Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Sky news biased against the Labor party?

2»

Comments

  • #52
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Inquitus wrote: »
    Labour has benefited from this form of undemocratic democracy for 13 years, they never tried to change it as it clearly favours them over the Cons and Lib Dems.

    I agree, Labour have acted disgracefully. But I don't think the conservatives are any better. As it stands the system clearly favours the two big parties. The conservatives with only 36% of the votes got 47% of the seats. Labour with 29% got 40% of the seats. But I still think that Labour are much more likely to change the system now than the cons.
    Labour would not have had a majority under AV in either of the last 2 elections. AV is almost as unfair as FPTP and certainly doesn't come anywhere near a decent form of PR. They are simply moving from one bad system to another that happens to favour them more.

    I agree partially. I would much rather PR, and a decent form of PR, I would also much rather have a PROPER referrendum on this. But it's clear that RIGHT NOW neither Labour nor the Cons would allow this, as proper PR would give the lib dems 130+ seats with their 23% level of electoral support.

    AV is an acceptable first step. This will give the lib dems another 20 seats in the next election at least and then they will be in a better position to force a referendum on PR.
    You work within the framework of your democracy, you can't then do shady deals and try and change a country's democracy when you get a result you don't like, certainly not without going to the public in a referendum.

    It seems to me, that a rainbow coalition consisting of many of the parties would be very much within the framework of the democracy. MAYBE if the cons had got anywhere close to 50% of the vote you could make a case that they MUST be in government, but they didn't and they certainly don't reflect the views of the majority of the electorate, not even close.

    As for shady deals...

    Lets see... a coaltion between the elected representatives of the labour party and the Liberals... or a coalition between the Cons and the Murdoch Media Empire.

    At least ONE of the above has an electoral mandate of some kind.


  • #53
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Anyways we are getting ahead of ourselves, its simply not possible that a rainbow coalition could pass a vote on AV. Alot of Scottish and Northern English Lab MPs will never vote for it, and they don't have any votes to play with.


  • #54
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    4. It’s reported that “Labour” is offering the LibDems an immediate Bill to ditch FPTP in favour of AV and a referendum on further change afterwards. This cannot be delivered; Labour MPs will not support it. I do hope some senior LibDems are reading this.

    http://www.tomharris.org.uk/


  • #55
    DingChavez
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 647 ✭✭✭DingChavez


    Adam Boulton has been on sky news everytime I've turned it on for the last month. I don't think he sleeps.


  • #56
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Inquitus wrote: »
    Anyways we are getting ahead of ourselves, its simply not possible that a rainbow coalition could pass a vote on AV. Alot of Scottish and Northern English Lab MPs will never vote for it, and they don't have any votes to play with.

    Maybe, maybe not. Let's see what happens.

    For now, I'm happy to see the Cameron and Murdoch coalition kept out of government.

    btw, has boards been acting wonky for anyone else tonight?


  • #57
    RichTea
    Registered Users Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭RichTea


    Sky News is the British Fox News now. It was a gradual change at first but it became all the more noticeable over the past few months. It started its real Labour baiting around the same time the Sun decided to withdraw its support for Labour (coincidence?). Kay Burley, Adam Boulton et al. If they're what passes for news then I won't be watching it.

    They harrassed Labour candidates and supporters and tried to convince people to vote Tory at almost every occassion. It is a farce.


    EDIT: And their city editor today, Randle? "The markets are confused by Labour's desperate attempt to cling to power". Nutter.


  • #58
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    RichTea wrote: »
    Sky News is the British Fox News now. It was a gradual change at first but it became all the more noticeable over the past few months. It started its real Labour baiting around the same time the Sun decided to withdraw its support for Labour (coincidence?). Kay Burley, Adam Boulton et al. If they're what passes for news then I won't be watching it.

    They harrassed Labour candidates and supporters and tried to convince people to vote Tory at almost every occassion. It is a farce.


    EDIT: And their city editor today, Randle? "The markets are confused by Labour's desperate attempt to cling to power". Nutter.

    I love Randle.

    "Make Cameron PM or the economy will collapse and the British pound will lose all value."

    Not like fox news's fear-mongering at ALL


  • #59
    Steviemak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 430 ✭✭Steviemak


    Inquitus wrote: »
    What labour are attempting to put together at the moment is an affront to democracy

    I think you need to look up Parliamentary Democracy.:D


  • #60
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Steviemak wrote: »
    I think you need to look up Parliamentary Democracy.:D

    What the public will accept, and what is technically correct under the definition of Parliamentary Democracy are not one and the same thing.

