Rishi Sunak and his government

I totally agree rigging the system is anti Democratic.




However the Unionist/Conservative/Tory (whatever they currently call themselves) party are the single most successful democratic party in all history, anywhere. This fact is worthy of more attention than the Labour Party seems to give it. 

Roughly since Disraeli organised them as a force to be reconned with, they have easily won the majority of elections.   I believe its because as general  elections come close they close ranks and get behind their leaders whatever they are promoting (and it tends to pull them to the centre no matter what their opponents call them).  The current batch of convict(ion  ) activists at the top of the party is an anomaly for them. 

One party being re-elected over and over is a terrible thing - no matter what party.

If I was into conspiracy theories I would be looking increasingly closely at the current narrative that I hear more and more.  "It doesn't matter who you vote for, they are all the same".  This seems to play into the hands of the rock solid Tory support as the uncommitted become apathetic.  Even if there is some truth in that, after all most politicians are human, we should recognise that the longer any party is in power the more corruption gets hold. If I were the slightest bit religious I'd be praying every day that the next elections gets rid of many of the failures that now crowd our government. It would actually do the Tory party good to get a spanking and that would be excellent news for Democracy.

I too favour PR but I'm not holding my breath. I presume Labour have conducted private research which doesn't show it as a clear vote winner. I do know one lifelong party member who has at times been close to the then leadership. He too favours PR but says whenever it is discussed at senior level within the party they all believe they can win a clear majority under the current system. Unless the Scottish Nationalist continue to implode in Labours favour, that seems unlikely to me.  Sad because amongst other things a hung parliament it won't get rid of enough of the (Eton educated) bad apples.

The point is not to create a system solely designed to wipe out any one party. That is denying democracy.

Changes in governing party always happen. The desire for a new approach eventually brings about a natural result. And we have a peaceful transition of power based on those 'change' elections.

Seeking to then embed that result by changing the electoral system to try to lock any party out of office is quite simply wrong.

We had a referendum on changing the voting system as part of the 2010 Coalition agreement. That vote was lost.

Just as it is right to rule out another Scottish referendum for a generation, the same applies to voting system changes to my mind. (And a once in a generation vote is what the SNP campaigned at the time of that referendum, so am only holding to their view at that time)

Conservative Party done their very best to wipe themselves out by being so nasty

I agree with all of that but not made the mistake and how a new democracy would see changes in voting. I'm a prime candidate myself. Never lived anywhere that the Tory candidate hasn't got a majority of >18k (apart from the Blair boom 1997 when it was 8k) so my vote would 'count' for the first time. At this moment I don't want to vote for any of the major parties so in a change of voting system I may actually put an x in the box.

Not too sure why you are including a Corbyn lead group and not some nasty Tories after the damage they have done to the country. But still, do you have any sway with ten per cent of MP's? 

We was having this conversation today also. I was arguing that people are capable of thinking about two things at one time and know how bad this nasty government have been despite the behaviour of Schofield being in the news

I hope i am not mimamising the Schofield case. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the enquiry and if any arrests are made.

I like the Coldwarsteve image, its satirical elements - who decides and why which story gets the front page.

I agree with you until the last question. It seems to me that the papers making the biggest fuss about Schofield are Tory leaning. The more they focus on trivial matters like Schofield, royals, and other minor celebrities, the less the public pays attention to yet another instance of Johnson acting inappropriately, let alone the fact that the government seems to be run by people using a platform famous for the fact that messages were originally supposed to disappear after a limited amount of time. Why are government communications even legally allowed to take place on non-government platforms?

Imagine if you voted for him?

I wonder if TalkTV or GB News are going to sign him up?

‘he's a most notable coward, an infinite and endless liar, an hourly promise-breaker, the owner of no one good quality worthy your lordship's entertainment…’

All's Well That Ends Well, Act III, Scene VI

A coward to the end, he knows he'd lose any recall election so he gets out now rather than get chucked out.

Then puts out a statement full of lies and conspiracies when the truth is so obvious. Very Trumpian. Now trying to damage his successors, the ones that had to try and clear up after his inadequate Brexit settlement.

Hopefully that's the end of him given the way he has sacrificed the good of the country to his own personal ambition and corrupted the entire political system.