2024 UK general election - Place to watch and discuss just how fucked we are

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Coccxys said:
He bowed to internal pressures and cries of muh racism so reinstated her just before the election. She is part of the ruling party, and has some back bench support from the race grifting wing of the Labour Party.
Click to expand...
Oh for fucks sake.

Just when I thought we were finally free of Corbyn's jizzrag the stupid cunt manages to squirm back in.

We are not so back, it's still so over.
 
BrainProlapse said:
Oh for fucks sake.

Just when I thought we were finally free of Corbyn's jizzrag the stupid cunt manages to squirm back in.

We are not so back, it's still so over.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he purged the party of the other braindead cobynites including corbyn (who won as an independent), but couldn't hold out against the race grift wing of the party when it came to queen negress.

I can't work out why the negress wing of the party hold her as some sacred idol of their movement, surely she's a terrible person to represent what a black woman Labour MP is, but she still somehow holds sway over them all.
 
Oliver Onions said:
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how Reform UK got more votes than the Lib Dems but only gained 4 seats compared to the Lib Dem's 59 new seats. Reform also got twice as many votes as the pozzed Greens but now have the same number of seats. That's bonkers.
Click to expand...
It reminds me a lot of Trump 2016, where the internet was full of lefties demanding the end of the electoral college.
 
Coccxys said:
I can't work out why the negress wing of the party hold her as some sacred idol of their movement, surely she's a terrible person to represent what a black woman Labour MP is, but she still somehow holds sway over them all.
Click to expand...
First black woman elected to parliament, longest serving black MP. She's practically a living relic to some people and the fact that she is openly racist, borderline brain dead and struggling to do basic maths or dress herself these days will do nothing to change the minds of those voting for her.
 
Judge Dredd said:
It reminds me a lot of Trump 2016, where the internet was full of lefties demanding the end of the electoral college.
Click to expand...
The electoral college makes way more sense to me, especially in a country like the US where population distribution is so wildly disparate.

I think you always need a system of proportional representation (otherwise London alone could render all of Scotland's vote moot), @Coccxys 's explanation helped it make more sense to me, it just looks really weird written down when a party can have twice the votes but gain the same number of seats as an opponent.
 
Oliver Onions said:
The electoral college makes way more sense to me, especially in a country like the US where population distribution is so wildly disparate.
Click to expand...
That's almost what we have, just instead of having states and scaling their number of electoral votes per population we draw 650 constituencies on the map with close enough to the same population in each and then each is winner take all.

That's why some constituencies in the North and Scotland are huge while in cetral London they're tiny in area.

One way a PR hybrid system could work would be grouping 10 or 20 constituencies together into a single voting area and have the 10/20 MPs selected by PR of the area.
 
Last edited:
Labour won, unfortunately it's that zionist jew cocksucker Starmer. Glad Corbyn won his seat.

Lotta cock sucking jew blairites in this thread.
 
CaptainAutism69 said:
so Labour get to do literally whatever they want for the next 5 years, when only 1 in 10 people in the UK voted for them. They are the 10%.
Click to expand...
It's worth it in the long-term. I'm sure like many here, I'm pretty much thinking the only way out is accelerationism.

Tories not dipping below 100 is the biggest disappointment, as that would have sent them right to the grave. But labour didn't actually win their seats by that much. And come 2029, that potentially leaves us in a good position to have them obliterated next after the Tories.

Especially if labour faces internal discourse as the remnants of the Corbynites cause internal discourse, being unhappy with Starmers more establishment labour.
 
Welsh Catgirl Enjoyer said:
It's worth it in the long-term. I'm sure like many here, I'm pretty much thinking the only way out is accelerationism.
Click to expand...
Exactly, we needed the conservatives to be decimated and Labour doing so was the only way that was going to happen.

I'm not too concerned given the biggest difference between the parties is the colour rosette they wear.

A huge Labour majority is actually far better for us than a slim one. A slim majority means they need to keep the crazies on side, a landslide means they can ignore them and suffer not problems. They essentially neutralised the fringes by getting a huge mainstream intake.

I just hope the right lessons are learnt by the Torys. If that happens I can suffer through 4/8 years of Labour.

Not like mass uncontrolled immigration, the NHS, or much else can get all that worse under Labour than it was when the Torys were failing to do anything meaningful about any of them.

CaptainAutism69 said:
when only 1 in 10 people in the UK voted for them. They are the 10%.
Click to expand...

I never get the cope of using the people who couldn't be assed to vote as some sort of gotcha. They didn't vote, that's on them and they get whatever everyone else decides for them.

Same with when everyone was claiming Leave got less than 50% of the population in the referendum so didn't count. It's meaningless because it assumes a hypothetical population who would have voted how you want if only they'd got off their settee and been bothered to vote.

The turnout points to the general mood of the country towards the politics occurring but it doesn't lessen the mandate of whoever wins based on votes actually cast.
 
Last edited:
Can someone remind me: even though the SNP got absolutely blown the fuck out by Scottish Labour, that doesn't actually affect the current state of Holyrood, right? Just the representation they have in Westminster?
 
Oliver Onions said:
Can someone remind me: even though the SNP got absolutely blown the fuck out by Scottish Labour, that doesn't actually affect the current state of Holyrood, right? Just the representation they have in Westminster?
Click to expand...
Yes, though it points to their probably decimation in the next Scottish election too.

The SNP are coping on this was a broad rejection of the conservatives not them and they'll be fine in scotland, but I seriously doubt that.

Though they do have 2 years to potentially turn it around as the next election isn't required until 2026 unless this is enough decimation to mean they get forced into it early.

This result is a collapse of the conservatives rather than a huge win of Labour. They have a similar vote share to their horrific 2019 and a lot less than the 2017 election they lost. Its just the conservative vote died. If the Torys can take the right lessons, choose a decent leader, and gain confidence again then it will likely be much closer next time.

ZomboDroid_05072024113006.jpg
 
Last edited:
Coccxys said:
A huge Labour majority is actually far better for us than a slim one. A slim majority means they need to keep the crazies on side, a landslide means they can ignore them and suffer not problems. They essentially neutralised the fringes by getting a huge mainstream intake.
Click to expand...
Large labour majority also means that they absolutely have no way of passing the buck if things fuck up in the next 5 years. They may initially try to go "oh we inherited this mess from the Tories", but that'll only be valid for about a year or so.

After that, it's on them.
 
Things can only get better (things will continue to not get better)
 
Overly Serious said:
What is the point of that? There are already regional councils that are supposed to handle local affairs. The role of an MP is to determine policy at the national level.

Having two houses is a good thing, but that is accomplished currently by the House of Lords.
Click to expand...
And how well is that working out for you? On a scale of 0-10?

Edit, Sorry, I meant Kebab-RapeGang.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom