|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 19:33:47 GMT
no I dont , for the purposes of our interaction and what passes as debate , as per my earlier posts. ive told you my point to you in this thread repeatedly. In favour of ineffective policies. No wonder you like the SNP under certain circumstances. All The Best misrepresentation of my argument yet again. Thats all you do. Please re read my posts in this thread. Im specifically talking about stop and search not being racist , and showing why. Ive made a comment now numerous times about the effectiveness of stop and search , and who should decide if the polis continue to use it in their arsenal. No wonder the liberal left struggle to win elections , and have to rely on cheating the electorate . |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 19:47:18 GMT
In favour of ineffective policies. No wonder you like the SNP under certain circumstances. All The Best misrepresentation of my argument yet again. Thats all you do. Please re read my posts in this thread. Im specifically talking about stop and search not being racist , and showing why. Ive made a comment now numerous times about the effectiveness of stop and search , and who should decide if the polis continue to use it in their arsenal. No wonder the liberal left struggle to win elections , and have to rely on cheating the electorate . Well the left just massively won an election, and did so without cheating at all. So, another instance of you being factually wrong. Anything else you want to be wrong about? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 19:51:29 GMT
misrepresentation of my argument yet again. Thats all you do. Please re read my posts in this thread. Im specifically talking about stop and search not being racist , and showing why. Ive made a comment now numerous times about the effectiveness of stop and search , and who should decide if the polis continue to use it in their arsenal. No wonder the liberal left struggle to win elections , and have to rely on cheating the electorate . Well the left just massively won an election, and did so without cheating at all. So, another instance of you being factually wrong. Anything else you want to be wrong about? All The Best getting double the seats comparable to your vote share isnt cheating? wow , you really are redefining the meaning of words today on many topics. no country in the western civilised world that I have seen has ever awarded a party with such a poor vote share such disproportionate seats in their legislature. labour often talk about the far right bogeyman preying on the disenfranchised. The labour cheats have just disenfranchised the largest amount of the uk electorate in history. Reap what you sow.... |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 19:58:12 GMT
Well the left just massively won an election, and did so without cheating at all. So, another instance of you being factually wrong. Anything else you want to be wrong about? All The Best getting double the seats comparable to your vote share isnt cheating? Not if it is within the rules that every General Election of the Modern Parliamentary Era has been fought under. Something ONLY becomes "cheating" if it is done outside the rules that normally govern how it functions. Something does not just become "cheating" if someone you don't like wins - that is the mindset of a petulant child. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 20:01:18 GMT
getting double the seats comparable to your vote share isnt cheating? Not if it is within the rules that every General Election of the Modern Parliamentary Era has been fought under. Something ONLY becomes "cheating" if it is done outside the rules that normally govern how it functions. Something does not just become "cheating" if someone you don't like wins - that is the mindset of a petulant child. All The Best Under the anti democratic fptp system , this isnt the norm . This is the worst and most unrepesentative result in uk political history since the universal vote was first introduced. can you show me any uk majority government in history that got two thirds of seats for a third of the vote share? over to you? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:05:35 GMT
Not if it is within the rules that every General Election of the Modern Parliamentary Era has been fought under. Something ONLY becomes "cheating" if it is done outside the rules that normally govern how it functions. Something does not just become "cheating" if someone you don't like wins - that is the mindset of a petulant child. All The Best Under the anti democratic fptp system , this isnt the norm . So which specific part of the process that saw Labour into office was carried out in violation of the current Electoral Regulations? Please point the specific reason, and then point to the specific part of the Electoral Regulation that have been violated. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 20:13:59 GMT
Under the anti democratic fptp system , this isnt the norm . So which specific part of the process that saw Labour into office was carried out in violation of the current Electoral Regulations? Please point the specific reason, and then point to the specific part of the Electoral Regulation that have been violated. All The Best misrepresenting my argument again. Where did I say the dodgy electoral regulations have been violated? Can you show me how 33.7% getting 64 % of seats is the norm under fptp ? over to you? which previous uk government has done this? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:15:38 GMT
So which specific part of the process that saw Labour into office was carried out in violation of the current Electoral Regulations? Please point the specific reason, and then point to the specific part of the Electoral Regulation that have been violated. All The Best misrepresenting my argument again. Where did I say the dodgy electoral regulations have been violated? So you are now admitting that Labour are in office both legally and, within our electoral system, fairly... Well done for finally making it all the way to big boy class... All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 20:17:27 GMT
misrepresenting my argument again. Where did I say the dodgy electoral regulations have been violated? So you are now admitting that Labour are in office both legally and, within our electoral system, fairly... Well done for finally making it all the way to big boy class... All The Best what part of this isnt the norm and the Labour Party have no mandate do you not understand? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:21:42 GMT
