I think I have read that he doesn’t drink alcohol. but some of his outpourings are quite a bit crazy.
I actually quite like Galloway, in spite of his fondness for Islam. And Farage, for that matter, in spite of his economics. If you could put together Galloway’s economic and foreign policy with Farage’s stance on the EU and immigration, you’d have a perfect candidate.
Paging Dr. Frankenstein…
Looking at that graph it would seem that many Lib Dems defected to Labour in the first eight or so months of the coalition. This coupled with the rise of UKIP, which was though likely to appeal to people who would normally vote Conservative would have suggested a clear Labour victory, taking it as a given that despite the pre election rhetoric the SNP would have formed a coalition with Labour if required.
It was obviously much more complex than that.
A perfect candidate for what?
It’s very clearly stated as opposition to the policy of austerity. If you can’t read the placards I can’t help you.
Opposition as spelled out by Nobel winning Paul Klugman:
All of the above is correct.
It’s worth noting, despite the SNP, Labour’s vote increased at this election by 1.5%
“Tories Out” is clearly opposition to austerity? I guess I certainly can’t read them the same way you do…
It seems not. Which explains quite a lot.
The election results, if there’d been proportional voting: http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/heres-how-the-election-results-would-look-under-a-proportional-voting-system--gJenQmaW2gW?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100
For me to vote for. If I was an UK subject.
I suspect under PR we’d still be under a Tory government right now. But it would be buttressed by UKIP MPs, and possibly DUP and UUP as well.
I am not sure that’s necessarily better!
In the interest of fighting ignorance, it is incorrect to refer to the citizens of the UK as UK or British Subjects. That is an outdated title which now refers to a very small, select group of people. The term you are looking for is “British Citizen”.
You can’t just transfer the votes across from a FPTP election to a PR election and say nothing changes. Under PR there’s absolutely no reason to vote tactically, for a start, and small parties are no longer “wasted votes”.
This is entirely opposition to policies. Or did you miss the fact that the Conservatives started announced massive cuts to disability benefits mere hours after the election result (an announcement they steadfastly refused to make before the election)? Or that they’re considering increasing the disastrous “bedroom tax”, scrapping statutory maternity pay, and making fitness-to-work tests even more draconian (because that was working so well in the past)?
It’s only going to get worse.
I’m rather late to the thought that TFTP - at least in the UK - is a very nuanced and subtle system.
As in 2010, tactical voting seemed very powerful, allowing not just regional variations but even single seats to contribute to a national result the majority could live with.
The 2010 result is the classic for me - the public trusted neither Gordon Brown or the Tories, but preferred a constrained Tory ideology in those particular circs.
This time has been so interestingly varied; Labour gaining in London and losing in the Midlands, Tories gaining outside London, the non-Metro population showing emphatic concern for EU immigration and SNP influence … etc.
It looks like very readable messages to me.
TFTP? FPTP?
On a tangent, someone did an overlay of the electoral map with where the coalfields historically were. It looks like there’s still a strong Labour voter base in those constituencies.
FPTP - sorry, pretty sure I am a bit dyslexic.
Those are pretty much urban centres though. A similar map will show the Labour voters leave the lights on at night. It’s less to do with a core working class culture bringing the Labour vote and more to do with the greater diversity of cities vs affluent, older “middle England” in the shires.