next British PM

[mint]

Are you happy with the next Prime Minister being chosen by a contituency of 150000 ish people?

[Kong]

Not happy, but given the rabble to choose from it doesn't make much difference. It will make the 150k blue rinses feel important. The process of selection makes a mockery of democracy. Something slightly more acceptable might come with a GE after bexsh1t. Meanwhile we can despair at the slow downward slide.....

[NormanH]

[IMG]http://i67.tinypic.com/2a8kdwz.jpg[/IMG]

[img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img][img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img][img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img][img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img][img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img][img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img][img]https://imgur.com/UJSX30d[/img]

[nomoss]

Looking at the rogues' gallery of pictures today I wondered if Morticia's successor will be Uncle Fester.

[Patf]

Yet there are people in London, and probably the rest of the country, who think he's great.

A London man came on LBC this morning and said what a fantastic mayor he'd been. He has a 'magic' quality about him, which none of the others have.

In spite of Nick Ferrari, who is definitely rightwing, pointing out Boris' failings in his time as mayor, and foreign secretary, this man brushed it all off. So that's the kind of person who would be voting.

Having said that, maybe MP's and Tory constituency members vision is just as clouded.

[YCCMB]

I'm going to stick my head above the parapet and say that I actually didn't mind him when he was mayor. Just for the record, I said the same about Ken Livingstone, and I'm currently fine with Sadiq Khan. In the end, Mayor of London is a pretty benign role.

Would I want him running the country? I wouldn't let him run a bath. And I'd also say that about the other two incumbents mentioned above.

[YCCMB]

Angry and betrayed: the people choosing the next PM

https://f7td5.app.goo.gl/aPYpm

I don't know if that link will work....but it makes quite

an interesting read. Not least because yet again it looks as though the fate of the UK (or the Tories at keast)will be decided by the over 70's. But, if you were

a millenial, would you want to even be associated

with a completely broken political system? Or would

You just be happy to bide your time and elect 70 year old Jeremy Corbyn when the time comes?

[Patf]

I agree Betty he was relatively harmless as a mayor, and exploited his gift for personal charm to the full. But running a country is another thing.

I read the link - the thing that's so strange to me is that pro Brexit people are either well off or from poor areas. such as Tyneside. Mostly the elderly here who want to bring back the good old days when we stood and fought on our own. And traditionally Labour voters.

It's puzzling.

[Alan Zoff]

I could weep

[mint]

Seneca:

What need is there to weep over parts of life?  The whole of it calls for tears

[woolybanana]

Which proves that Proust was a lousy lover and that Senecccca had verbal dyeyouear!?

[Thibault]

British PMs are never elected by the people. Automatically, they are the leader of the party with the largest number of seats.

[mint]

That's the whole point of the thread.  The next PM will be elected by the paid-up and signed-up members of the Conservative Party!

No general election planned (at least not at the moment) so no chance to bring in another party and no say in who gets to be PM at a critical time in our national life.

Some of us think that's pretty shameful.  Don't you think so as well?

[woolybanana]

Anything which keeps Corbyn from power is good!?

[YCCMB]

I confess to being slightly baffled, mint, as to why it's any more "shameful" this time than all the other times it's happened throughout history?

Did you know how common this actually is?

https://fullfact.org/news/unelected-prime-ministers-common-or-not/

Chucking red herrings at Brexit isn't the answer, I'm sad to say.

[richard51]

Just because something is common does not make it acceptable.

The Mint argument is pertinent because the whole argument for Brexit nowadays is that it was "democraticaly" voted for yet the future is now being decided by small groups of extreme people.

It was a narrow vote in the referendum. Now that the situation arround leaving is clearer I see no reason why another vote cannot be given to the people.

Corbyn wants an election and would indeed provide a more socially acceptable government IMHO but I'd be happy with another peoples vote.

The two party system did indeed stitch up the referendum some time back that looked at proportional representation.

[woolybanana]

Prime Ministers are not chosen by the people at elections but must present themselves as head of their particular party or faction at elections for approval or otherwise.

I am not sure that a proportional representation system would work in a country that is three countries as it is highly likely that the local national parties or factions would have an excess and undemocratic share or power. Examples are the extreme religious parties in Israel or the DUP in the British set up.

[mint]

Yes, Betty, I do know that it's happened in the past though my memory only goes as far back as Callaghan!

But, Richard is right insofar as the Conservatives bang on so much about the will of the people, constitutional rules, democracy, etc etc ad infinitum that yes, it does seem more "shameful" this time around.  Besides, aside from times of war, Brexit IS in a different degree of seriousness, if you like, than other times when a PM has come to power without an election beforehand.

Anyway no vote for any of us except perhaps Wooly who must be one of those dyed in the blue wool type?  Wools, so for whom will you vote?[:P]

[woolybanana]

Rory Stewart, who has a touch of the original and the backswoodsmen about him. Had Kenneth Clarke being in the running he would have been my choice.

I have no taste for the right of right Tories nor the left of left Labourites as both create inequality.

A radical Brexit was NOT mandated by such a close vote whatever MussoFarage may think.

[mint]

Good answer, Wools, you have redeemed yourself in my eyes........[:D][:D][:P]

[richard51]

So:

In the last election the DUP got 8 seats with a popular vote of 292,316. Lib Dems got 8 seats with a popular vote of 2,371,910.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_Kingdom_general_election

[woolybanana]

And the inequalities of numbers in constituencies gives Labour a 30 seat advantage.

[richard51]

Dont know your source for that but not when boundary changes kick in.

For the 2017 election: conservative to labour seat ratio was 1.21, whereas popular vote ratio was 1.06.

For the 2015 election the same ratios were 1.42 and 1.21 respectively.

Same wiki source.

NB SNP got 4.7% of seats yet 3.0% of popular vote.

The likes of far right Israel and Hungary and indeed now the US are that because of their voters exploited racist nature.

[woolybanana]

Richard, the last set of proposals put to Parliament in 2018 (?) the Electoral Commission were not adopted, to the best of my knowledge which means that the next election could be fought on a very ancient electoral register which greatly favours Labour because they are elected in inner city areas where much of the population has fled to the ‘burbs and where the number of voters is much smaller.

Boris and Jeremy would be faced with a very different constituency and a new one respectively.

[richard51]

The point is that proportional representation is a much more equitable system compared to the present

If the "ancient" system overall favours labour more than conservative then how come we have the recent election figures that I've quoted.