    Changing a country's voting system without a referendum is undemocratic imho. Especially when changing it to one that is still grossly unfair and little improvement on what exists at the moment. Its not like they are going to go to some form of reasonably fair PR, they are simply stitching up a system no better than FPTP, because that suits them better.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    loldog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    Hey, check out Gordon Brown with Adam Boulton last year:



  • #62
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Inquitus wrote: »
    What the public will accept, and what is technically correct under the definition of Parliamentary Democracy are not one and the same thing.

    I posted this earlier... did you not read it?
    The post of Prime Minister is a constitutional one and in the last fifty years or so there have been ten Prime Ministers four of whom were the leader of their party at the time of the general election in which they met success: Wilson; Heath; Thatcher and Blair.

    The remaining six assumed the role during the course of a parliament without the involvement of the electorate: Eden; Macmillan; Douglas-Home; Callaghan; Major and Brown. Four Conservatives and two Labour.

    Conclusion: the usual way for someone to assume the post of Prime Minister is without reference to the electorate.

    In what way would a new leader of the Labour Party assuming the post be anything other than the normal constitutional way?

    So 6 out of the last 10 PM's of the UK were unelected.

    Out of those 6, 4 were conservatives. 2 were labour.


  • #63
    Stinicker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,102 ✭✭✭Stinicker


    The think the whole problem here the is the lefty PC communists that are the BBC and Labour cannot accept the fact that the Rightwing Conservative party won the election and any sort of a mishmash Lib/Lab/SDLP/PC/SNP coalition is an affront to democracy.

    Clegg and Brown are focused on one thing only and that is getting PR in when they should be focused on the economy over there; however they are raging that a resurgent Tory party left them both for dead and are now trying to bring in PR so their supporters can vote tactically to try and ensure that the Torys never again get an overall majority or anywhere near it.

    It shows up the sort of hairbrained idiots that the Liberals and Labour are; best thing the Tories should do now is either form a Minority gov and dissolve in October to get an overall majority. LIB/LAB are not changing the electoral system for the people but to suit their own power grabbing agendas.

    Minority partys have no place in politics and look at the mess PR has done to the political landscape of Ireland. Only one party ever gets an overall majority and that is Fianna Fail, when they fail you get an unpredictable government like FF/Greens and FF/PDs which even though FF was the majority partner it saw insane policies from Herr Flick and Gormless alter the political landscape when the electorate gave neither of them a mandate to do it. As badly as Fianna Fail are governing now Ireland would be far better off under a FF majority than letting the likes of the JHR's/Greens and others derail the party plans.

    Likewise when we have our election we will be given a mishmash of Fine Gael and the clowns in the Labour party with a centre Left/Right government where the only thing they have in common is that they are not Fianna Fail. This will lead to unstable and inability to govern properly. The PR system was a marxist stunt to allow them influence the Governments without having to get the real support of the people.

    PR is a sham and Ireland should abandon it in favour on the first past the post system with one person one vote. Many's a good candidate has lost out due to PR and many TDs in Leinster House were elected despite getting less No. 1 Votes than the person who lost out only to be brought up through transfer votes and surpluses form other similiar idea-logs candidates. Eg. in the 2007 General Election in Kerry South Labour's Breeda Moynihan got far more No. 1 votes than Jackie Healy Rae yet Healy Rae got elected on transfer votes and surplus redistributions.

    Voting is something we all have a democratic right to and it is something we should take seriously. You have to decide who to vote for simple as but with our stupid system you can have your cake and eat it too. PR = Democracy for dummies, and when you see the dingleberries it has helped to get into the Dail I think you will agree that it is farcical.


  • #64
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Stinicker wrote: »
    The think the whole problem here the is the lefty PC communists that are the BBC and Labour cannot accept the fact that the Rightwing Conservative party won the election and any sort of a mishmash Lib/Lab/SDLP/PC/SNP coalition is an affront to democracy.....

    Adam? You really need to get some rest Mr. Boulton. I reccomend Stilnoct 10 mg.


  • #65
    Steviemak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 430 ✭✭Steviemak


    Inquitus wrote: »
    What the public will accept, and what is technically correct under the definition of Parliamentary Democracy are not one and the same thing.

