[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Livia

I'm quite disgusted at this thread. How people can justify this pathetic riot is amazing, but not wholly unexpected. I remember "protestors" throwing a fire extinguisher from the top of Tory HQ, luckily it didn't kill anyone but it was an extreme act of violence and yet people were still saying they had a point.

Don't like the result of the election? Let's riot, and some people who didn't get the election result they wanted will back us. I wonder how many of those rioters have a job? I'm guessing not many. And sadly for the people who went along to peacefully protest - because even if I don't agree with them I do uphold their right to peaceful protest - their message has been lost on the majority, overshadowed by the reckless acts of the few. But some people are backing them! Astonishing.

The thread is the most depressing indictment of the left I've seen for a while, and it's up against some stiff competition.

It doesn't say very much for me as to the right either with respect,
In fact I have had a real eye opener on this thread.
Those with left views are also condemning the defacing of the war memorial too if you notice, (not just the right are), I am one of them.

Those from the right who are quite willing to jump in and condemn rightly the few people who did wrong on this protest march.
Who then choose to avoid the chance to then show any compassion whatsoever as to the cuts and wrong of those cuts,from this govt; as to the most vulnerable.

That says it all as to the so called right for me, I am disgusted for 2 reasons, (1) at the attitude of the few who defaced the war memorial during this march,and (2),the attitudes of those who show scant or no regard for the most vulnerable of this country, as to the real and unjustified misery they are going to face,from the govt; they likely support, and very soon for years too.

[Niamh.]

More people obviously wanted them in then not so these "protesters" really don't have valid case at all

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

More people obviously wanted them in then not so these "protesters" really don't have valid case at all

That's not really how it works Niamh, they didn't even get 40% of the popular vote. I suppose you can't assume that everyone who didn't vote Tory was actively against having a Tory government... but you can't assume that they weren't, either. I'm relatively confident in saying that anyone who voted Labour, SNP, Green, most Independents, and a good chunk of Lib Dem would not have wanted a Tory government.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That's not really how it works Niamh, they didn't even get 40% of the popular vote. I suppose you can't assume that everyone who didn't vote Tory was actively against having a Tory government... but you can't assume that they weren't, either. I'm relatively confident in saying that anyone who voted Labour, SNP, Green, most Independents, and a good chunk of Lib Dem would not have wanted a Tory government.

Probably not but they're the breaks of having a democracy

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Probably not but they're the breaks of having a democracy

True, but I don't see it as any reason that people have to just roll over and take it up the tailpipe. Majority rule isn't always a good thing. Refusing to conform to popular opinion is not a character flaw. Sometimes, popular opinion is stupid and dangerous.

But then, I've been pretty open about that in the past. I have my reservations about full democracy. I don't trust "people in general" - I think they're stupid, ignorant and easily lead. That goes for voters of all parties by the way I'm not making assumptions about any one group... it's just people. "Average Intelligence" = "Quite Stupid".

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

True, but I don't see it as any reason that people have to just roll over and take it up the tailpipe. Majority rule isn't always a good thing. Refusing to conform to popular opinion is not a character flaw. Sometimes, popular opinion is stupid and dangerous.

But then, I've been pretty open about that in the past. I have my reservations about full democracy. I don't trust "people in general" - I think they're stupid, ignorant and easily lead. That goes for voters of all parties by the way I'm not making assumptions about any one group... it's just people. "Average Intelligence" = "Quite Stupid".

Well, if you take that power away from the people you end up with a dictatorship, that imo is far more dangerous. No system is perfect or will make everyone happy but imo every person should have a say in how their country is run

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That's not really how it works Niamh, they didn't even get 40% of the popular vote. I suppose you can't assume that everyone who didn't vote Tory was actively against having a Tory government... but you can't assume that they weren't, either. I'm relatively confident in saying that anyone who voted Labour, SNP, Green, most Independents, and a good chunk of Lib Dem would not have wanted a Tory government.

But you're never going to get a party having over 50% in a multi-party system, its not happened since 1931 in this country when politics really was a two party affair. And even if you put together Labour voters, SNP voters, Green voters and every Lib Dem voter, that doesn't even make up 50% of the vote. If we absolutely insist on talking about national vote share well then the right of centre parties in the Tories, Ukip, the DUP and the UUP got just about over 50% of the national vote.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by MTVN

But you're never going to get a party having over 50% in a multi-party system, its not happened since 1931 in this country when politics really was a two party affair. And even if you put together Labour voters, SNP voters, Green voters and every Lib Dem voter, that doesn't even make up 50% of the vote. If we absolutely insist on talking about national vote share well then the right of centre parties in the Tories, Ukip, the DUP and the UUP got just about over 50% of the national vote.

The SNP have managed to take 50% of the vote in Scotland,in a multi party election.

I accept that parties except in a freak election probably,cannot get 50% of the vote but the votes for the 2 parties have fallen every decade and now over the last decade in 3 elections,neither party has exceeded 37% of the vote and more to the point,both main parties have not even secured just 70% of the total votes cast between them.

