Proportional representation..

keith1879 · Post by **keith1879** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:20 pm

Caballo wrote:Not for me, at least we have someone fighting our geographical corner at the moment, under PR the big cities will dominate even more than the already do.

I think there are systems that address this ....so that for example the North West would get MPs in proportion to the way we voted here. In the end we all have to accept that we can't have all our own way ....."will of the people " and all that. You would still have an MP who is identifiable as your geographical representative.

Espia · Post by **Espia** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:33 pm

Winstonswhite wrote:Has everyone forgotten we had a vote on this in 2011 and FPTP won.

Indeed. And in that vote roughly a mere 14% of the total potential electorate voted for PR (42% turn out with a 68/32 % split to stay with FPTP). So, we can't want it that badly.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:05 pm

Winstonswhite wrote:Has everyone forgotten we had a vote on this in 2011 and FPTP won.

Therefore we can’t possibly have another vote on it as it would be undemocratic and against the will of the people.

No we didn't. That wasn't for PR.

jurek · Post by **jurek** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:20 pm

I think the last few months, well since the referendum (including the last election) really,
has, in my opinion, finally put the last nail in the coffin for the first past the post system.

So, for me, we need a radical change to the current political system.
What form of proportional representation I'm not sure of but as long as it represents and
fairly reflects how the nation voted.
And then we need to decide on what kind of second chamber we wish for.
So a possible major reform of the current House of Lords too.

I don't care whether UKIP, or whichever party, get x number in the main chamber.

It might also encourage better candidates as we clearly also need to change
the view that has prevailed in terms of how we, the general voting public view our current
bunch of politicians.
They're not all bad I would hasten to add but at present
they're not very well respected and that's probably being more than generous.

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:03 pm

I am actually in favour of PR as it gives everyone a vote that matters. I was just citing the argument against it. The real reason we won't get it is that the two biggest parties know it is not in their interest.

Winstonswhite · Post by **Winstonswhite** » Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:35 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:No we didn't. That wasn't for PR.

Ok yep you’re right, Alt Vote isn’t PR, I should have concentrated more in Politics lessons.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:46 am

FPTP has been reasonably successful here in the UK and gives us the benefit of constituency MPs. I like the concept of PR but how could we arrange some hybrid where access to our own representative is still possible?

My reason for liking the idea of PR was because in 1983 the Liberal-SDP Alliance won a quarter of the votes and got 23 seats, but this should have translated as 165 seats. A discrepancy of one or two is acceptable but 140.....:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Unit ... l_election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We did have a referendum on the subject in 2011 but the question was based on an 'Alternative Vote' system which seemed quite complicated. It was certainly overwhelmingly rejected.

Another reason for considering PR is that the turnouts at general elections since the war have more or less consistently gone down:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... _elections" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The House of Lords may not be elected but I think it generally does a good job of offering wise council and should be left alone. The U.S. has two elected houses but that is not always a success.

SussexDon1inIreland · Post by **SussexDon1inIreland** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 9:03 am

Problem is that our politicians have just ignored a referendum after saying that its OUR (the peoples) decision and they have ceded power over us to Brussels (it seems with approx half of the British people in favour of that decision!- I wonder how remainers would have taken what has happened had they won and their vote not delivered on!!) so we are now RULE TAKERS and a COLONY of the EU what voting system we have DOESNT MATTER as we have lost power over who governs us.

UTC

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 9:58 am

SussexDon1inIreland wrote:Problem is that our politicians have just ignored a referendum after saying that its OUR (the peoples) decision and they have ceded power over us to Brussels (it seems with approx half of the British people in favour of that decision!- I wonder how remainers would have taken what has happened had they won and their vote not delivered on!!) so we are now RULE TAKERS and a COLONY of the EU what voting system we have DOESNT MATTER as we have lost power over who governs us.

UTC

Why are you so full of ****? No referendum has been ignored, you absolute genius.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:23 am

The referendum hasn't, yet, been ignored by Parliament but there are plenty there who wish to ignore it.

It's a question of whether a government should lead or be led. We voters mostly simply don't know enough to make complicated decisions. Governments are employed by us to listen advice from experts and make decisions accordingly, mostly based on practicalities, and sometimes on political views.

The problem of course is when we are asked to make a decision, such as the EU referendum, the information we receive is filtered through biased sources, from politicians, media and others, and so who can honestly say that we can fully understand it all. I certainly can't and I made a reasonable effort.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:49 am

Hipper wrote:The referendum hasn't, yet, been ignored by Parliament but there are plenty there who wish to ignore it.