So which specific part of the process that saw Labour into office was carried out in violation of the current Electoral Regulations? Please point the specific reason, and then point to the specific part of the Electoral Regulation that have been violated. All The Best misrepresenting my argument again. Where did I say the dodgy electoral regulations have been violated? Can you show me how 33.7% getting 64 % of seats is the norm under fptp ? over to you? which previous uk government has done this? Ah, well, yes this GE was ever so slightly more anomalous than usual. But that was because of the attempt at gerrymandering by the Tories, which redistributed Constituency Boundaries. The Tories have themselves to blame, tried to rig both the electoral boundaries, and voter eligibility, and they still got fucking trounced. Imagine how more crushing the Tory loss would have been if they hadn't tried to rig the game in their favour. However, whether or not a previous government has done the same is irrelevant. The ONLY thing that is relevant is: was the election carried out using, and in accordance with, the regulations defined for that purpose.And you have just admitted that you can not demonstrate that it wasn't. Ergo, Labour's win is legal, democratic, and fair -within the bounds of the rules (that we both agree need to change) set down to govern that process. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:23:08 GMT
So you are now admitting that Labour are in office both legally and, within our electoral system, fairly... Well done for finally making it all the way to big boy class... All The Best what part of this isnt the norm and the Labour Party have no mandate do you not understand? I don't understand either of them, because they are both factually wrong. It would be like me trying to make sense of 2+2=12 in decimal - it is just not possible. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 20:26:27 GMT
misrepresenting my argument again. Where did I say the dodgy electoral regulations have been violated? Can you show me how 33.7% getting 64 % of seats is the norm under fptp ? over to you? which previous uk government has done this? Ah, well, yes this GE was ever so slightly more anomalous than usual. But that was because of the attempt at gerrymandering by the Tories, which redistributed Constituency Boundaries. The Tories have themselves to blame, tried to rig both the electoral boundaries, and voter eligibility, and they still got fucking trounced. Imagine how more crushing the Tory loss would have been if they hadn't tried to rig the game in their favour. However, whether or not a previous government has done the same is irrelevant. The ONLY thing that is relevant is: was the election carried out using, and in accordance with, the regulations defined for that purpose.And you have just admitted that you can not demonstrate that it wasn't. Ergo, Labour's win is legal, democratic, and fair -within the bounds of the rules (that we both agree need to change) set down to govern that process. All The Best starmer is trying to rule with an authoritarian iron fist , despite 2/3 people voting against him , and yet cannot understand why the disenfranchised are resorting to mass protest , and in some cases violence. if people are denied democracy , then they will as we have seen in other places resort to direct action. If starmer introduced pr , in accordance with his own party members wishes , then things would calm down. He won't though as he is chicken shit scared of democracy , hence why he , and his supporters like you would rather see the uk crash and burn than see multiple parties sit in the commons beside him in a hung parliament. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Aug 4, 2024 20:28:59 GMT
what part of this isnt the norm and the Labour Party have no mandate do you not understand? I don't understand either of them, because they are both factually wrong. It would be like me trying to make sense of 2+2=12 in decimal - it is just not possible. All The Best clearly you dont. If this was the norm , then you could show me when 33.7 % got 64% of seats previously. /the fact you cant speaks volumes. If labour had a majority mandate , then you could show me a majority vote share. You cant when 2/3 people voted against them. this isnt the norm , and labour have no mandate to govern , and things I suspect are going to escalate quickly under no mandate starmer in terms of tensions and protests. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:36:53 GMT
I don't understand either of them, because they are both factually wrong. It would be like me trying to make sense of 2+2=12 in decimal - it is just not possible. All The Best clearly you dont. If this was the norm , then you could show me when 33.7 % got 64% of seats previously. Well I could only logically do that if the Electoral Boundaries in this last election were 100% identical to every previous election. Because boundary changes affect the distribution of voters, and so electoral outcomes. Given we can't do that, we have to fall back to "was the election carried out in accordance with the relevant electoral regulations" - and the answer to that is YES. It really is not rocket science here - well, perhaps it is for some. Oh, and I know it does not seem to have sunk in yet, but no government since 1931 has had a majority vote share. So why does the lack of a majority vote share suddenly matter so much. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 5, 2024 6:41:15 GMT
Meanwhile, here's the real low down on S&S: The stop and search race myth - Alasdair Palmer.etc
It's a good point that when police are looking for people who are dealing drugs or carrying knives they will tend to go to an area where these activities are occurring - and that often means black areas. There was a C4 program on the police a few months ago and it showed police working in Bristol. When they were doing S&S they were in the St Pauls area (which is predominantly black) because that's where the stabbings happen and the drug dealing happens. They could have walked a mile or so to Whiteladies Road and tried stopping people there but they probably wouldn't get many "hits". The fact is that, in the case of S&S, the police are not being motivated by racism. |
|
