But they have only got 121 candidates eligible (120 excluding Sunak). I think James Cleverley will get the gig. I wouldn't put it past the Tories to get Bozza back via the back door. Sunak vacates his seat, Boris wins the by election and hey presto.
I've read a lot of people like yourself saying, today, that the grownups are back. I've also read a lot of people like myself who think a bunch of clowns are now in charge.
Seems the UK is as polarised as ever. Thank God we have football to bring us together.
It works both ways and makes arguing on the internet even more pointless than ever. Take any issue of the last eight years and one side, if shown evidence that they are wrong, will scream 'Russian propaganda' (or whatever) and the other side will scream '77th Brigade'.
Everything's a football match nowadays where you not only support your side no matter what, you even have chants! (and team colours if we include all the flags that have become popular in recent times)
Anyway, now that the UK is Centrist Dad heaven with lashings of Madri beer and Euro wins, tomorrow looks interesting. Will France go genuinely far-right? Thank God Cavendish broke the record for stage wins before the entire country bursts into flames,.
It's interesting how people take the basic stats and create the story. Starmer got 34% of the vote on Thursday and won a 'landslide'. Le Pen got 37% of the vote yesterday and Fascism was roundly defeated.
Switching teams does happen, obviously, but Starmer managed to get less votes than Corbyn which hardly makes it a ringing endorsement of the man and as for the French election.... well, let's hope we never replace FPTP for the mess they've given themselves.
I think we'll have a much better idea if it's 'grown-ups' or circus by Christmas but by then we'll be back to the more important business of arguing about the football.
Since the second world war no party has won a majority of the popular vote, the closest was Anthony Eden in 1955 with 49.7%.
It is also worth noting that since the high point of the 1950 election (83.9%) turnout has been on a steady decline reaching its nadir in 2001 with 59.4%.
That is the thing with FPTP you do not need to win the popular vote you just need to have 1 more vote than your nearest opponent in each constituency; it must also be said that given the increase in the number of parties, as well as the spread of political views FPTP is no longer fit for purpose as a method of selecting our parliament. During this 5 year term we need to start a sensible conversation around how we replace it with a more representative system even if that means we have to settle for coalition governments for a while.
On a separate note we also need to think very carefully about how politics engage those in our society who feel marginalised, ignored &/or disenfranchised by the mainstream parties & takes their concerns on-board. This has to go hand in hand with a much better quality of political discourse at all levels to encourage a much better understanding of what is & isn't possible (to quote Otto von Bismark).
Pleasing though it was to hear Rishi and Kier graciously accept victory and defeat, I fear that even if politicians and the mainstream media raise the discourse standard, the social media genie is not only out of the bottle, it has shattered it and used the pieces to create a crystal ball that shows whoever looks into it their worst fears as futures sure to come to pass.
What we do about that I have no idea that doesn’t involve some form of draconian censorship.
On the bright side I feel cautiously optimistic for the next few years under Labour. Until that is, I remember that by this time next year the Orange Shit Gibbon will have had a hundred days at the helm. Plenty of time to trigger the apocalypse. Yes, I am aware of how my last sentence is an exemplar of what I said in my first.
Unfortunately, as soon as a party is elected through FPTP, all talk of proportional representation is ditched - hardly surprising this time round when our single representative constituency system delivered 68% of the parliamentary seats to Labour in return for 35% of the vote. Labour had a tight strategy and did enough to win those seats - they invested in campaigns in about 350 - and raked up some surprising gains even where there was no national party resource investment in places such as Bracknell. We now have a massively asymmetric parliament - physically too many government MPs for the benches, and HM Official Opposition at under a third of the seats of the party in power, and with a strong third voice from, potentially, a progressive alliance of LD/SNP/Green/Plaid and Alliance MPs. The five Reform MPs, with a massively disproportionate share of voice during the campaign, are going to have to be very clever to get their voices heard at all in debates - I look forward to Farage and Tice bobbing to catch the speaker's eye. Westminster is going to be a very different place from what we've been used to since Cameron, though it's hard to see true power shifting back from the Executive to Parliament any time soon.
The gap between richest/ rich and "average" let alone poor has grown to completely unsustainable levels.
Similarly so has the gap between educated/ informed and complete ****wit, so I really struggle to see a positive way forward when I see a good 10-15% maybe more of the country as functionally brain dead and incapable of reason or learning.
I'm sure it's always been this way, but before social media this was less of a problem as these people were marginalised, with social media it's a huge problem as that portion of society are also the loudest and most taken in by the algorithms/ lies/ echo chambers pushed by nefarious players with money at the top (eg Putin/ Farage)
it is this kind of attitude that, just as much as social media, explains why so many people feel disenfranchised and marginalised. 10-15% of the country are “brain dead” and incapable of reason or learning. Well get you, you smart arse motherfucker. It was okay when they were marginalised eh?
I work in mental health and have worked for LD teams and find language and attitudes like this both deeply offensive and depressingly elitist. Shades of Gordon Brown and the infamous hot mike moment. To me you come across as not so different from the people you refer to as nefarious.