If there is absolutely no way to deliver on the result without it being a complete disaster then not enacting it is not the same as ignoring it.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:02 am

Further support for getting rid of this dumb electoral system

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -thinktank" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

bfcjg · Post by **bfcjg** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 6:47 pm

We need a strong centre ground of consensus politicians who will bring the UK together. Corbyn IMHO is unelectable If the Tories get Johnson they are unelectable the liberals are to woosy for a lot of people me included but if a decent centre ground can be achieved be it by PR or a new alliance it has to be a goer or as a nation we will stagnate.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 7:54 pm

The interesting thing with PR is that Farage appears to be building a party of varying other views, but all pro Brexit. Today he has announced a marine as well as Claire Fox from the Moral Maze (leftie). He is determined for the Brexit party to be a broad church.

Clever guy.

I remain convinced that PR will be the end game from this farce, and that the Tories and Labour will never be solely in power again afterwards. The daft sods. They are playing into Farage's hands.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 8:01 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:For once you and I agree. The funny thing being that PR will not get you what you want though. It will keep people like Farage out of #10 because they'll never command a majority with it.

Yes because Nigel Farage has been close to forming a government for many years....

Seriously, if the best arguments people can come up for different electoral systems are "it could keep XX out" then it's a poor show.

Personally, I'd like to see a mix of first past the post and PR although it isn't a top priority at the moment, especially with Parliament failing to enact Brexit.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 8:04 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:The interesting thing with PR is that Farage appears to be building a party of varying other views, but all pro Brexit. Today he has announced a marine as well as Claire Fox from the Moral Maze (leftie). He is determined for the Brexit party to be a broad church.

Clever guy.

I remain convinced that PR will be the end game from this farce, and that the Tories and Labour will never be solely in power again afterwards. The daft sods. They are playing into Farage's hands.

What's that you say?

Nigel Farage's Brexit Party is solely concerned with enacting Brexit?

And it's recruiting the best possible candidates from across the political perspective?

How cunning!

How very cunning!

It's almost as if there was some kind of democratic mandate for Brexit, wouldn't you say?

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 8:28 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Can't see it

Would require common sense and agreement to break out in Parliament, and imagine having to make sure that more than just you own nodding donkeys agreed with you?

The Conservative and Labour quite like it the way it is, so it won't change.

Used to think PR was the way forward and in years to come probably will again, however I currently don't have the belief the majority of current MP's are capable of concensus.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 10:26 pm

Rowls wrote:Yes because Nigel Farage has been close to forming a government for many years....

Seriously, if the best arguments people can come up for different electoral systems are "it could keep XX out" then it's a poor show.

Personally, I'd like to see a mix of first past the post and PR although it isn't a top priority at the moment, especially with Parliament failing to enact Brexit.

A poll of the conservative party showed recently that their second favourite choice for PM was Nigel Farage.

That party is getting closer and closer to being captured by the far-right. That's probably the point of the Brexit Party. UKIP fulfilled its role of pushing the Tories enough to the right that they pandered to their voters in 2015. Now Farage needed a new party that the Tories will have to pander to to keep power, thus pushing them even further to the right for the next election.

I've seen this happen before. It's how the Tea Party turned the US Republican party into a far-right party in the aftermath of the 2010 elections.

You can't see it, but we are much closer to a far-right government than you think.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 10:56 pm

I’d like to know what Farage’s far right views are. I can recall a bad decision about a poster being behind him, but his actual views? His, not UKIPs. I’m not saying he doesn’t have them, I just don’t know.

Today former Communist Claire Fox, an ex nurse and a charity CEO have all been named as Brexit Party candidates.

There is a chance that Farage isn’t interested in left or right politics, but wants to structurally change politics instead. If so, he may catch a lot of people by surprise who expect these European elections to be a one off event.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:05 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:I’d like to know what Farage’s far right views are...

Brexit, obviously. To some people, the idea of wanting to leave an established political union of many nations in order to go independent, is de facto far right.

If you don't believe me, just look at the SNP.

But I think the two parties he has headed - "UK Independence Party" and "Brexit Party" - give pretty good clues in their names as to what they stand for.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:17 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:I’d like to know what Farage’s far right views are. I can recall a bad decision about a poster being behind him, but his actual views? His, not UKIPs. I’m not saying he doesn’t have them, I just don’t know.