It used to be called the magic 40% figure,for elections.
Neither main party has got even just a dead 40% since 2001.

I feel now, that is unacceptable and unsustainable and if the UK really wants people to vote more,then they have to see that their votes do count and that out of every 10 voters that vote, a govt; cannot be elected to absolute power,by actually taking less than 4 of those voters out of every 10.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

The SNP have managed to take 50% of the vote in Scotland,in a multi party election.

I accept that govts; except in a freak election probably,cannot get 50% of the vote but the votes for the 2 parties have fallen every decade and now over the last decade in 3 elections,neither party has exceeded 37% of the vote and more to the point,both main parties have not even secured just 70% of the total votes cast between them.

It used to be called the magic 40% figure,for elections.
Neither main party has got even just a dead 40% since 2001.

I feel now, that is unacceptable and unsustainable and if the UK really wants people to vote more,then they have to see that their votes do count and that out of every 10 voters that vote, a govt; cannot be elected to absolute power,by actually taking less than 4 of those voters out of every 10.

I'll be very surprised if that ever gets replicated again though even in Scotland. I accept there could be a debate to be had over electoral reform even though I do think our system works well in combining the national with the local in allowing regions to choose the representative of their interests, the fact remains that the majority of constituencies did democratically elect a Conservative MP. But we could debate different electoral systems till the cows come home, there are clear benefits to each system available and clear drawbacks.

[bots]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

The SNP have managed to take 50% of the vote in Scotland,in a multi party election.

I accept that parties except in a freak election probably,cannot get 50% of the vote but the votes for the 2 parties have fallen every decade and now over the last decade in 3 elections,neither party has exceeded 37% of the vote and more to the point,both main parties have not even secured just 70% of the total votes cast between them.

It used to be called the magic 40% figure,for elections.
Neither main party has got even just a dead 40% since 2001.

I feel now, that is unacceptable and unsustainable and if the UK really wants people to vote more,then they have to see that their votes do count and that out of every 10 voters that vote, a govt; cannot be elected to absolute power,by actually taking less than 4 of those voters out of every 10.

The only way to have a election system more reflective of % votes is through some form of PR system. To get 40% or more votes in multi party politics is going to be next to impossible.

I've said it before, the UK was given the choice of a new system and they said NO. To try and diminish that result by saying other issues were more important or whatever is not supportive of democracy .... again. Democracy is not something you can pick up and forget as it suits.

All that being said, we have a democracy, people can lobby for change, and if they get the required support it will change. But all i see is bleating, yes, i repeat bleating, because people can't accept the result of a democratic election. Its disgusting. If people didn't want something they wouldn't have voted for it.

In a democracy, it is everyones right to have their view respected. People voted for the conservatives IN THE MAJORITY - that is the will of the people

[bots]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That's not really how it works Niamh, they didn't even get 40% of the popular vote. I suppose you can't assume that everyone who didn't vote Tory was actively against having a Tory government... but you can't assume that they weren't, either. I'm relatively confident in saying that anyone who voted Labour, SNP, Green, most Independents, and a good chunk of Lib Dem would not have wanted a Tory government.

The protest/riot was over austerity. The only major party that was anti austerity was the SNP, all the others were invoking some form of austerity measures.

The UK democratic system revolves around who got the most votes at constituency and parliament level. At a constituency level, if there are 25 candidates, the one who received the most votes wins the seats. At a parliament level, the party with the majority of the seats wins. Its pretty straightforward and easy to understand. It is the process that individual candidates agree to when the stand for election.

Everyone is entitled to lobby for change if they feel that system is unfair, and if they get sufficient support, it will be changed. That is democracy.

Rioting/protesting in the street because they do not like the result of a democratic election is not democracy, and those saying they support that action are anarchists, no ifs or doubts about it.

[user104658]

I'd also throw out there that even if they had an overwhelming majority of the vote - say 70% - that still wouldn't mean that the people who are against it don't have a "valid case". Popular does not mean "right", and there have been some pretty horrendous regimes throughout history that have had a large amount of public support with only pockets of resistance. Would you say that those people in those pockets of resistance have never had "a valid case"?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'd also throw out there that even if they had an overwhelming majority of the vote - say 70% - that still wouldn't mean that the people who are against it don't have a "valid case". Popular does not mean "right", and there have been some pretty horrendous regimes throughout history that have had a large amount of public support with only pockets of resistance. Would you say that those people in those pockets of resistance have never had "a valid case"?

Not if it's voted for fairly no

[Kazanne]

The 16 year old boy arrested in that riot wasn't even old enough to vote!! just another moron on the bandwagon.

[Jemal]

You can't tell me that this system of voting doesn't need to be changed because it does.
Over half of the country doesn't want tory's in power and what? Did people just expect everyone to be okay with it especially with the stupid policies that they have created that look like they only favour the rich side of town.

