Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

64% of the UK did not want David Cameron as priminister Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dylann)
    The majorities before the war were when there were very few other parties so voters had little option, so obviously vote majorities were more common.

    You cannot count the 2010 vote as a majority for David Cameron when the other votes were for Nick Clegg, who was deputy. The thread was referring to votes for the prime minister, not for the government, and we are using the assumption OP meant that: vote for the party = vote for the prime minister.
    Well I'm just providing more information. And we all know that Supreme Leader David Cameron got only 35,201 votes, or 0.1% of the votes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    e.g. they want to end discrimination laws, believe that anthropogenic climate change is unproven, want to leave the EU.
    None of that is extreme, its called a different point of view.

    (Original post by Onde)
    huge economic cost to the UK, and have a disproportionate number of xenophobic and homophobic members and former members.
    False unproven trash accusations, UKIP has plenty of gay and minorities in the party.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    Plenty would mean proportionately more than the general population, rather than less.
    40 of their candidates in the election were ethnic minorities, I'm sure thats around the same or more than the current amount in Westminister.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)


    The tories only obtained 1/3rd of the popular vote, that means it'll be a hostile 5 years for them, though your ally rupert murdoch will make sure he tends to that.
    Did you protest when he was Labours' ally? Or when Labour introduced fees and then proceeded to triple them? You are crying crocodile tears, you are alarmed at the result, although if it was a Labour win, you wouldn't dare make such a stupid thread like this. You are fooling no-one.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    Can you produce figures for council elections?
    I don't particularly care.
    Are you going to admit they aren't a racist party like the Greens, or will you continue with your liberal smear tactics?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dylann)
    What a stupid thread. In Labour's 1997 landslide victory, Blair only got 43.2% of the popular vote, and by your logic that means 56.8% of the UK didn't want him as PM. The same has happened in every general election - the prime minister has never had a majority share of the popular vote.

    :rolleyes:
    This. All I've seen is people spitting their dummies out at the outcome of this election, when if it were the other way around with Labour having 36% of the vote we would be hearing none of this. More people wanted Cameron as Prime Minister than anyone else, what is the problem? If 64% of people voted for Ed Milliband/Labour and only Ed Milliband/Labour instead I could understand the uproar, but this is ridiculous. No other single leader gained more support from one group of people, end of.

    (Original post by meenu89)
    Did you protest when he was Labours' ally? Or when Labour introduced fees and then proceeded to triple them? You are crying crocodile tears, you are alarmed at the result, although if it was a Labour win, you wouldn't dare make such a stupid thread like this. You are fooling no-one.
    Left wing hypocrites who can't stand losing. :facepalm:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    e.g. they want to end discrimination laws, believe that anthropogenic climate change is unproven, want to leave the EU even if it has an huge economic cost to the UK, and have a disproportionate number of xenophobic and homophobic members and former members.
    Thing is, those are elements old Labour used to have. The immigration/race bit first changed when they invited the Windrush generation in to help us rebuild after the war and the rest is history. Labour were still so isolationist ("xenophobic") even in the 1970s they wanted to stay out of the EU.

    Labour detached themselves from the unions and from the needs of the native worker and became about metropolitanism, multiculturalism, capital, the middle classes and social and sexual liberation, with their social conscience transferring onto identity politics groups.Hence why working-class areas that voted Labour in mid-century are now (or are now increasingly) UKIP.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    I didn't say they were a racist party. I said that Farage wanted to get rid of discrimination laws and take us back to the days of "No dogs. No blacks. No Irish.", and that UKIP had a disproportionate number of members and ex-members who are xenophobic.

    In addition, they are the only party who has to have an explicit ban on former BNP members joining, while still having former BNP and National Front members in the party. This did not stop them getting endorsements from Britain First however. Farage also has a questionable past in regards singing Hitler Youth songs and saying things like "We will never win the n*gger vote. The n*g-n*gs will never vote for us".
    Farage's words were discrimination in favour of British workers to immigrants if employers wanted to, not on race.The rest of that post is just false scaremongering and liberal smears, and unless you can facually prove every statement I'm reporting it for misinformation and falsely accusing over 3 million people of being racists and xenophobic.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by meenu89)
    Did you protest when he was Labours' ally? Or when Labour introduced fees and then proceeded to triple them? You are crying crocodile tears, you are alarmed at the result, although if it was a Labour win, you wouldn't dare make such a stupid thread like this. You are fooling no-one.
    This, we're not easily fooled by socialism!!

    But who cares, what can they do? Tory majority for the wins!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Dude, I get where you're coming from and agree with what you're saying. Our system is not as democratic as it could be. There's countless ways to improve it, replacing FPTP is only a start. It's not right that the country can be governed by anyone without a substantial majority of the populations support.

    HOWEVER.