Today former Communist Claire Fox, an ex nurse and a charity CEO have all been named as Brexit Party candidates.

There is a chance that Farage isn’t interested in left or right politics, but wants to structurally change politics instead. If so, he may catch a lot of people by surprise who expect these European elections to be a one off event.

Being anti-immigration, anti-refugee, anti-asylum is far-right. The Overton window has shifted to include these views recently, to give them an air of respectability, to give people who claim to hold them some weak defence against accusation of racism, xenophobia, cruelty, selfishness etc. but they're still extreme views.

People like Farage think we should enforce a religious test for refugees. Christian? Good. Muslim? Bad. That is far-right. https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/04 ... gel-farage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

People like Farage opposes rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean. That's pretty extreme. You know, just deliberately letting people die. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... iterranean" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Opposition to multiculturalism is pretty far-right since it implies opposition to the individual liberties that inevitably lead to people choosing the peaceful practice of whatever culture they like.
Arguing against immigration by talking about how some of them are diseased is pretty extreme. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32176826" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But really, the single biggest indicator that someone like Farage is an extremist is how they tell you to be afraid of foreigners.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:27 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:A poll of the conservative party showed recently that their second favourite choice for PM was Nigel Farage.

That party is getting closer and closer to being captured by the far-right. That's probably the point of the Brexit Party. UKIP fulfilled its role of pushing the Tories enough to the right that they pandered to their voters in 2015. Now Farage needed a new party that the Tories will have to pander to to keep power, thus pushing them even further to the right for the next election.

I've seen this happen before. It's how the Tea Party turned the US Republican party into a far-right party in the aftermath of the 2010 elections.

You can't see it, but we are much closer to a far-right government than you think.

There is only one mainstream UK political party which has been captured by the further end of its membership, turtle, and it ain't the Conservatives.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:07 am

Rowls wrote:

There is only one mainstream UK political party which has been captured by the further end of its membership, turtle, and it ain't the Conservatives.

One of the differences between you and I, (and there are a lot) is that i can tell the difference between someone on the right and someone on the extreme right. But you're incapable of seeing anything other than people on the left as extreme.You can't tell the difference between a leftie and a far leftie because everyone on the left is extreme from your point of view.

Prove me wrong. Identify a key difference.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:04 am

SussexDon1inIreland wrote:Problem is that our politicians have just ignored a referendum after saying that its OUR (the peoples) decision and they have ceded power over us to Brussels (it seems with approx half of the British people in favour of that decision!- I wonder how remainers would have taken what has happened had they won and their vote not delivered on!!) so we are now RULE TAKERS and a COLONY of the EU what voting system we have DOESNT MATTER as we have lost power over who governs us.

UTC

he doesn't post often, but when he does its a classic of the "batshit mental Brexiteer" genre.

atlantalad · Post by **atlantalad** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:38 am

Pstotto wrote:It won't make any difference, it's not about politics in this country, it's only about the Queen's horses.

No need to drag Humpty Dumpty into this, we've enough inept broken politicians sitting on the wall to chose from.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:44 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:he doesn't post often, but when he does its a classic of the "batshit mental Brexiteer" genre.

Nationalists are typically batshit mental.

Cryssys · Post by **Cryssys** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:08 pm

Rowls wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see a mix of first past the post and PR although it isn't a top priority at the moment, especially with Parliament failing to enact Brexit.

Not quite sure how you could combine the two but we do need a system that produces a HOC that is more representative of the way people voted. Any system that allows a party (be it Labour or Conservative) to form a government with less than 40% of the votes cast must be considered flawed, undemocratic and in need of change.

As someone pointed out earlier in this thread, how can it be right that a party receiving 25% of the vote only gets 23 out of 650 MPs?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:15 pm

Cryssys wrote:Not quite sure how you could combine the two ...

The usual way is to have a FPTP election by constituency but also to have a party list, so that underrepresented parties can "top up" their representation by nominating some of their people who couldn't get elected (or didn't try).

Cryssys · Post by **Cryssys** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:46 pm

dsr wrote:The usual way is to have a FPTP election by constituency but also to have a party list, so that underrepresented parties can "top up" their representation by nominating some of their people who couldn't get elected (or didn't try).

Thanks for that.

Based on a quick look it does seem a much better and fairer way of electing MP's. I have always been an advocate of PR and I can't see why we have put up with the FPTP system for so long. We need to move away from the adversarial politics we have now in which a Conservative government spends half its time in office trying to undo the changes the previous Labour government introduced (and vice versa).