Give me a break. Listen i've never been a fan of torys but even in the last election when i still knew a fair few things about politics I wasn't really upset about the conservatives winning purely because their policies were not ground breaking and didn't really have a big impact on people like me or of a similar ilk.

But this election has just been so dubious to say the least that i'm not even going to count david cameron as a prime minister. It just doesn't make sense. A prime minister even if they are a left wing party or right wing it doesn't matter they should still have some policies that will favour the wing they are not specialised in.

Yes a minority of the rioters were stupid but the rest of them I applaud them for taking a stand cause britian need people who are willing to call out this stupidity of a government that is out to ruin this country and the working class lives for the next five years.

[Kazanne]

I am a teaching assistant,my brother is a firefighter,and I believe they are in for some cuts,so it will affect me and him,but I am not throwing a tantrum,if the time comes,I will deal with it,find another job and get on with life,afterall I am sure they don't make these cuts just to piss people off and make them poor,no one would go out of their way to make themselves unpopular.My mother also looks after a disabled gentleman,who has no savings as such,but his social workers make sure he lives comfortable and gets the help he needs,I think a lot of scare mongering is flying about.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I am a teaching assistant,my brother is a firefighter,and I believe they are in for some cuts,so it will affect me and him,but I am not throwing a tantrum,if the time comes,I will deal with it,find another job and get on with life,afterall I am sure they don't make these cuts just to piss people off and make them poor,no one would go out of their way to make themselves unpopular.My mother also looks after a disabled gentleman,who has no savings as such,but his social workers make sure he lives comfortable and gets the help he needs,I think a lot of scare mongering is flying about.

Yes a lot on Threads like this

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I am a teaching assistant,my brother is a firefighter,and I believe they are in for some cuts,so it will affect me and him,but I am not throwing a tantrum,if the time comes,I will deal with it,find another job and get on with life,afterall I am sure they don't make these cuts just to piss people off and make them poor,no one would go out of their way to make themselves unpopular.My mother also looks after a disabled gentleman,who has no savings as such,but his social workers make sure he lives comfortable and gets the help he needs,I think a lot of scare mongering is flying about.

And if she loses her job?...

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

And if she loses her job?...

But she hasn't Kizzy,people are presuming all this will happen,and IF it does,I am sure he will be booted out at the next opportunity.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I am a teaching assistant,my brother is a firefighter,and I believe they are in for some cuts,so it will affect me and him,but I am not throwing a tantrum,if the time comes,I will deal with it,find another job and get on with life,afterall I am sure they don't make these cuts just to piss people off and make them poor,no one would go out of their way to make themselves unpopular.My mother also looks after a disabled gentleman,who has no savings as such,but his social workers make sure he lives comfortable and gets the help he needs,I think a lot of scare mongering is flying about.

Yeah,thank you for that, I would go about scaremongering.
I think not.

I am horrified at the situations I have come across and thank god the gentleman you mention has good social care where you are.

For the vast majority.that is nothing like the case, real necessary social care is in no way available, a situation made greatly worse by the cuts the last govt; made as to social care,with now even more to come.

[Jemal]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I am a teaching assistant,my brother is a firefighter,and I believe they are in for some cuts,so it will affect me and him,but I am not throwing a tantrum,if the time comes,I will deal with it,find another job and get on with life,afterall I am sure they don't make these cuts just to piss people off and make them poor,no one would go out of their way to make themselves unpopular.My mother also looks after a disabled gentleman,who has no savings as such,but his social workers make sure he lives comfortable and gets the help he needs,I think a lot of scare mongering is flying about.

You say this now kaz, but just wait.
I would never wish hell on someone or their family but it is the inevitable that everyone will suffer.

[Jemal]

Originally Posted by Jemal

You say this now kaz, but just wait.
I would never wish hell on someone or their family but it is the inevitable that everyone will suffer.

Apart from the rich folks that is.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Jemal

Apart from the rich folks that is.

A lot of people have worked really hard to get rich though Jemal,it had to start somewhere even for those who inherit,It's like people don't like people being rich.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

A lot of people have worked really hard to get rich though Jemal,it had to start somewhere even for those who inherit,It's like people don't like people being rich.

Some poor people are lazy, some rich people need to do relatively little for their money. Some rich people worked hard to get into that position, some people work their fingers to the bone and will never have a hope of being rich.

The two aren't particularly related.

The idea that rich people are rich because they "work harder" is quite simply a completel fallacy. But it's a fallacy that the Tory party would absolutely love that you believe.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Jemal

You say this now kaz, but just wait.
I would never wish hell on someone or their family but it is the inevitable that everyone will suffer.

Neither would I Jemal,IF that happens,we have the opportunity to kick him out.I don't want people to suffer,but I do think there is an overreaction at the moment,I hope he doesn't let us down,but there will be cuts we wont all like.Great thread btw.