General Discussion: Politics thread


Show original post
Axiom
Axiom avatar

249 posts since 28/10/08

14 Oct 2009 12:13
Double D wrote: He has presidential-style authority over (edit: 7.5 million, underestimated before) people and a gigantic chunk of the UK's GDP. Scary but true.

Pretty much only the PM and the Speaker of the House could realistically claim to have more power.

The mayor of London isn't anywhere near as powerful as you presume. It's not like, say, the New York mayoralty (Bloomberg has a huge amount of power), the vast majority of London's functions are devolved to the boroughs.
breck
breck avatar

939 posts since 5/3/09

14 Oct 2009 12:19
superbe wrote:
nick2 wrote:
superbe wrote: (used to shag a girl from the home office responsible for sending home illegals).

Hope she did a better job in bed.

Also reckon if Milliband gets the top job and Harman goes then MAYBE New Labour can hold on by the skin of their teeth.

I agree with this
Mandrake
Mandrake avatar

461 posts since 23/6/06

14 Oct 2009 18:27
Double D wrote:
Mandrake wrote:
Double D wrote:
Mandrake wrote:
Double D wrote:
Guido wrote: It's a small percentage of MP's however you look at it. You'll be well suited to being an MP. Dragging up bollocks stats to try prove a point.
Maybe 27% is a small percentage but you need to look at who is actually in real power and not just sitting in a constituency in the arse end of Wales. If you look we're actually trending towards a world of Oxford dominance in both parties, I mean Thatcher and Blair had average Oxford degrees but take a look at the probable PM and leader of the opposition in 6 months time:

David Cameron - PPE First Class
David Miliband - PPE First Class

Not to mention half the incumbent cabinet and the probable next leader of the Conservative party (who as London mayor is already roughly the third most powerful politician in the country) all hold PPEs from Oxford.

boris johnson is 3rd most powerful politician in the country? megalolz
He has presidential-style authority over (edit: 7.5 million, underestimated before) people and a gigantic chunk of the UK's GDP. Scary but true.

Pretty much only the PM and the Speaker of the House could realistically claim to have more power.

of this 9 or 7.5m people he got 1.1m votes, not much of a mandate. I don't think his sphere of influence really extends that far, in my eyes he's London's own special Transport minister. I would put Gordon Brown, David Miliband, David Cameron, Peter Mandelson and George Osborne all above Boris, and thats only people off the top of my head. In fact I think I'd probably put most of the Labour and Conservative (shadow) Cabinet above him too.
The Leader of the Opposition has power? Not really beyond the ability to put some pressure on the incumbent government via the media. Wuldn't say any of the shadow cabinet have any actual power right now. Thing with anyone who sits in the Commons is they're at the mercy of themselves and can only operate as a collective (note that we have a PM not a president). Johnson has a fair degree of authority over an area of the nation with more economic power than Wales and Scotland combined, and whilst the Assembly has to power the amend his decisions it's also very nearly a Tory majority.

There's some pretty odd positions of auto power out there when you look at it. Speaker of the House and Chief Whip spring to mind first in the Commons, outside of it the Attorney General and Archbishop of Canterbury spring to mind (the Church of England still has a fairly startling amount of power in the Lords).

Chief whip is a good point. So the leader of the opposition has less power than Mayor of London? The presumptive next PM (Cameron) has the power to say we're going to do this, that and the other and can be seen as realistic policy by the public and a large portion of the commons (although hes doing a terrible job with it). boris' influence is massive insulated, the cabinets authority stretches the breadth of the country. attorney general really shouldnt be politicised, and i think that archbishop of canterbury is ridiculous.
Double D
Double D avatar

3552 posts since 8/3/07

14 Oct 2009 20:14
Well, I was talking about actual power to make decisions and enact them. Well, ish. Not in the case of the Archbishop, who is very much a figure of influence rather than power, but I wouldn't underestimate how powerful the Church of England is.

Anyhow, in regards to Cameron versus Johnson in terms of actual power right now… Johnson has presidential style authority and the assembly (which is nearly an outright Tory majority anyhow) can amend/veto his policies. Cameron right now can only propose a bill in the manner of any other MP which could usually be comfortably shot down by an incumbent government with a significant majority.

I can understand the cabinet but the shadow cabinet are just MPs with slightly higher public profiles. Throw head of the Bank of England in somewhere near the top of the list too.
inversesquare
inversesquare avatar

6682 posts since 7/6/08

14 Oct 2009 20:47
What about Alan Sugar. He's on TV and he's kind of in the cabinet as a business advisor.
unCouth
unCouth avatar

6883 posts since 3/11/07

21 Dec 2009 20:19
televised political debates agreed
biglforlife
biglforlife avatar

2099 posts since 23/9/06

21 Dec 2009 20:49
Doesn't really matter does it? Three men who all want to take a huge chunk of our money which we've earned and then decide to spend it because they think they know what's best for us all. The entire discourse of politics in this country is skewed towards a statist project and minimising the rights of the individual. The mainstream stus quo parties only intent is to perpetuate the false choise we're presented.
unCouth
unCouth avatar

6883 posts since 3/11/07

21 Dec 2009 21:07
as a spectacle i think it'll be quite interesting. it'll be interesting to see them debate live on a level platform. disenchanted much bigl Laughing out loud
biglforlife
biglforlife avatar

2099 posts since 23/9/06

21 Dec 2009 21:52
Absolutely…

There's very little or no priciples behind the work of the main stream parties, without that they cannot not have any coherent paradigm for framing their policies and so continually base there work on short term populism.

There won't be any spectacle either. Politics for the most part is extraordinarily dull.
DuffMan
DuffMan avatar

14381 posts since 21/2/07

22 Dec 2009 00:43
biglforlife wrote: Doesn't really matter does it? Three men who all want to take a huge chunk of our money which we've earned and then decide to spend it because they think they know what's best for us all. The entire discourse of politics in this country is skewed towards a statist project and minimising the rights of the individual. The mainstream stus quo parties only intent is to perpetuate the false choise we're presented.

Ohi Milton Friedman
BOOKSTORECORE
BOOKSTORECORE avatar

7634 posts since 8/8/06

22 Dec 2009 02:00
Oh come on, we all surely know he speaks the truth?
DuffMan
DuffMan avatar

14381 posts since 21/2/07

22 Dec 2009 12:03
The concept of using personal freedom as an excuse to do whatever the fuck you feel like is neoliberalism at it's best, so if we all agree with Thatcher and Reagan then maybe. However I agree entirely with
biglforlife wrote: There's very little or no priciples behind the work of the main stream parties, without that they cannot not have any coherent paradigm for framing their policies and so continually base there work on short term populism.

There won't be any spectacle either. Politics for the most part is extraordinarily dull.
EVERS
EVERS avatar

8580 posts since 2/7/06

22 Dec 2009 13:23
politics is anything but dull.

agree that major party politics and our parliamentary system is a complete dinosaur
superbe
superbe avatar

1015 posts since 5/6/08

22 Dec 2009 13:28
unCouth wrote: as a spectacle i think it'll be quite interesting. it'll be interesting to see them debate live on a level platform. disenchanted much bigl Laughing out loud

yes and I think Clegg is going to come off very well he's seriously bright and a good debater without all the theatrics. Cameron is going to fuck himself up with the on-going Mr PR Slickness/Blair Mk II vibe he gives off. Can't wait - this is how Obama won. After the vs. McCain tv debate OB took the lead and never went back.
biglforlife
biglforlife avatar

2099 posts since 23/9/06

22 Dec 2009 21:12
DuffMan wrote: The concept of using personal freedom as an excuse to do whatever the fuck you feel like is neoliberalism at it's best, so if we all agree with Thatcher and Reagan then maybe. However I agree entirely with
biglforlife wrote: There's very little or no priciples behind the work of the main stream parties, without that they cannot not have any coherent paradigm for framing their policies and so continually base there work on short term populism.

There won't be any spectacle either. Politics for the most part is extraordinarily dull.


I'm not quite sure what your point is but I'm not suggestig individuals have free reign to do as they please with no consequences. However, they shouldn't be impossed on and coerced to act in a manner they do not want- the main stream parties do this.
biglforlife
biglforlife avatar

2099 posts since 23/9/06

22 Dec 2009 21:32
On the matter of the tv debate; I don't object but I would include more parties.
breck
breck avatar

939 posts since 5/3/09

4 Feb 2010 08:19
fontelroy wrote: personally im a huge fan of the conservative party and hope to represent them some today (no sleaze linking back to this place some day)

barack obama = alright
war = neccesary - saddam could well have has wmd + was a cunt
oil = something we should attempt to access by all means neccesary, crucial to economic growth

domestic = NHS privatised/ global warming is a load of tosh - most people dont even know why the sea levels will rise thus everyone arguing for it dont know why making it a stupid argument


http://atonesdiscretion.blogspot.com/

This post gets me everytime Laughing out loud . First it makes me burst out laughing because it is rediculous. Second it makes me cringe then third it makes me cry…or want to.

Bumping this up for gawkrodger because i want to see him post in here more.
Charles Winthorpe III
Charles Winthorpe III avatar

5474 posts since 29/7/05

4 Feb 2010 10:43
i like the line.

'i'm a huge fan of the conservative party'
joeyjojo
joeyjojo avatar

4303 posts since 24/8/06

4 Feb 2010 10:48
Im liking the 'saddam was a cunt' bit Laughing out loud
San
San avatar

10493 posts since 14/11/05

4 Feb 2010 11:03
the line about obtaining oil by any means neccesary is cracking me up. why, cant others benefit from economic growth?