Been catching up on the backlog of e-mails on electoral reform but am rather
dissappointed at how timid the proposals are.
I mean in this post-modern, post-industrial, globalised, we're all in it
together society is it really right and proper that some knuckle-dragging
Milwall supporter
On 02/05/2011 15:44, Graham White wrote:
Been catching up on the backlog of e-mails on electoral reform but am rather
dissappointed at how timid the proposals are.
I mean in this post-modern, post-industrial, globalised, we're all in it together society is it really right and proper that
Like your thinking Graham but should have taken your ideas to their logical
conclusion. You would then have seen that your basic premise is almost
Leveller and they are a downright Socialist grab at redistribution.
No - we can't take the money that has been hard-earned over many
generations, even
Which one, or both? QPR I could see, but would not have thought Norwich would
have done this well.
From: barbaravi...@gmail.com barbaravi...@gmail.com
To: leedslist@gn.apc.org
Sent: Monday, May 2, 2011 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [LU] Non-LU AV
On 02/05/2011 15:57
On 02/05/2011 17:39, Nicholas Armit wrote:
Which one, or both? QPR I could see, but would not have thought Norwich
would have done this well.
Rog had one I had the other
Betty
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
On 02/05/2011 16:21, barbaravi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/05/2011 15:57, Sean Emmott wrote:
=
Or, link the number of votes you get to the amount of tax you paid in
the previous year. Get all your money put in an off shore company based
in the British Virgin
Bollox.
Name 1 libdem who isn't for it.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Cundell [mailto:p...@cundell.com]
Sent: 29 April 2011 08:38
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: leedslist
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
On 29 Apr 2011, at 08:12, Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
The fact
all the votes as you do
now, and then if no one gets 50% you count some more votes?
-Original Message-
From: Paul Cundell [mailto:p...@cundell.com]
Sent: 29 April 2011 08:38
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: leedslist
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
Here is my view on it all;
1. It is more
On 30/04/2011 07:54, Mark Humphries wrote:
All teams will vote for themselves, we'd have by far the most votes,
but we wouldn't get more than 50% of the votes cast.
Just here in Scotland I find more people consider Leeds their second
team than any other. It has been a constant source of joy
On 30/04/2011 07:34, Mark Humphries wrote:
How can it NOT cost more, you count all the votes as you do
now, and then if no one gets 50% you count some more votes?
Mark have you ever been to an election count?
Every vote HAS to be counted. You can't come to a decision without that
whatever
Mark, you're funny, you never cease to make statements of fact with little or
no proof whilst completely avoiding the real crux of any argument you haven't a
chance of winning.
Here's some 'facts' for you: -
1 You won't vote for AV because the LibDems want it, regardless of how flawed
the
@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
On 30/04/2011 07:34, Mark Humphries wrote:
How can it NOT cost more, you count all the votes as you do now, and
then if no one gets 50% you count some more votes?
Mark have you ever been to an election count?
Every vote HAS to be counted. You can't come
I actually found this interesting from the Electoral Commission's
reports on pilots it has carried out on voting in 2007. It strikes me
that for anyone to comment on the issue rather than using a broad
brush approach they need to have a very clear understanding of ALL the
issues rather than
: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Simon Hart
Sent: 29 April 2011 00:21
To: 'Damian Walsh'; 'leedslist'
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
It appears all the politicians are against it, which tells me it must be a
good thing.
Si.
-Original Message-
From
On 29 Apr 2011, at 08:12, Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
The fact all libdems are for it should tell you more.
In your words - bollox - it's cross party in both camps
Here is my view on it all;
1. It is more complicated, therefore will be more expensive to
snip
I don't want my MP spending half his term going round trying to woo
concessions out of voters, I want them to be representing me in parliament.
snip
But in the current system your MP does not represent you, even if you voted
for him/her. The MP represents and, unless he/she is an
Also, relies on everyone actually giving a second preference. If you
don't want the Lib Dem candidate then don't give a 2nd preference.
On 29 April 2011 09:22, Ed Morrish edmorr...@gmail.com wrote:
Mark,
I think your point about the Lib Dem who wins on 2% of the vote raises an
interesting
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Moran
Sent: 29 April 2011 09:26
To: e...@morrish.org
Cc: leedslist; Simon Hart
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
Also, relies on everyone actually giving a second preference. If you don't
want
[mailto:leedslist-
boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Moran
Sent: 29 April 2011 09:26
To: e...@morrish.org
Cc: leedslist; Simon Hart
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
Also, relies on everyone actually giving a second preference. If you
don't
want the Lib Dem candidate then don't give a 2nd preference
I'm trying to work out what your angle is given you've picked just about the
one issue that has always (post-war) been a free vote :0
Damian
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Steve Gillen steve.gil...@ntlworld.comwrote:
... So, if for instance the voters of Leeds were deeply in
support of
And I thought that Bagehot was incapable of spinning anymore in his grave ;)
What's wrong with getting rid of the partys instead as we live in a
post-ideologic world nowadays (don't we? )
Damian
This is a local representative for local people ;)
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Tim Leslie
Looked up Bagehot in wiki.
I still don't follow your Bon mot.
As this is a rivetingly boring day ( sat with a dozing nigh on ninety Year old
mother watching the wedding. For this I came to the UK ?) please be kind and
explain yourself. Anything to stop me from topping myself in despair.
Yeah I realised that after I wrote it, but too late then... The point is
the same though
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Damian Walsh
Sent: 29 April 2011 12:58
To: leedslist
Subject: Re: [LU] non LU AV
I'm trying
To try and tie the thread back together again - given that our politics have
followed a traditional Buck house govt. v Carlton house opposition since the
Hannovarians took us over (Symbiosis or Parasitism depending on yr POV ;))
are we entering into a world analogous to the dotage of Georg III
On 28/04/2011 23:25, Damian Walsh wrote:
I know that the list was neutered a long time ago
Opre Roma!
I say!
Betty
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
To unsubscribe, email
What the f...
Do explain. Please.
Opre Roma as a non-governmental organization was set up by the Roma (Gypsy)
residents of the Domokos Marton Kert settlement in Debrecen (eastern Hungary)
The NGO aims at the improvement of the health and life of its members and Roma
people in general.
I know that the list was neutered a long time ago and LPC sensibilities
means we can only openly discuss RW's will he _ wont he homoerotic love-in
with our Argy striker. But I actually enjoyed those heady days when the list
was just like a conversation in a pub and we could opinionate to our
23:25
To: leedslist
Subject: [LU] non LU AV
I know that the list was neutered a long time ago and LPC sensibilities
means we can only openly discuss RW's will he _ wont he homoerotic love-in
with our Argy striker. But I actually enjoyed those heady days when the list
was just like a conversation
It appears all the politicians are against it, which tells me it must be a
good thing.
Si.
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Damian Walsh
Sent: 28 April 2011 23:25
To: leedslist
Subject: [LU] non LU AV
I know
29 matches
Mail list logo