Basically we need to focus on implementing policies for which there is a consensus in the HOC and in the country. PR works very well in the majority of democracies and there is no reason why it wouldn't here.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:59 pm

The London Assembly elections work on this basis. A little over half are elected for specific areas and the rest are general.

Cryssys · Post by **Cryssys** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 6:15 pm

aggi wrote:The London Assembly elections work on this basis. A little over half are elected for specific areas and the rest are general.

If we want people to believe that their vote counts then we need to move away from FPTP. Many people feel disenfranchised by FPTP and have stopped voting because of it.

Time to start campaigning for a more inclusive and representative system.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 6:19 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Being anti-immigration, anti-refugee, anti-asylum is far-right. The Overton window has shifted to include these views recently, to give them an air of respectability, to give people who claim to hold them some weak defence against accusation of racism, xenophobia, cruelty, selfishness etc. but they're still extreme views.

People like Farage think we should enforce a religious test for refugees. Christian? Good. Muslim? Bad. That is far-right. https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/04 ... gel-farage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

People like Farage opposes rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean. That's pretty extreme. You know, just deliberately letting people die. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... iterranean" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Opposition to multiculturalism is pretty far-right since it implies opposition to the individual liberties that inevitably lead to people choosing the peaceful practice of whatever culture they like.
Arguing against immigration by talking about how some of them are diseased is pretty extreme. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32176826" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But really, the single biggest indicator that someone like Farage is an extremist is how they tell you to be afraid of foreigners.

So, basically, Farage is far right because of his views on foreigners? Got it. I agree, I can’t think of anything else, and as leader of a party again he will no doubt have to expand on some of those views so we shall soon see if the Brexit party is far-right.

On the multiculturalism one, it is interesting that the Guardian on 16th Sept 2018 reported an ICM poll stating that 40% of people believe multiculturalism is bad for Britain. Presumably, by your above definition, that makes 40% of U.K. citizens far right?

Cirrus_Minor · Post by **Cirrus_Minor** » Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:23 pm

I have in principle been in favour of PR but there is a couple of problems with it that has put me off.

1. PR would not enable you vote in or out local representatives. So the party leadership would be first in line for MP. We would still have Clegg, Portillo and Balls with PR.
2. PR would more often than not result in weird and wonderful partnerships giving the leaders almost certain to be elected (from1) to make up the rules for government, bit like the ConDem debacle.

So not really for me.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:18 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:For once you and I agree. The funny thing being that PR will not get you what you want though. It will keep people like Farage out of #10 because they'll never command a majority with it.

I don't agree, because it actually lets extreme minorities, like Farage, BNP etc get a voice in parliament, instead of none.

That's why Europe is full of mini parties holding the biggest parties to ransom.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:25 am

IanMcL wrote:I don't agree, because it actually lets extreme minorities, like Farage, BNP etc get a voice in parliament, instead of none.

That's why Europe is full of mini parties holding the biggest parties to ransom.

But if 20% of people vote for an 'extreme' party shouldn't that party get 20% of the seats, no matter whether you, I, or anyone else, agrees with them.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:29 am

No! They are not actually representative if the people. Only a disparate collection of people, with a particular viewpoint, which not at all mainstream. They can stand for election and promote the views...and then disappear again.

Because of folk voting for Monster Raving Loony party candidates, across the country, they might get an MP. Is that really a good prospect?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:32 am

IanMcL wrote:No! They are not actually representative if the people. Only a disparate collection of people, with a particular viewpoint, which not at all mainstream. They can stand for election and promote the views...and then disappear again.

Because of folk voting for Monster Raving Loony party candidates, across the country, they might get an MP. Is that really a good prospect?

You just said to me:

IanMcL wrote:The very reason Scotland want rid. They rarely get a UK government of choice and suffer the consequences.

FPTP is why the SNP's voice is irrelevant.

But you also just said:

IanMcL wrote:I don't agree, because it actually lets extreme minorities, like Farage, BNP etc get a voice in parliament, instead of none.

That's why Europe is full of mini parties holding the biggest parties to ransom.

So which is it? Are smaller parties like the SNP able to hold others to ransom, or does the SNP want to leave the UK because it doesn't have a voice at all? It can't be both.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:35 am

IanMcL wrote:No! They are not actually representative if the people. Only a disparate collection of people, with a particular viewpoint, which not at all mainstream. They can stand for election and promote the views...and then disappear again.

Because of folk voting for Monster Raving Loony party candidates, across the country, they might get an MP. Is that really a good prospect?

If the other candidate was someone like Sturgeon or Ian Blackford then the monster raving loony party would seem a sensible choice

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:57 am

Imploding Turtle wrote: Are smaller parties like the SNP able to hold others to ransom, or does the SNP want to leave the UK because it doesn't have a voice at all? It can't be both.

SNP is a very large party in the country it stands. It is very relevant . It does not stand in England, Wales or Northern Ireland.
The current distribution of parties would be very different, under a proportional system. That is when, in other countries, where proprep has been in place for years, there is a collection of deals, with the minuscule, to achieve a government.

If there was one vote needed by the Tories and BNP or MRLP had a seat, they would do the deal and something bizarre or distasteful would surely happen.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:20 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:FPTP is why the SNP's voice is irrelevant.

The SNP got 3.0% of the vote at the last general election, but 5.4% of the seats.

In Scotland, they got 36.9% of the vote but 59.3% of the seats.

They do very well out of FPTP. If their voice is irrelevant, it's because they are a minority party in a small part of the UK; not because of the voting system.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:32 am

dsr wrote:The SNP got 3.0% of the vote at the last general election, but 5.4% of the seats.

In Scotland, they got 36.9% of the vote but 59.3% of the seats.

They do very well out of FPTP. If their voice is irrelevant, it's because they are a minority party in a small part of the UK; not because of the voting system.

Yes, the SNP have an outsized number of MPs because of FPTP and that's an example of one reason to get rid of FPTP. And another reason is that that outsized number of MPs is an irrelevant voice because of FPTP.

Those two are not mutually exclusive. You won't understand that, because you don't want to, but they're actually related phenomenons.

When one party has a majority of MPs then the minority is rendered irrelevant. When one party can have a majority of the MPs with a minority of the votes, then that means the majority who voted for another party is rendered equally irrelevant.

3.0% of seats that is sometimes needed to pass laws is more valuable than 5.4% of seats that is never needed.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:13 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Yes, the SNP have an outsized number of MPs because of FPTP and that's an example of one reason to get rid of FPTP. And another reason is that that outsized number of MPs is an irrelevant voice because of FPTP.

Those two are not mutually exclusive. You won't understand that, because you don't want to, but they're actually related phenomenons.

When one party has a majority of MPs then the minority is rendered irrelevant. When one party can have a majority of the MPs with a minority of the votes, then that means the majority who voted for another party is rendered equally irrelevant.

3.0% of seats that is sometimes needed to pass laws is more valuable than 5.4% of seats that is never needed.

One of these days you might learn that you can respond in a civil manner without having to have a dig. Why do you persistently have to be unpleasant? As a matter of choice, why is being rude considered preferable to being polite?

The problem with FPTP and PR is that minority parties don't get a fair influence either way. At present, both the DUP and the SNP have more seats than their vote share suggests they should, and the SNP is three times the size of the DUP either way, and the DUP has significant influence and the SNP has not. How would that be helped by PR? Wouldn't we get the same problem of some minority parties having zero influence while others get disproportionate influence? And, incidentally, the problem (like the Liberals in 2010) of some parties reneging on principles for the sake of power?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:42 pm

dsr wrote:One of these days you might learn that you can respond in a civil manner without having to have a dig. Why do you persistently have to be unpleasant? As a matter of choice, why is being rude considered preferable to being polite?

Yeah, i should probably be less of a **** to you.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:43 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Yeah, i should probably be less of a **** to you.

If you think it's only me that doesn't like you, think again.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:45 pm

dsr wrote:If you think it's only me that doesn't like you, think again.

I don't care that you don't like me.

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:44 pm

This should trigger a few !

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonMEP/status ... 0634989573" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:45 pm

AndyClaret wrote:This should trigger a few !

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonMEP/status ... 0634989573" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why? Are you triggered by liberals running for office and think that that's how everyone else must be when a white nationalist runs for office?

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 6:13 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Why? Are you triggered by liberals running for office and think that that's how everyone else must be when a white nationalist runs for office?

Caught one !

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 6:15 pm

AndyClaret wrote:Caught one !

*sigh* I don't think you know what triggered means.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:10 pm

Tommy Robinson standing might cost either the brexit party or UKIP a seat,depends how many votes he garners,but i recall in the 2014 European Elections,many of the lower placings and seats were closely fought.