The Doctor

it's about national swing basically. if we had a functional democratic system which apportioned power in relation to support rather than First Past the Post which is a shit or bust system, then reform would get more seats than the lib Dems on the vote share, but under FPTP they'll probably get a decent amount of votes nationwide but not enough to concentrate into a large number of seats, where as the lib dems support is concentrated into a few constituencies so they'll keep the seats they were in/gain a few where they were in second

the best candidate in the election. vote for £1.10 price cap on croissants and the nationalisation and reintroduction of ceefax

in effect you are, because you're gonna make him prime minister. I can see the argument for voting for decent candidates even if the party leader is shit, it's why I'd hold my nose and vote labour if I was in Coventry South or Edinburgh South West, or Tories if I was in Canterbury, but fact of the matter is a vote for Labour is ultimately a vote to give Starmer a majority

I mean yes, Starmer is just restarting the last 14 years given how labours campaign could easily be mistaken for Cameron's if you were colour blind, but reform isn't kicking the 2 party system apart, it's taking Tory policies to their logical end, restoring perfidious Albion as a petty little island loathed by the world. pick an independent, go green or lib dem, hell, find some weird local party who want Leicestershire to secede from the UK and become it's own nation because theres no FFP in the world cup, just not reform.

they're counted as a invalid ballot and not added to the % vote share

and god if that revelation that pointing out bigotry was worse than being bigoted didn't set the tone for the past 14 years...

liberals are right wing as far as I'm concerned, and last time I dyed my hair it was purple, but you got the length right at least so... 33%, failing grade.

pedro sucks, vote for Kodos

I'd say Rob Kelly (making up the numbers, what's he doing there) should stand for them and Claude Puel should be the greens (great ideas, never able to implement them).

just remember, polling day for Refuk voters is on the 5th of July, out of respect for their American financiers

to get attention, and it clearly worked

"net zero is a scam!" literally just doing this cartoon now:

it's not copium, it's daggers being a troll and not reading what was said. I did not say that labour winning a landslide would be bad for them, I said explicitly that a Tory collapse meant that tactical voting wasn't necessary. literally any party that challenges for seats gets a fair few 'well they're not as bad as [main opponents for that seat]' votes. labours come from would be green voters: indeed 12% of labour voters would rather vote green according to you gov: so without the need to tactical vote, you'll see a decent chunk decide to vote with their ethics and heart and so the greens could reasonably be expected to get a higher vote share than predicted. that is not at all a claim that it will be tighter than polled in terms of labour v Tory.

genuinely think that the smaller parties (e.g. greens) will go higher than generally predicted. the Tories dying is bad news for labour getting the "hold your nose" vote from the centre left. there's no reason to tactical vote when they're on course for a stonking majority so people are freeer to vote with their ethics

tbf I think giving travel advice to other countries is a bit outside of the government job specifications

not a chance, he'll resign and go pick up a 7 figure salary in the US as a political advisor for some tech company, a la Nick Clegg

Starmer coming out swinging against the equality act 2 days before the election is certainly a look. what a weapons grade **** he is. Bare in mind what he's talking about was tried in North Carolina 9 years ago and had Camerons government issue a travel warning that the state wasn't safe for LGBTQ Brits to travel to...

the only way it's gonna help Biden is if he decides to test that to its logical extreme and send Trump to Gitmo. the people that are bothered by it are the ones already voting for Biden

personally I would say if you abandon your principles because you don't have the power to easily enact them, then you don't have any principles in the first place.

I'll ask again, does not being able to win the vote justify not even taking a symbolic stance against police being allowed to rape protesters?

I see your argument on demographics and I hope that is how it will play out, but I think there's an under appreciation of how alienated and radicalized teenage boys in particular have become (see Andrew Tates popularity), and generally history tells us that when neither side present any answers (and the centrists fight harder to stop the left than anything else) it's the far right that the disaffected then flock to

not even in power yet and already aiming for his Neville Chamberlain moment

functional democracy update: the president can commit high crimes, don't look at the bits of the constitution that say otherwise

I don't take Bravermans word for it, I'm highlighting that currently labour are being outflanked to the left by a woman who believes homelessness is a lifestyle choice, as they refuse to remove the benefit cap which keeps 300k children in poverty I've already covered the issue with the notion that you can use the private sector to bring down waiting lists in the NHS (they're not different doctors, more private sector current detracts from the NHS). so, "we don't have the seats to win that" justifies whipping to abstain on the extrajudicial rape bill? https://labourlist.org/2020/10/35-labour-mps-break-whip-to-oppose-spycops-bill-as-seven-frontbenchers-quit/

I see your argument, but I would say that you have to draw that line at some point otherwise it becomes a straight up ratchet effect, nothing ever gets better and the centrist party just exists to normalise the changes before another round of right wing advances.