    What are you going to do about it? Not trying to be passive aggressive, it's a genuine question. One I've been asking myself for the past few years. Parliament isn't going to change because people mumble about how silly it is. If you want things to change, you have to take action. A silent protest is no protest. Grab a banner and take to the streets if you feel strongly enough. Organise a massive strike to take to the streets and just cause them nothing but trouble until you're heard.

    Basically, what I'm saying is that to change a system as large as this, you can't just complain on TSR. You have to take direct action, organise a following and act in a way that can't be ignored. The most effective methods will probably get you thrown in jail or left starving on the streets without a job, but if you don't feel strongly enough to take that risk then you should really ask yourself if you're really that bothered.

    *awaits hate*
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by felamaslen)
    In which election has more than 50% of the electorate supported the winning party?
    in North Korea the winner invariably gets well over 99% of the votes
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I wanted Labour to win they won in my area though so I suppose my vote had some influence
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    in North Korea the winner invariably gets well over 99% of the votes
    There is no winner in North Korea. Only millions of losers.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manchester United)
    I didn't hear all the complaints before the election.

    That's the result, deal with it.
    Yes there were a lot of complaints about our political system before the election, coming from the Conservatives....how unfair would it have been if the SNP had held the balance of power and put Ed Miliband in to Number 10.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    I think there are various problems with this. There is quite a strong disconnect between the number of votes a party gets and their number of seats under FPTP currently. We also do not choose our Prime Minister, even though they have great executive power. We very rarely get asked directly to vote on important issues: we have to go with a whole party's manifesto or we can lump it altogether.

    The voteforpolicies website (not going to be representive of the public as on the internet) also shows that people can favour lots of different policies from different parties, and yet if they are only choosing a party on one or two factors (albeit very important ones) e.g. a party's perceived competence in handling the economy", it means that the changes that the electorate want made are only taken up very slowly. Of course if you are in a seat where your vote counts for little, saying that "if the Tories can get a majority on 36% of the vote and you are unhappy with that, then you'll have to put up with it" is especially grating. People will wonder why Scotland can have its own parliament and increased control over their own affairs and budgets while an area like South Yorkshire has to continuing putting up with a central Tory government.
    There is no doubt that FPTP discourages people from taking part in the voting process due to wasted votes, which is unfortunate. But with the alternatives how will we ever have a stable government? If we look at FPTP in terms of constituencies then it seems fair. The most people in a particular area want a certain representative from a certain party to represent them. While most of these don't get 50 per cent of the vote anyway, they're still the candidate who most people in that area would choose over anyone else.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)
    Yes there were a lot of complaints about our political system before the election, coming from the Conservatives....how unfair would it have been if the SNP had held the balance of power and put Ed Miliband in to Number 10.
    No there weren't.

    Too many butt-hurt left-wing people complaining about the system.

    Deal with it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    I don't feel the need to defend Labour many decades ago ; if it's wrong, it's wrong.
    I know, but that's why the same sorts of people are voting UKIP.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    Farage was asked "In Ukip-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?".

    He said "No".
    Asked about his comments on LBC, he said: “What I said is this: that if a British employer in small business wants to employ a British person over somebody from Poland they should be able to do that without fear that they contravene discrimination laws. That’s all I have said."
    You also said;
    - UKIP had a disproportionate number of members and ex-members who are xenophobic. Factually incorrect, they believe in a different immigration system based skills rather than being European.
    - having former BNP and National Front members in the party. (their policy is to ban anyone who was EVER a part of these) Factually incorrect
    - Farage also has a questionable past in regards singing Hitler Youth songs and saying things like "We will never win the n*gger vote. The n*g-n*gs will never vote for us". Accused of singing a Hitler song when he was a schoolboy in the 70s? Weak stuff.

    I'm reporting you, if you want to discuss UKIP policy thats fine, but I'm not accepting these factually incorrect statements people make up that UKIP is an extreme or racist party just because you dislike them. People are finished with it, get a new line.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    This is what he said later to cover his ass after he realised he had let the cat out of the bag. This time he didn't try to blame it on painkillers or being tired and emotional.

    The sources happen to be the founder of UKIP, as well as a teacher.
    The founder of UKIP has a personal grudge against the party because of internal politics, I don't think his opinion means much, he has trashed Douglas Carswell, all sorts of thing, he gives off the vibe of a very bitter man looking for attention.
    Its really a nothing story, anyone can run a smear and claim so and so did something as a young lad, even if he did sing a Hitler song once, who cares? Have you never done politically incorrect things as a boy? This is really, really weak stuff if your best evidence for UKIP being a racist party is based on their leadier singing a song as a child, just admit you're wrong and keep quiet about things you don't know.
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    So much on this thread is regurgitated Facebook and Guardian Have Your Say comments.

    Never did did I think Whigs could be so venomous.
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply
Updated: May 22, 2015
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
How are you feeling about your A-level results?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.