I will grant you that people are poorly educated in the skills needed to evaluate evidence, to understand how the social media companies manipulate us, to make considered decisions. That is a problem that needs addressing. I’d argue with a significant reform of the national curriculum and a willingness to really engage with the people who feel marginalised and afraid of the pace of change.
Although maybe insensitively worded, I don't think they meant those comments to come across quite in the harsh way you perceived them. I get your point, and I think I understand what the OP was trying to put across too....
It was insensitively worded, slightly deliberately so.
I was not aiming the comments at those with Mental health issues or learning difficulties
It's aimed at those that never bothered to learn any critical thinking skills and would rather parrot the bile they consume towards whichever the latest fashionable group to hate is: migrants/ LGBT/ anything "woke" etc etc. Particularly at those who outright refuse to accept there's any way they could be wrong, or even attempt to genuinely understand how they could be influenced in that way by social media.
Most of my disgust is to those setting those rage-bait agendas who do know better and deliberately skew news stories or straight up lie to whip up hatred and exacerbate biases for their own personal gain whether that be politically (Braverman/ Farage) or just straight up grifting for money through donations or subscriptions (Tommy Robinson/ Barton).
Of course, but we're at a point now where we're crossing over from the majority of people getting their news/ information from "traditional" sources, ie newspapers and mainstream TV news channels, which are far far from perfect but do have some semblance of professionalism and should have checks and balances, to the majority of people getting their news from the free for all that's social media.
The increasing rejection of anything "mainstream" by a large section of society is noticeable, as is the rejection of being able to accept an experts opinion on a subject that doesn't agree with the crack pot theory that's been watched on YouTube or Tiktok.
It's equal parts funny and scary having someone tell you that they know you're wrong about something you're a genuine expert in, with receipts, because it disproves some niche theory that their favourite influencer is pushing that week for political points/ to sell a product.
You seriously think the Sun and Daily Mail have ever had a semblance of professionalism? Particularly the Sun. It basically invented the idea of mass spreading of lies, misinformation and pile ons.
Comments
Also a big fan of the James Timpson appointment.
Remarkable stat - there are now no (English) League football clubs in Tory constituencies.
Or Welsh presumably
Those are last season's teams. There's actually one, Bromley
Same old list of very poor candidates to replace Sunak as leader. Surely the Tories should have learnt their lesson by now.
But they have only got 121 candidates eligible (120 excluding Sunak). I think James Cleverley will get the gig. I wouldn't put it past the Tories to get Bozza back via the back door. Sunak vacates his seat, Boris wins the by election and hey presto.
The prospect of having the Mad Hatter back in charge of the tea party says it all.
If he was elected, he would still need to serve the 30 day suspension before he could take the seat.
I've read a lot of people like yourself saying, today, that the grownups are back. I've also read a lot of people like myself who think a bunch of clowns are now in charge.
Seems the UK is as polarised as ever. Thank God we have football to bring us together.
Based on what though? The labour personnel haven't done any clowning yet?
If you know, you know.
I do know that it's an obvious coping mechanism of the right to paint everyone with the useless brush rather than just their "team" .
It works both ways and makes arguing on the internet even more pointless than ever. Take any issue of the last eight years and one side, if shown evidence that they are wrong, will scream 'Russian propaganda' (or whatever) and the other side will scream '77th Brigade'.
Everything's a football match nowadays where you not only support your side no matter what, you even have chants! (and team colours if we include all the flags that have become popular in recent times)
Anyway, now that the UK is Centrist Dad heaven with lashings of Madri beer and Euro wins, tomorrow looks interesting. Will France go genuinely far-right? Thank God Cavendish broke the record for stage wins before the entire country bursts into flames,.
I think the popular term is ‘You lost. Get over it’. Plus something about the will of the people.
It's always weird when a spoof account poster starts making fairly serious posts...
(and no I don't mean Mr Arnos)
You do realise we’ve gone from a massive Tory victory to a Labour landslide?
This suggests that, contrary to your assertion, the electorate are inclined to switch teams when the circumstances change.
It's interesting how people take the basic stats and create the story. Starmer got 34% of the vote on Thursday and won a 'landslide'. Le Pen got 37% of the vote yesterday and Fascism was roundly defeated.
Switching teams does happen, obviously, but Starmer managed to get less votes than Corbyn which hardly makes it a ringing endorsement of the man and as for the French election.... well, let's hope we never replace FPTP for the mess they've given themselves.
I think we'll have a much better idea if it's 'grown-ups' or circus by Christmas but by then we'll be back to the more important business of arguing about the football.
Factually in terms of seats Labour won a landslide.
Early indications from ministers appointed are encouraging but huge task ahead given the dreadful inheritance. We will see how they get on.
Le Pen lost the election under the rules of France's electoral system.
Since the second world war no party has won a majority of the popular vote, the closest was Anthony Eden in 1955 with 49.7%.
It is also worth noting that since the high point of the 1950 election (83.9%) turnout has been on a steady decline reaching its nadir in 2001 with 59.4%.
