Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not necessarily. If the Big Three are all tied or near tied with each other after the polls close, which is looking more and more likely, then the smaller parties will be chased after to form coalitions.
Which was the case in 1974 when Jeremy Thorpe had talks with Edward Heath.
Since 1945 British politics have changed a lot. It was just Labour and Conservative right up to the mid 1970s when there was a Liberal revival. Then the Liberals joined up with the "gang of 4" (led by Dr. Death ) to form the Lib-Dems. In the meantime, the nationalists became a serious force in Scotland and Wales. This coincided with the Conservatives effectively being extinguished as a serious force in Scotland (they have just 1 seat). In Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein has taken over from the SDLP as the focus of Republican support; in the past, the SDLP could usually be relied upon to support Labour.
The 1990s has seen much more political volatility with the rise of parties like UKIP, BNP, Respect, etc.. And they are attracting votes. One effect of this in a "first past the post" system is that both Labour and Conservatives have been able to command huge majorities and, yet, have failed to win a majority of the popular vote. The downside for all the major parties is that a small swing in any direction can produce a disproportionate impact in the number of seats won.
Thus, in 2005, Labour got 35.3% of the vote and the Conservatives 32.3% (a 3% difference) yet Labour got 356 seats to the Conservative 198. In these circumstances, a small party attracting just 2% or 3% of the vote can badly damage a larger party if it is attracting votes mainly from that party. This is especially the case if those votes are geographically focused as is the case with the SNP and Plaid Cymru and is likely to be the case with the BNP.
Which was the case in 1974 when Jeremy Thorpe had talks with Edward Heath.
Since 1945 British politics have changed a lot. It was just Labour and Conservative right up to the mid 1970s when there was a Liberal revival. Then the Liberals joined up with the "gang of 4" (led by Dr. Death ) to form the Lib-Dems. In the meantime, the nationalists became a serious force in Scotland and Wales. This coincided with the Conservatives effectively being extinguished as a serious force in Scotland (they have just 1 seat). In Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein has taken over from the SDLP as the focus of Republican support; in the past, the SDLP could usually be relied upon to support Labour.
The 1990s has seen much more political volatility with the rise of parties like UKIP, BNP, Respect, etc.. And they are attracting votes. One effect of this in a "first past the post" system is that both Labour and Conservatives have been able to command huge majorities and, yet, have failed to win a majority of the popular vote. The downside for all the major parties is that a small swing in any direction can produce a disproportionate impact in the number of seats won.
Thus, in 2005, Labour got 35.3% of the vote and the Conservatives 32.3% (a 3% difference) yet Labour got 356 seats to the Conservative 198. In these circumstances, a small party attracting just 2% or 3% of the vote can badly damage a larger party if it is attracting votes mainly from that party. This is especially the case if those votes are geographically focused as is the case with the SNP and Plaid Cymru and is likely to be the case with the BNP.
I'd like to add that the current FPTP projections...if the Lib Dem support holds...is exceptionally difficult to predict, and the previously used nationwide swing map might not work... i.e., where is the LD support coming from? Is it spread nationwide? Is it in hard LD districts? Is it focused in LD/Labour areas? Is it focused in LD/Con areas? This is what we must know before we can get to a final conclusion.
Ok, I read the SNP's plans for Scottish independence.
They are, as you would expect, suitably vague, to allow some wiggle room.
The only real points of note are that they plan to retain membership of the EU, and to hold a referendum on joining the Euro.
As i suspected, they want to take taxes from oil and gas, but apparently want to "negotiate" with the companies.
All it's done is strengthen my scepticism about the whole deal, unless there are some details they're keeping up their sleeves.
If they can pull it off, then, great, I'm all for it, but I still can't see how they can achieve it.
Ok, I read the SNP's plans for Scottish independence.
They are, as you would expect, suitably vague, to allow some wiggle room.
The only real points of note are that they plan to retain membership of the EU, and to hold a referendum on joining the Euro.
As i suspected, they want to take taxes from oil and gas, but apparently want to "negotiate" with the companies.
All it's done is strengthen my scepticism about the whole deal, unless there are some details they're keeping up their sleeves.
If they can pull it off, then, great, I'm all for it, but I still can't see how they can achieve it.
And that is a major problem with the SNP for me. There are a huge number of details that affect Scots living both inside Scotland, elsewhere in the UK as well as overseas. There are details that affect Scots working for the UK government, in the armed forces, the diplomatic service, international organisations and in other EU countries.There are financial details that will affect Scots taxpayers. There are details about the ownership of physical property, etc. etc..
One of the big problems with the whole debate over independence is that there is too much misty eyed romanticism and to little hard-nosed, detailed planning. The failure by the SNP to start laying out the reality of an independence settlement detracts from their credibility. We know what the status quo is. Why would we vote for some nebulous future where nothing is guaranteed?
I am not a UK citizen,but as a EU citizen ,I could be after 5 years stay in London,for example...
So,I am interested in UK politics...
Would be glad to hear what you think.. You are a citizen of the world after all. It's a different story when people here want to voice their opinions on American politics of course...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) to form the Lib-Dems. In the meantime, the nationalists became a serious force in Scotland and Wales. This coincided with the Conservatives effectively being extinguished as a serious force in Scotland (they have just 1 seat). In Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein has taken over from the SDLP as the focus of Republican support; in the past, the SDLP could usually be relied upon to support Labour.