    Changing a country's voting system without a referendum is undemocratic imho. Especially when changing it to one that is still grossly unfair and little improvement on what exists at the moment. Its not like they are going to go to some form of reasonably fair PR, they are simply stitching up a system no better than FPTP, because that suits them better.

    36% of people voted for the Tories.

    52% of people voted Liberal and Labour. Both parties had electoral reform in their manifesto's.

    FPTP is deeply unfair. AV is also deeply unfair but its a first step to PR and people who voted labour were aware of their intention to move to this system.


  • #66
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Memnoch wrote: »
    I posted this earlier... did you not read it?



    So 6 out of the last 10 PM's of the UK were unelected.

    Out of those 6, 4 were conservatives. 2 were labour.

    No I didn't read whatever you said.

    Unelected PMs coming in mid parliament etc for whatever reason is one thing. Stitching up who the PM will be immediately after the election quite another.

    Also despite this being a UK parliament it is complicated by NI, Wales, Scotland, devolution, parties like the SNP not voting on english issues etc etc.

    Not cutting Welsh, NI and Scottish budgets due to buying votes and using Scottish MPs votes to cut English spending when the Tories have a big majority of MPs in England has issues all of its own.

    Yes Lib, Lab, SDLP, PC and SNP can command a wafer thin majority, but its ugly, and using it to try and force through AV without a referendum, so they can have another GE in a few months with a better result is not going to wash with the British people imo.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Inquitus wrote: »
    No I didn't read whatever you said.

    Unelected PMs coming in mid parliament etc for whatever reason is one thing. Stitching up who the PM will be immediately after the election quite another.

    Also despite this being a UK parliament it is complicated by NI, Wales, Scotland, devolution, parties like the SNP not voting on english issues etc etc.

    Not cutting Welsh, NI and Scottish budgets due to buying votes and using Scottish MPs votes to cut English spending when the Tories have a big majority of MPs in England has issues all of its own.

    Yes Lib, Lab, SDLP, PC and SNP can command a wafer thin majority, but its ugly, and using it to try and force through AV without a referendum, so they can have another GE in a few months with a better result is not going to wash with the British people imo.

    Then the British people will vote them out and the cons will reverse the AV without the referendum.


  • #68
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Steviemak wrote: »
    36% of people voted for the Tories.

    52% of people voted Liberal and Labour. Both parties had electoral reform in their manifesto's.

    FPTP is deeply unfair. AV is also deeply unfair but its a first step to PR and people who voted labour were aware of their intention to move to this system.

    Labour only included it in their manifesto at the last minute and mainly because it favours them directly, not for any altruistic reasons that it may be fairer.

    A first step to PR is bull****, its just a stitch up to move from one bad system (FPTP) to another just as bad (AV) because it favours your party.


  • #69
    steelcityblues
    Registered Users Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭steelcityblues


    Memnoch wrote: »
    I posted this earlier... did you not read it?



    So 6 out of the last 10 PM's of the UK were unelected.

    Out of those 6, 4 were conservatives. 2 were labour.

    Eden, MacMillan, Major were all elected with subsequent majorities in elections though! The other three failed!


  • #70
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    steelcityblues wrote: »
    Eden, MacMillan, Major were all elected with subsequent majorities in elections though! The other three failed!

    Splitting hairs now. Fact is they were unelected PMs. Brown was an unelected PM, now that he's lost the election, he's resigning, which is as it should be.


  • #71
    Steviemak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 430 ✭✭Steviemak


    Inquitus wrote: »
    Labour only included it in their manifesto at the last minute and mainly because it favours them directly, not for any altruistic reasons that it may be fairer.

    A first step to PR is bull****, its just a stitch up to move from one bad system (FPTP) to another just as bad (AV) because it favours your party.

    Its definitely a first step as far as the Liberals are concerned. They want PR and rightly so. If AV allows the British people to get used to voting in this manner then PR would not be such a big leap.

    BTW Does it matter when it was added? The British people voted knowing it was in their manifesto. Therefore the voted in good faith that electoral reform was on offer. Not to give it to them is, as you might say, undemocratic.:D


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    steelcityblues
    Registered Users Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭steelcityblues


    The Cyprian Brady under 1,000 first preferences in Dublin Central is the best example of PR-STV not always working, but still better any day than 1st past the post!

    One thing, I won't predict the next government -the last few days have been strange enough and who knows what is in store!


