Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 5:40:20 GMT
This case, like all cases, is an example not a proof of a wider problem which Trump highlighted in his campaign. However what it really shows is how poor are the current border controls that this man can cross illegally seemingly at will. Man crosses border 15 times in 15 years
This will have the right wingers salivating for some action, and whilst they will have point and will increase pressure on politicians to fund the 'wall' what alternatives are there if the border is so leaky? One is almost tempted to say that if would be easier if Mexico simply threw in the towel and added a few more states to the US. |
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,354 
|
Post by WDB on May 11, 2017 7:03:54 GMT
There are always anecdotes, and tabloid journalists and readers love them: look at all the '18-bedroom house paid for by benefits' stories here. But it's a poor show when the anecdotes become the political debate.
It's the age-old demagogue's trick: find a disaffected group, offer them someone to blame for their disappointments in life, sit back and count the votes. Simple answers to complex questions; it's poor politics and it doesn't need our encouragement.
|
|
|
|
Post by bromptonaut on May 11, 2017 19:02:04 GMT
There are always anecdotes, and tabloid journalists and readers love them: look at all the '18-bedroom house paid for by benefits' stories here. But it's a poor show when the anecdotes become the political debate. It's the age-old demagogue's trick: find a disaffected group, offer them someone to blame for their disappointments in life, sit back and count the votes. Simple answers to complex questions; it's poor politics and it doesn't need our encouragement. Wot he said ^^^^^^ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 20:15:51 GMT
Party politics no longer has any place in our world. No longer can our beliefs be split into one of 2 or 3 buckets.
It is not possible for me to say that overall I believe in one party completely. They are all catastrophically wrong about some things.
We should have a parliament of 650 independent MPs.
I increasingly believe that l.
I believe the appropriate word is "discuss".
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,354
|
Post by WDB on May 12, 2017 6:52:16 GMT
I'm less concerned about political parties per se than I am about the mechanism we use to elect them. The one we have is hopelessly unrepresentative; this year, for example, it is about to hand one party a huge majority although the electorate is split roughly down the middle. It does seem absurd that, in a constituency field of five, the candidate with 20.1% of the vote can be selected to represent it.
I used to think PR was the answer but I no longer do. Politics needs grownups, and true PR would give too much credit to vexatious single-issue groups, as well as the lunatic fringe.
I voted in favour of AV in 2011, but I have to admit now that I can't remember how it was supposed to work, and that's a problem. People have to understand the system or they won't trust it. STV is mathematically elegant but has the same problem of opacity.
So I'd go for run-offs. Recognize that the choice is not a simple binary one of red or blue, and that individuals' views are nuanced and sometimes conflicting. What we need to find is the least-unacceptable candidate in each constituency; round one eliminates the no-hopers, leaving two, of whom one ought to be at least tolerable to the majority. That will make more (most, even) people feel invested in their MP, and make supporters of the minority parties feel they are still relevant, as theirs are the votes the top two need to win for the run-off.
Best of all, it's simple for the voter: pick your preferred candidate from this list. Just do it twice.
I suspect our only real objection to this system is that the French thought of it first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2017 6:39:22 GMT
The voting system for the new mayors worked well. The Liverpool and Manchester mayors were won in the first round, but the others were voted in by the secondary vote. It gave those people voting for the smaller parties the chance to support an alternative. I think in all cases the first position after the first round won anyway, but it took the UKIP votes to push the Tory candidates over the line.
My dilemma locally is very difficult. Our local MP is a local boy, 20 years in post, a great constituency MP but Labour. He hates Corbyn. I am a natural Tory who has never voted Labour, but previous Tory candidates have also been local people, working in the area for many years. So a genuine choice of decent people. Now, the Tory candidate is a local boy (boy being the operative word), but left eight years ago to move to London. His little connection and many of us don't think he will represent us particularly well.
No point in voting for the smaller parties, but the 2015 winning margin was 4000 votes with UKIP getting 6000. It's going to be interesting. However I cannot bring myself to vote Labour as Corbyn is simply a lover of terrorists despite his supposed pacifist credentials. Pacifist for the government but a warmonger for the revolutionaries. Anyone who calls the IRA, Hamas or Hizbollah 'my friends' cannot be a friend of mine.
|
|
