Bahtatboy

There are, there are... just have faith. I'm a multi-millionaire thanks to some very inventive Nigerian accounting / inheritance rules, my little black book is bursting at the seams with gorgeous ladies just aching for sex, my investments never fail, HMRC has given me 4 refunds even though I don't pay tax, Everest installed my double-glazing at an amazing price, Petra at PayPal just sent me $3,182, and thanks to the Canadian Pharmacy my pecker's always up and further thanks to various devices, pills and techniques its now 14 feet long. This week I'm going to buy some Armani suits in a car park, get 2 Chinese girlfriends for the 2 Russian ones to play with, finally fix that problem with my online bank account, set up my own work-for-home business that will bring me in £4,976 a month or more, rid my laptop of that virus which somehow hasn't yet caused me any problems, grow my hair back and lose 17 trousers sizes.

ExpatAl

That strategy has worked very well so far in calling voters you disagree with 'stupid'. The whole referendum debate is not about being 'smart' if you vote remain. There are plenty of well spoken and articulate Brexiteers (Daniel Hannan, Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Buik)

Bahtatboy

Granted. (If I was nit-picking I'd say merely being well spoken and articulate is insufficient, it's the thought behind the words that's important -- but I think that's what you mean.) What grates is that a significant proportion* of those who voted Leave were swayed by "pledges" that were never going to be implemented, and by pandering to -- frankly -- base instincts: and base instincts which fundamentally didn't influence those who voted Remain. Yes, there was duplicity on both sides, but I sincerely believe if there had been only honest, reasoned and sincere debate and tactics then the outcome would have been significantly different.

*As a previous poster stated, that significant proportion had to amount to only 600,000 to have altered the outcome. And there's no appeal, no second chance.

Millhouse

The funny thing about the numbers, especially as we talk about a landslide tory election and the injustice of the brexit vote... if there are were only two political parties in the UK and the votes were cast in the same way as brexit/remain between the two parties, the winning political party would win by a landslide - and not a slim majority that brexit appeared due to the college system... I was quite shocked really.

An anti-Brexit party would win 150 fewer seats than a Leave party at a general election, analysis suggests

LouisB

It is shocking but a referendum isn't like that, it's a direct measure of opinion.

And imho it won't take a lot to tip the opinion back again, which could easily flip a whole swath of seats back to remain.

All it takes is brexit to continue to be shit. Which actually makes it potentially likely...

shiva

you too and pretty much.

DXBtoDOH

If Brexit was based on constituencies it would have been a landslide. Which is why Labour has generally been so quiet on Brexit. The majority of Labour voters didn't vote for Brexit, but the majority of Labour constituencies did.

As it is, latest polls (first post announcement of snap election) has Tories up at 48%, but this is most likely a reflection of the collapse of UKIP and the return of UKIP voters to the Tory fold (or the final transformation of large sectors of working class white voters to the Tory camp, me old gramps would be turning over in his grave if he knew this was happening, but then again he'd probably be doing the same thing).

It is possible that we could have a final result mirroring Brexit: 52% Tory victory and 48% everyone else, based on the near destruction of UKIP by May. While nothing like the 60%+ Liberal victories under Gladstone it does make sense and could deliver May a landslide even bigger than Blair's. Maybe. We'll have to wait and see.

Do I feel sorry for Labour? No more than Labour voters felt sorry for the Tories under Blair (ah, the hypocrisy that reeks from some of the posters on here).

weasel decentral

Proportional representation voting is designed to be a reasonably accurate reflection of the popularity of each party. The first past the post system is pretty brutal in comparison. Though winning under that system would hardly encourage the victor to change to PR!

Inselaffen

PR though tends to lead to very ineffective Government by coalition and gives too much influence to minority parties.

Don't forget Hitler came to power through a PR system

Millhouse

Took 5 pages this time to mention him.

Millhouse

I've no idea on this as have never lived under a PR system. Regardless, the level of bias in the FPTP system is incredible. A landslide basically means 50% of the votes in the right areas.

Anyway, I really don't care. I shall vote in exactly the same way as I have voted for the last 20 years - not bother. Nor shall I complain about the outcome - life is about learning to dance in the rain.

scrubbedexpat141

Fair enough.

I'm registered to vote and will (well, Mummy will).

It's a bit pointless though given we're in rock solid Conservative country, has been since the 20's I think.

When Clegg the tea boy did well a couple of elections ago the Lib Dems did very well in Salisbury, but in reality to blues get 45-55% of the total vote.

So I'll do what I've always done when I can and vote blue.

Millhouse

If I could be bothered, I would vote blue but I've always lived nice areas, sorry I mean tory strongholds, so my vote was never a swing vote. The one time I did vote was when I was in a student town that was overun by champagne socialists - my vote essentially counted for nothing in that case too.

LouisB

In a 'modern' country perhaps our old PR fptp system needs a review?

scrubbedexpat141

Yeah, me too. Although in Southampton where I lived for a while it was Labour pretty much solid since Blair. But votes still worthwhile.

If nobody votes then nobody gets elected, so feel it's at least a tiny bit worthwhile etc.