  • #73
    steelcityblues
    Registered Users Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭steelcityblues


    Memnoch wrote: »
    Splitting hairs now. Fact is they were unelected PMs. Brown was an unelected PM, now that he's lost the election, he's resigning, which is as it should be.

    He has resigned as party leader but not yet PM! Were you not paying attention to the bulletins earlier?

    I was only providing some facts for interested readers, not trying to score points btw!


  • #74
    Memnoch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    steelcityblues wrote: »
    He has resigned as party leader but not yet PM! Were you not paying attention to the bulletins earlier?

    I was only providing some facts for interested readers, not trying to score points btw!

    Well until either someone else forms a legitimate government, or if it's his party as part of a coalition, until they elect a replacement, it makes sense for him to remain in the custodial role.


  • #75
    RichTea
    Registered Users Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭RichTea


    loldog wrote: »
    Hey, check out Gordon Brown with Adam Boulton last year:


    Fair play Gordon Brown. What is Kay Burley at there at the end? 'Three Weetabix for breakfast?'


  • #76
    Euro_Kraut
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭Euro_Kraut


    RichTea wrote: »
    Fair play Gordon Brown. What is Kay Burley at there at the end? 'Three Weetabix for breakfast?'

    Suggesting he ran off to go to the toilet. Classy bird, Ms Burley.


  • #77
    RichTea
    Registered Users Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭RichTea


    Euro_Kraut wrote: »
    Suggesting he ran off to go to the toilet. Classy bird, Ms Burley.

    Tw@, must be said.


  • #78
    duffflash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭duffflash


    Stinicker wrote: »
    The think the whole problem here the is the lefty PC communists that are the BBC and Labour cannot accept the fact that the Rightwing Conservative party won the election and any sort of a mishmash Lib/Lab/SDLP/PC/SNP coalition is an affront to democracy.

    So you think that the Conservative party with only 35% of the vote have won the election! That statement in itself is an affront to democracy!!


  • #79
    Euro_Kraut
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭Euro_Kraut


    I think some people, Adam Boulton, included are missing the point that Gordon Brown cannot constitutionally resign as PM. There is no successor in place.

    Cameron has not been able to go to the Queen yet as he does not have the backing of parliament. Therefore while Britain are fighting 2 wars overseas some people are disappointed when Gordon Brown didn't give us a nice TV moment and move out of number 10 and leave the Army without a de facto commander in chief for a few weeks.

    Unfortunately, Brown cannot leave until a successor is in place. It is his constitutional duty to hand over the reigns. Right now there is no one to hand over too.


  • #80
    Euro_Kraut
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭Euro_Kraut


    duffflash wrote: »
    So you think that the Conservative party with only 35% of the vote have won the election! That statement in itself is an affront to democracy!!

    You miss the point. A coalition comprised of parties that over 60% of the British public voted for would be an affront to democracy. Cleary this is the case because...erm... there would be a lot of parties involved and ...er.. that's cleary anti-democratic.


  • #81
    duffflash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭duffflash


    Euro_Kraut wrote: »
    You miss the point. A coalition comprised of parties that over 60% of the British public voted for would be an affront to democracy. Cleary this is the case because...erm... there would be a lot of parties involved and ...er.. that's cleary anti-democratic.

    erm....ok


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    duffflash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭duffflash


    Euro_Kraut wrote: »
    I think some people, Adam Boulton, included are missing the point that Gordon Brown cannot constitutionally resign as PM. There is no successor in place.

    If you listen to Boulton you'd think Brown had barricaded himself in no 10 and had claimed squaters rights!!:cool:


  • #83
    MisterAnarchy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,833 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    RichTea wrote: »
    Sky News is the British Fox News now. It was a gradual change at first but it became all the more noticeable over the past few months.
    The ironic thing is that while Sky News has become more biased and unimpartial in its reporting ,Fox News has gone the other way.


  • #84
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    duffflash wrote: »
    If you listen to Boulton you'd think Brown had barricaded himself in no 10 and had claimed squaters rights!!:cool:
    Not just Boulton, it might be any of the political editors at the odd News International company or two. You might have noticed this in Saturday's Sun if you'd picked it up (it was on the front page). Or this in yesterday's. It's at least consistent.

    Gotta give them this though, this gets at least a three or four out of ten for funniness.


  • #85
    Hogzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,544 ✭✭✭Hogzy


    Wish BBC news was on sky digital :(



    Its not the same having to go into other channels


  • #86
    loldog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    sceptre wrote: »
    Gotta give them this though, this gets at least a three or four out of ten for funniness.