That is the thing with FPTP you do not need to win the popular vote you just need to have 1 more vote than your nearest opponent in each constituency; it must also be said that given the increase in the number of parties, as well as the spread of political views FPTP is no longer fit for purpose as a method of selecting our parliament. During this 5 year term we need to start a sensible conversation around how we replace it with a more representative system even if that means we have to settle for coalition governments for a while.
On a separate note we also need to think very carefully about how politics engage those in our society who feel marginalised, ignored &/or disenfranchised by the mainstream parties & takes their concerns on-board. This has to go hand in hand with a much better quality of political discourse at all levels to encourage a much better understanding of what is & isn't possible (to quote Otto von Bismark).
Pleasing though it was to hear Rishi and Kier graciously accept victory and defeat, I fear that even if politicians and the mainstream media raise the discourse standard, the social media genie is not only out of the bottle, it has shattered it and used the pieces to create a crystal ball that shows whoever looks into it their worst fears as futures sure to come to pass.
What we do about that I have no idea that doesn’t involve some form of draconian censorship.
On the bright side I feel cautiously optimistic for the next few years under Labour. Until that is, I remember that by this time next year the Orange Shit Gibbon will have had a hundred days at the helm. Plenty of time to trigger the apocalypse. Yes, I am aware of how my last sentence is an exemplar of what I said in my first.
Unfortunately, as soon as a party is elected through FPTP, all talk of proportional representation is ditched - hardly surprising this time round when our single representative constituency system delivered 68% of the parliamentary seats to Labour in return for 35% of the vote. Labour had a tight strategy and did enough to win those seats - they invested in campaigns in about 350 - and raked up some surprising gains even where there was no national party resource investment in places such as Bracknell. We now have a massively asymmetric parliament - physically too many government MPs for the benches, and HM Official Opposition at under a third of the seats of the party in power, and with a strong third voice from, potentially, a progressive alliance of LD/SNP/Green/Plaid and Alliance MPs. The five Reform MPs, with a massively disproportionate share of voice during the campaign, are going to have to be very clever to get their voices heard at all in debates - I look forward to Farage and Tice bobbing to catch the speaker's eye. Westminster is going to be a very different place from what we've been used to since Cameron, though it's hard to see true power shifting back from the Executive to Parliament any time soon.
The gap between richest/ rich and "average" let alone poor has grown to completely unsustainable levels.
Similarly so has the gap between educated/ informed and complete ****wit, so I really struggle to see a positive way forward when I see a good 10-15% maybe more of the country as functionally brain dead and incapable of reason or learning.
I'm sure it's always been this way, but before social media this was less of a problem as these people were marginalised, with social media it's a huge problem as that portion of society are also the loudest and most taken in by the algorithms/ lies/ echo chambers pushed by nefarious players with money at the top (eg Putin/ Farage)
it is this kind of attitude that, just as much as social media, explains why so many people feel disenfranchised and marginalised. 10-15% of the country are “brain dead” and incapable of reason or learning. Well get you, you smart arse motherfucker. It was okay when they were marginalised eh?
I work in mental health and have worked for LD teams and find language and attitudes like this both deeply offensive and depressingly elitist. Shades of Gordon Brown and the infamous hot mike moment. To me you come across as not so different from the people you refer to as nefarious.
I will grant you that people are poorly educated in the skills needed to evaluate evidence, to understand how the social media companies manipulate us, to make considered decisions. That is a problem that needs addressing. I’d argue with a significant reform of the national curriculum and a willingness to really engage with the people who feel marginalised and afraid of the pace of change.
Although maybe insensitively worded, I don't think they meant those comments to come across quite in the harsh way you perceived them. I get your point, and I think I understand what the OP was trying to put across too....
It was insensitively worded, slightly deliberately so.
I was not aiming the comments at those with Mental health issues or learning difficulties
It's aimed at those that never bothered to learn any critical thinking skills and would rather parrot the bile they consume towards whichever the latest fashionable group to hate is: migrants/ LGBT/ anything "woke" etc etc. Particularly at those who outright refuse to accept there's any way they could be wrong, or even attempt to genuinely understand how they could be influenced in that way by social media.
Most of my disgust is to those setting those rage-bait agendas who do know better and deliberately skew news stories or straight up lie to whip up hatred and exacerbate biases for their own personal gain whether that be politically (Braverman/ Farage) or just straight up grifting for money through donations or subscriptions (Tommy Robinson/ Barton).
There’s nothing new about any of this
Of course, but we're at a point now where we're crossing over from the majority of people getting their news/ information from "traditional" sources, ie newspapers and mainstream TV news channels, which are far far from perfect but do have some semblance of professionalism and should have checks and balances, to the majority of people getting their news from the free for all that's social media.
The increasing rejection of anything "mainstream" by a large section of society is noticeable, as is the rejection of being able to accept an experts opinion on a subject that doesn't agree with the crack pot theory that's been watched on YouTube or Tiktok.
It's equal parts funny and scary having someone tell you that they know you're wrong about something you're a genuine expert in, with receipts, because it disproves some niche theory that their favourite influencer is pushing that week for political points/ to sell a product.
You seriously think the Sun and Daily Mail have ever had a semblance of professionalism? Particularly the Sun. It basically invented the idea of mass spreading of lies, misinformation and pile ons.
He said newspapers.