to prevent all strikes in practice. Tories traditionally want the masses to just do as they're told without protest.
@Lady Alex.
I would not disagree with you regarding the way the government handled the MMR crisis. Many people I have spoken with have the same recollection and opinion of the handling.
One should not judge the severity or danger of an infectious disease solely upon its mortality rate.
In the developed world, the death rate is something like 1 in 1000 - still grounds for some real family tragedy, and fatalities might not be unexpected , if the Swansea outbreak continues, or the spread takes hold in somewhere like London, for instance....
You might find this paper of interest, LadyAlex.
http://
I would not disagree with you regarding the way the government handled the MMR crisis. Many people I have spoken with have the same recollection and opinion of the handling.
One should not judge the severity or danger of an infectious disease solely upon its mortality rate.
In the developed world, the death rate is something like 1 in 1000 - still grounds for some real family tragedy, and fatalities might not be unexpected , if the Swansea outbreak continues, or the spread takes hold in somewhere like London, for instance....
You might find this paper of interest, LadyAlex.
http://
There is a vast difference voting to elect a single person and voting for a strike. Further to that if I don't vote for Boris no one is going to call me a scab or intimidate me at work and no one is going to ostracise me for years . There was a time when union shop stewards would call a strike with no ballot at all , those were the good old days of brother Calaghan.
Not now though, modeller - and these claims of Boris are anti-democratic and smack very much of Boris climbing on the Thatcher bandwagon with comments like "Thatcherite zeal" etc.
Cannot talk about needing a majority of those balloted unless you extend that to all elections and introduce mandatory voting.
I would howver quite like to see a quorum for each ballot - be it union or election - where there is a minimum number of votes being cast for the election to be deemed valid...
Cannot talk about needing a majority of those balloted unless you extend that to all elections and introduce mandatory voting.
I would howver quite like to see a quorum for each ballot - be it union or election - where there is a minimum number of votes being cast for the election to be deemed valid...
OG and gromit say everything that needs to be said.
We may expect to hear more of Boris, in the run up to the general election in 2 years time. He is trying to make himself even more prominent, if that is possible ! He will immediately become Tory leader when Cameron loses in 2015.
Who knows, the Tories may even eject Cameron and put Boris in place BEFORE the election. After all, that is exactly what they did to Thatcher, with Major Bumble, so the precedent has already been made.
Be afraid Dave, very afraid.
We may expect to hear more of Boris, in the run up to the general election in 2 years time. He is trying to make himself even more prominent, if that is possible ! He will immediately become Tory leader when Cameron loses in 2015.
Who knows, the Tories may even eject Cameron and put Boris in place BEFORE the election. After all, that is exactly what they did to Thatcher, with Major Bumble, so the precedent has already been made.
Be afraid Dave, very afraid.
I have stated many times before & I repeat. Elections in this country are seriously undemocratic under the present rules, eg. If 1,000 people cast their votes in a general election & the figures are thus :-
Tories 400
Labour 300
Lib Dem 200
Others 100 It follows that the Tories would win BUT all the others add up to 600 So The Tories would in my eyes be elected by the minority. Explain to me how that can be democratically fair.
WR.
Tories 400
Labour 300
Lib Dem 200
Others 100 It follows that the Tories would win BUT all the others add up to 600 So The Tories would in my eyes be elected by the minority. Explain to me how that can be democratically fair.
WR.
They are elected by a minority for whom they were first choice. It doesn't follow that all those who had a different first choice can be assumed to be against the elected candidate. The simple figure comparison is misleading.
One could swop to a transferable vote system which is arguably fairer but it will inevitably result in more middle-of-the-road members of parliament.
Of all the systems FPTP is the least worse IMO. And certainly more democratic that one where you have to vote for a group and not your representative and the group decides who will represent you.
One could swop to a transferable vote system which is arguably fairer but it will inevitably result in more middle-of-the-road members of parliament.
Of all the systems FPTP is the least worse IMO. And certainly more democratic that one where you have to vote for a group and not your representative and the group decides who will represent you.
whiskeryron...you are 100% right ! But when the people of this country were given a chance to make a change from first-past-the-post, with the Libs referendum on PR, the motion failed miserably.
Actually, that was a bit strange, seeing that The Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly Government and MEP's are already voted in by PR. But the people have spoken and it likely to be some time before they asked again on this subject.
No manner of democracy is perfect and FPTP is as imperfect as you can get it but it has the advantage of being simple and easy to understand.
The difficulty for PR is that it doesn't benefit Labour or the Tories and its one or the other that has called the tune for nearly 100 years now. Turkeys are not known for being awfully keen on voting for Xmas. The Liberals stand to gain, although not by as much as you might think by a change to PR, and they aren't in a position to do anything, even now when they have a few toes in the door of government, which they are on-course to lose shortly.
Actually, that was a bit strange, seeing that The Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly Government and MEP's are already voted in by PR. But the people have spoken and it likely to be some time before they asked again on this subject.
No manner of democracy is perfect and FPTP is as imperfect as you can get it but it has the advantage of being simple and easy to understand.
The difficulty for PR is that it doesn't benefit Labour or the Tories and its one or the other that has called the tune for nearly 100 years now. Turkeys are not known for being awfully keen on voting for Xmas. The Liberals stand to gain, although not by as much as you might think by a change to PR, and they aren't in a position to do anything, even now when they have a few toes in the door of government, which they are on-course to lose shortly.
Mikey 444
\\\Who knows, the Tories may even eject Cameron and put Boris in place BEFORE the election. After all, that is exactly what they did to Thatcher, with Major Bumble, so the precedent has already been made.
Be afraid Dave, very afraid. \\\
Yes and he won more votes – 14 million – than any other British prime minister has ever done.
Be afraid Ed, very afraid.