    No, it's just retarded. It is his constitutional DUTY to remain as PM until a new government is formed. Those ignorant scumbags at the Sun don't even know what they're talking about.

    .


  • #87
    danman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 583 ✭✭✭danman


    I think they know exactly. But their general readership can be herded into any direction.


  • #88
    irishh_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭irishh_bob


    Stinicker wrote: »
    The think the whole problem here the is the lefty PC communists that are the BBC and Labour cannot accept the fact that the Rightwing Conservative party won the election and any sort of a mishmash Lib/Lab/SDLP/PC/SNP coalition is an affront to democracy.

    Clegg and Brown are focused on one thing only and that is getting PR in when they should be focused on the economy over there; however they are raging that a resurgent Tory party left them both for dead and are now trying to bring in PR so their supporters can vote tactically to try and ensure that the Torys never again get an overall majority or anywhere near it.

    It shows up the sort of hairbrained idiots that the Liberals and Labour are; best thing the Tories should do now is either form a Minority gov and dissolve in October to get an overall majority. LIB/LAB are not changing the electoral system for the people but to suit their own power grabbing agendas.

    Minority partys have no place in politics and look at the mess PR has done to the political landscape of Ireland. Only one party ever gets an overall majority and that is Fianna Fail, when they fail you get an unpredictable government like FF/Greens and FF/PDs which even though FF was the majority partner it saw insane policies from Herr Flick and Gormless alter the political landscape when the electorate gave neither of them a mandate to do it. As badly as Fianna Fail are governing now Ireland would be far better off under a FF majority than letting the likes of the JHR's/Greens and others derail the party plans.

    Likewise when we have our election we will be given a mishmash of Fine Gael and the clowns in the Labour party with a centre Left/Right government where the only thing they have in common is that they are not Fianna Fail. This will lead to unstable and inability to govern properly. The PR system was a marxist stunt to allow them influence the Governments without having to get the real support of the people.

    PR is a sham and Ireland should abandon it in favour on the first past the post system with one person one vote. Many's a good candidate has lost out due to PR and many TDs in Leinster House were elected despite getting less No. 1 Votes than the person who lost out only to be brought up through transfer votes and surpluses form other similiar idea-logs candidates. Eg. in the 2007 General Election in Kerry South Labour's Breeda Moynihan got far more No. 1 votes than Jackie Healy Rae yet Healy Rae got elected on transfer votes and surplus redistributions.

    Voting is something we all have a democratic right to and it is something we should take seriously. You have to decide who to vote for simple as but with our stupid system you can have your cake and eat it too. PR = Democracy for dummies, and when you see the dingleberries it has helped to get into the Dail I think you will agree that it is farcical.


    +1 , PR is a recipe for back scratching , horse trading , clientelism , indescisiveness , trying to please everyone and general gombeenism


  • #89
    RichTea
    Registered Users Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭RichTea


    MisterAnarchy wrote: »
    The ironic thing is that while Sky News has become more biased and unimpartial in its reporting ,Fox News has gone the other way.

    Has it? I haven't seen any Fox News for a few months so I can't comment on it right now. They still have Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly so they can't be fully switching to a news channel just yet. Shepherd Smith, one of their news guys has seemed quite fair at some points. It'd be great if they actually became a news channel.


  • #90
    who the fug
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,041 ✭✭✭who the fug


    irishh_bob wrote: »
    +1 , PR is a recipe for back scratching , horse trading , clientelism , indescisiveness , trying to please everyone and general gombeenism

    +2

    25 Year of that and the PM will be winning cash at William Hills


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Aidric
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,591 ✭✭✭✭Aidric


    Hogzy wrote: »
    Wish BBC news was on sky digital :(



    Its not the same having to go into other channels
    It's FTA, you can tune it in through your sky remote. All the instructions on this thread, it will only take you a minute.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055520627


  • #92
    Ludo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,015 ✭✭✭Ludo


    Aidric wrote: »
    It's FTA, you can tune it in through your sky remote. All the instructions on this thread, it will only take you a minute.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055520627

    You didnt read the small print in the post you replied to, did you ;)


  • #93
    Aidric
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,591 ✭✭✭✭Aidric


    Ludo wrote: »
    You didnt read the small print in the post you replied to, did you ;)
    In my haste to aid. :o


Advertisement