http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8669409.stm

 

I'd be so annoyed if I had voted for Lib Dem and they'd form a coalition with the Conservatives.

http://search.twitter.com/search?q=withington

 

hundreds of voters unable to vote because the queues are too long, including just up the road here in Withington Manchester. Rules are rules 7am - 10pm!

 

They ran out of ballot papers in Wavertree Liverpool. :lol:

Bush should have won.

lol Nick, you so drunk! ;)

Not yet homes

 

Is it homes or holmes? The Hispanic gangsta term?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8669409.stm

 

I'd be so annoyed if I had voted for Lib Dem and they'd form a coalition with the Conservatives.

 

But I'd be pissed off if I saw Labour moved back into power - that's not what 70% voted for.

 

For me though it is not right that Nick Clegg holds Cameron to ransom. I'm sure Cameron will point out after all that they did get less seats, but more importantly, millions of votes less than the Conservative Party.

 

I'm watching the news and I'm watching these irritating people protesting outside Lib Dem HQ demanding voting reform. Yet the VERY same people who protest against the BNP, who by fact would get a few seats under PR.

 

Personally - I hope another general election is held, and a majority government is returned.

 

p.s - Do you think Cameron is prepared to risk it all and if he doesn't then the Lib Dems will turn to Labour and other parties to form a government. Then Cameron will find himself back into opposition, but with the advantage that he has the biggest party in parliament, and along with the eyes of the nation, will be viewing what the government will do in very difficult times.

Absolutely ridiculous state we are in at the minute!

 

Nick Clegg has been right by saying that the Conservatives should have the main say in what happens because they got the most votes/seats!

 

However (although I personally prefer Lib Dem's to Labour) I don't think it is fair for the party who came THIRD should be involved in parliament at all...

 

And what is this about the SNP wanting to form a coalition?

 

If ANY of them have any sense and have a good perception of what 'fair' is, they should just let David Cameron take over government or at least have another general election where people need to vote sensibly.

I fear for the stock market when it opens tomorrow

I don't think it is fair for the party who came THIRD should be involved in parliament at all...

Whoever said democracy was fair!

:\

 

You for Cameron then, Ian?

What should happen is that PR comes in, but with a fully elected house of lords.

 

If MPs are corrupt, what about the lords getting paid to vote on behalf of certain companies

But I'd be pissed off if I saw Labour moved back into power - that's not what 70% voted for.

 

For me though it is not right that Nick Clegg holds Cameron to ransom. I'm sure Cameron will point out after all that they did get less seats, but more importantly, millions of votes less than the Conservative Party.

 

I'm watching the news and I'm watching these irritating people protesting outside Lib Dem HQ demanding voting reform. Yet the VERY same people who protest against the BNP, who by fact would get a few seats under PR.

 

Personally - I hope another general election is held, and a majority government is returned.

 

p.s - Do you think Cameron is prepared to risk it all and if he doesn't then the Lib Dems will turn to Labour and other parties to form a government. Then Cameron will find himself back into opposition, but with the advantage that he has the biggest party in parliament, and along with the eyes of the nation, will be viewing what the government will do in very difficult times.

 

That's not the point though. I don't think the majority of the people who did vote Lib Dem want to see the Conservatives in power.

 

Absolutely ridiculous state we are in at the minute!

 

Nick Clegg has been right by saying that the Conservatives should have the main say in what happens because they got the most votes/seats!

 

However (although I personally prefer Lib Dem's to Labour) I don't think it is fair for the party who came THIRD should be involved in parliament at all...

 

And what is this about the SNP wanting to form a coalition?

 

If ANY of them have any sense and have a good perception of what 'fair' is, they should just let David Cameron take over government or at least have another general election where people need to vote sensibly.

 

No, they shouldn't because the Conservatives didn't win the elections. The election results might have been disappointing for Lib Dem but they still gained enough seats that it's of interest to form a coalition with them.

 

Also I don't think there is much of a point in holding another general election. And if they were to hold another general election, it should have been announced straight away when they found out that some people were unable to vote.

What should happen is that PR comes in, but with a fully elected house of lords.

 

If MPs are corrupt, what about the lords getting paid to vote on behalf of certain companies

 

I wouldn't want PR. I would hate to see the BNP gain a few seats at Westminster because of PR. I would also not want to see a continuous stream of hung parliaments rather than a majority government which would happen. That'd be the end of majority stable governments as we know it and I don't think enough people know that.

I was thinking just how would PR work, the current system of 650 little areas all voting for 650 people they want to represent them with the highest person in each of the 650 being handed the keys to an office in the house of commons. How would PR change?

It's not Peter Mandelson it's Lord Mandelweasel :P

 

Mr Young increased his stronghold on this area to a majority of 18563 getting 58.3% of the votes!

 

Lord Fondlesbums

I wouldn't want PR. I would hate to see the BNP gain a few seats at Westminster because of PR. I would also not want to see a continuous stream of hung parliaments rather than a majority government which would happen. That'd be the end of majority stable governments as we know it and I don't think enough people know that.

 

 

If there was PR there's wouldn't be any hung parliements. First past the post would be replaced by the majority party e.g in this case Conservatives being allowed to form the coalition.

 

They're trying to do it now and it's confusing the hell out of people because we're used to FPTP always creating a result.

 

The 'end of majority stable government' smacks of media hysteria. Our victorian system of rule is pretty rare in europe... Nobody shout's instability in Germany when no party gets a majority. It;s expected.

 

S

If there was PR there's wouldn't be any hung parliements. First past the post would be replaced by the majority party e.g in this case Conservatives being allowed to form the coalition.

 

They're trying to do it now and it's confusing the hell out of people because we're used to PFTP always creating a result.

 

The 'end of majority stable government' smacks of media hysteria. Our victorian system of rule is pretty rare in europe... Nobody shout's instability in Germany when no party gets a majority. It;s expected.

 

S

 

It's true! There will be no such thing as one party governing a majority from now on if there was PR. A perfect example is the Scottish Parliament elections. Even though that's a mix of FPTP (used to elect local counties) and another more proportionate system called the Additional Membership System (used for larger regional representation such as Highlands and Islands etc). Even with a bit of FPTP the Scottish Parliament in it's 3 elections since it's formation in 1999, has never come close to producing a majority result for one party.

 

In order to get a majority government in PR, the winning party would have to gain 50% of the vote. Not one party has come close to gaining 50% of the vote. Even when Labour achieved a landslide in 1997, virtually wiping out the Conservatives, he still only gained 40% of the vote. I believe that it's important for this country to continue having a syatem which can more often than not offer a majority government.

I'm not sure why it's such a bad thing to have a hung parliament. Why is it good that the government is constantly pumping out new laws and regulations like a factory?

 

There seems to be a bias for action here.