Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
In message o.uk, Dave
Liquorice writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs today are career politicians. That's all they know. -- hugh "Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own common sense." Buddha |
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
On 04/05/2011 13:51, hugh wrote:
In message o.uk, Dave Liquorice writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs today are career politicians. That's all they know. Too right. They know how parliament works (possibly) but so many have absolutely no comprehension whatsoever of how many people live. |
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
"hugh" ] wrote in message ... In message o.uk, Dave Liquorice writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Usually they don't. What does happen is that they don't get selected for government jobs (and the extra money/future opportunity) that goes with it. tim |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
On 04/05/2011 13:51, hugh wrote:
In message o.uk, Dave Liquorice writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs today are career politicians. That's all they know. That includes the present Prime Minister. -- Old Codger e-mail use reply to field What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003] |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
On 04/05/2011 20:26, Old Codger wrote:
On 04/05/2011 13:51, hugh wrote: In message o.uk, Dave Liquorice writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs today are career politicians. That's all they know. That includes the present Prime Minister. who can't even make a convincing job of putting over a pre-prepared sound-bite! |
#6
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
On Wed, 04 May 2011 20:26:43 +0100, Old Codger
wrote: On 04/05/2011 13:51, hugh wrote: In message o.uk, Dave Liquorice writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs today are career politicians. That's all they know. That includes the present Prime Minister. And the chancellor who went into politics because he failed to make it as a Journalist. -- (\__/) M. (='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by everyone you will need use a different method of posting. |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Referendum
On 05/05/2011 09:45, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 04 May 2011 20:26:43 +0100, Old wrote: On 04/05/2011 13:51, hugh wrote: In whill.co.uk, Dave writes On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote: But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in government with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get more unfair than that. That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party. I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do". Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant. TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing to the party whip. If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs today are career politicians. That's all they know. That includes the present Prime Minister. And the chancellor who went into politics because he failed to make it as a Journalist. Indeed. -- Old Codger e-mail use reply to field What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003] |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Referendum | UK diy | |||
Referendum | UK diy | |||
Referendum | UK diy | |||
Referendum | UK diy |