Comments

Utter tedium — 12 Comments

  1. What? You jest. The Brexit party stomped all over everybody else! I suspect the Irish MSM are even more bent than the U.K. Or European M.S.M and that’s saying something.

    Mind you I don’t follow any of the so called professional European news outlets so I tend to get a far more accurate political analysis. At least by the number of times their estimations are proved correct over the long term.

    • But the Brexit Party got less than half the votes therefore the majority are pro-EU.  Simple logic [if you're simple].

      • It is reported that the UK political establishment has come to the conclusion that the UK electorate is "not fit for purpose" and so will create a replacement.

      • "The candidate least likely to win."

        I don't know what strange parties you get appearing from time to time on your side of the border?  In the 80's and early 90's we got some really far out and freaky do-gooder ones.  I will always remember the Natural Law Party, which, like your tactic of voting for the losers I used to vote for.  They were guaranteed to lose their deposit on every poll.  It always made more sense to me to vote this way because the alternatives were raving right wing unionists who locked up the kids playgrounds every Sunday and still wanted to stone disbelievers, or ex terrorists who would probably stone you if you didn't appreciate the gentle art of Hurling.

        The Natural Law Party were something to do with the Krishna's (if I remember correctly)?  One of their chief policies was to send an 'army' of 200 yogic fliers to any of the worlds trouble spots (of which we here in the North must have been high on the list).  When these 200 loonies started their bouncing and chanting, the troubles would apparently stop immediately.  The only way that I can see this mob stopping any fighting is if the combatants were so puzzled by the weirdos in orange robes bouncing on their knees that they laughed so much they were incapable of proceeding with the conflict.   Still, it makes more sense that UK politics at the moment. 😉

        • We could do with a few more Monster Raving Loony parties all right.  Anything to break the tedium of the established mob.

  2. Rather than ‘the candidate least likely to win’, there’s a better logic in voting for ‘the candidate most likely to finish second’.

    That way, you reduce the winner’s majority, thus keeping the winner focused on their constituents in order to get elected next time around. Winners with big majorities are rarely good representatives as they know they don’t need to try, so by keeping the majority low, you keep them more under your control.

    • The vagaries of the PR system means that you have to be quite careful how you vote.  Voting for the second most likely will just give him [or her] a better chance of getting in.  Voting for the least likely means your second preference will just come into play, so the trick is to try to get your vote counted as often as possible as they work through your preferences and to be eliminated before you reach the dangerous territory of actually voting someone in on the seventh or eighth count.

  3. So now it's a "Climate Catastrophe" is it? First it was "Global Warming" then it was "Climate Change" (didn't offend the senses of certain top government officials as much as "Global Warming" did…or so I heard) and now "Climate Catastrophe". Didn't know it had been upgraded.

    What's next I wonder? "Catastrophic Global Climate Change Apocalypse"?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting