The next Conservative Leader thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have a government in charge which only 28% of the country voted for

Of the people who voted there was a majority. Of the people who didn't, or more likely couldn't be bothered to vote, they were by definition happy to allow the rest of the country to decide on their behalf. Therefore a majority of the country did vote for the government.
 
Of the people who voted there was a majority. Of the people who didn't, or more likely couldn't be bothered to vote, they were by definition happy to allow the rest of the country to decide on their behalf. Therefore a majority of the country did vote for the government.

The Conservatives won 36.9% of the popular vote at the last general election. Nowhere near a majority, even out of those that voted.

However, this translated to a clear majority of seats under FPTP.
 
The Conservatives won 36.9% of the popular vote at the last general election. Nowhere near a majority, even out of those that voted.

However, this translated to a clear majority of seats under FPTP.

Yes because we vote for who governs and speaks for the particularly area we live in which i think is a good thing.
 
Well he completed the Conservative leadership process and won after the membership voted, which is at least a little more complete than everyone else withdrawing before the membership gets a vote.

Shes been elected by 165 out of 310 odd MPs, which I grant is a majority but its hardly the most upstanding version of democracy is it?

When we voted in the last two elections we knew that if the Conservatives got in then David Cameron would become PM and so if we did not think he was suitable for the job we could decide not to vote for the Conservatives. Therefore, he was elected by us indirectly.

Now, however, we have no choice with regard to Theresa May and had no knowledge that she would become PM when we voted in the last election, that is the crucial difference and is why I agree with you.
 
Last edited:
When we voted in the last two elections we knew that if the Conservatives got in then David Cameron would become PM and so if we did not think he was suitable for the job we could decide not to vote for the Conservatives. Therefore, he was elected by us indirectly.

Now, however, we have no choice with regard to Theresa May and had no knowledge that she would become PM when we voted in the last election, that is the crucial difference and is why I agree with you.

So there should be a GE every time we need a new PM?
 
So there should be a GE every time we need a new PM?

I suppose that this would have saved us from Gordon Brown, so maybe it would be a good thing;). Joking aside, I'm not sure what we should do in this event, I haven't thought that far ahead yet. I responded to make clear why I feel that our current arrangement is not very democratic.
 
Almost choked when I read this article

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36760953

How are the Tories going to remove 40 years of legislation to achieve this aim?
Workers on boards? Funnily enough it was the British that did this for Germany, post war, but refused to do it in Britain. Never happen, the lobby groups will be all over the Tories if they even think about actually going to do it.
 
Mrs May is saying all the right things, so long as she avoid messing up the economy we can hopefully those Bolshevik loonies in Labour out of power for another 10 to 14 years.
 
It's like leavers have conveniently forgotten that they get to vote in the MEPs that make EU law.

MEPs get to vote on and amend the laws not make them. However, in my view this is just a technicality and a position of equivalent power and is the only way to make a union of many countries work in any way effectively so that national interests and bickering do not influence the law-making process.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom