| Topic Review (Newest First) |
| 06-12-2008 03:09 AM | |
| bluegold |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
 You seem to have missed my point. Plenty of parties have had funding, but zero electoral success. We're tied into a two-party system, and only a change in the voting system or some seismic socio-political change will alter that fundamental fact. I agree with you , Lion Spirit you could achieve more by changing the first past the post system . We are way ahead of you downunder ...we each get two votes 
|
| 06-12-2008 02:26 AM | |
| guinnesshero | I love these threads about lion's political aspirations. I admit I dont know much about the UK but I would be surprised if voters there were in a hurry to run right out and vote for someone who has to ask avice on VB about his manifesto and how to raise cash for his party. |
| 06-09-2008 06:50 AM | |
| Lentil Burger |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
I've sat and watched loads of T.V. previously and seen LOADS of political party ads from the big 3, but hardly any from the other parties. The only ones I remember in fact are Green Party and UKIP. Clearly then, they either had lots of money but didn't really want to win, or they didn't have enough money for enough adverts to lots of people. No offence mate... but all that does is demonstrate how poorly you understand the political system. It doesn't matter how much money you have - party political broadcasting in the UK is based entirely upon the number of candidates fielded by any given party. In terms of available air-time, spending doesn't even enter into it. Quote:
Wanna bet?
I'd love to. |
| 06-09-2008 04:03 AM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
You seem to have missed my point. Plenty of parties have had funding, but zero electoral success. I've sat and watched loads of T.V. previously and seen LOADS of political party ads from the big 3, but hardly any from the other parties. The only ones I remember in fact are Green Party and UKIP. Clearly then, they either had lots of money but didn't really want to win, or they didn't have enough money for enough adverts to lots of people. Quote:
We're tied into a two-party system, and only a change in the voting system or some seismic socio-political change will alter that fundamental fact. It's great that you're motivated and positive, but really, you haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of being elected.
Wanna bet? |
| 06-02-2008 05:49 AM | |
| Lentil Burger |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
Because money is a factor. You seem to have missed my point. Plenty of parties have had funding, but zero electoral success. We're tied into a two-party system, and only a change in the voting system or some seismic socio-political change will alter that fundamental fact. It's great that you're motivated and positive, but really, you haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of being elected. |
| 05-27-2008 08:48 PM | |
| Bof |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
Over 200 people voted for one of the members? I'm scared now It was probably more a protest vote against the major parties than for the MRLP |
| 05-27-2008 08:01 PM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lurker
Have you thought of overthrowing the government and monarchy in a (non-violent) military coup? veg*ns of the world unite!! Or you could join one of the existing major political parties, rise to the top and do it that way? Well I could try overthrowing the government (would there be any point in overthrowing the moarchy?) but too many legal hassles  As for the other suggestion, takes too long. The country needs changing A.S.A.P. and you'll see why in my manifesto in the near future. Quote:
Originally Posted by Bof
Why not take over as leader of an existing party? This one could use a charismatic leader, since the original one is no longer with us. Over 200 people voted for one of the members? I'm scared now |
| 05-27-2008 05:13 AM | |
| Blobbenstein |
yes, I would be quite happy to vote for the monster raving loony party, but for their postal policy. Apparently they believe that the Royal Mail should be allowed to carry on with their monopoly, which is absolutely insane! Personally, if we aren't heading towards a deregulated postal system where agency temps stuff your letters in a rubbish bin, or behind a hedge, then this country will go to the dogs. |
| 05-27-2008 05:07 AM | |
| Tablaqueen |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bof
Another Screaming Lord Sutch fan?  (I met him once).My mate Dave lived near him and got to know him quite well, apparently Oh, i had another thought! Lion Spirit could have a Lion Party! There was (and possibly still is? I found a website!), a Rhino Party in Canada, after all!!!  http://www.rhinoparty.com/
|
| 05-27-2008 05:01 AM | |
| Bof |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tablaqueen
Yay! I'm with Bof on that one! Another Screaming Lord Sutch fan? (I met him once).
|
| 05-27-2008 03:44 AM | |
| Tablaqueen |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bof
Why not take over as leader of an existing party? This one could use a charismatic leader, since the original one is no longer with us. Yay! I'm with Bof on that one!
|
| 05-27-2008 02:27 AM | |
| Bof |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
I will have a party, and will have a manifesto as you describe - it will be on my website once the party has been formed. As will the answer to your last question Why not take over as leader of an existing party? This one could use a charismatic leader, since the original one is no longer with us.
|
| 05-27-2008 01:54 AM | |
| The Lurker |
Have you thought of overthrowing the government and monarchy in a (non-violent) military coup? veg*ns of the world unite!! Or you could join one of the existing major political parties, rise to the top and do it that way? |
| 05-27-2008 12:35 AM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
Which brings us back to your earlier assertion: Money alone does not determine your chance of becoming elected. Many political parties have fielded candidates across the entire country with zero electoral success. What leads you to believe that your attempt will be any different? Because money is a factor. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think people want a Prime Minister who actually cares about making the country better, and who hasn't lied several times already to the public. A number of small parties seem to meet this criteria but don't have the money to advertise enough apparently, so people see mostly adverts from the Big 3 and vote for one of them. Quote:
Originally Posted by FatFreddy'sCat
The Labour Party was formed in 1893 and didn't win a General Election until 1945. The Liberals haven't won one since 1916. No other party outside of the "Big Three" has ever come close, despite the abundance of fringe parties currently and in the past. Why then, do you consider that you have "just as good a chance (if not better) of being elected", when you don't even have a party; you have no members; and only a rough draft of a partial manifesto with no clear indication of how you'd implement your policies? What experience and political credentials do you have that you could be the next Prime Minister and lead this country in two years time? I will have a party, and will have a manifesto as you describe - it will be on my website once the party has been formed. As will the answer to your last question
|
| 05-14-2008 10:32 AM | |
| FatFreddysCat |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
If I can afford to advertise as much as the Big Three parties, then I'll have just as good a chance (if not better) of being elected as them. The Labour Party was formed in 1893 and didn't win a General Election until 1945. The Liberals haven't won one since 1916. No other party outside of the "Big Three" has ever come close, despite the abundance of fringe parties currently and in the past. Why then, do you consider that you have "just as good a chance (if not better) of being elected", when you don't even have a party; you have no members; and only a rough draft of a partial manifesto with no clear indication of how you'd implement your policies? What experience and political credentials do you have that you could be the next Prime Minister and lead this country in two years time? |
| 05-08-2008 03:20 AM | |
| Lentil Burger |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
I'm going to have a party formed though. Which brings us back to your earlier assertion: Quote:
If I can afford to advertise as much as the Big Three parties, then I'll have just as good a chance (if not better) of being elected as them.
Money alone does not determine your chance of becoming elected. Many political parties have fielded candidates across the entire country with zero electoral success. What leads you to believe that your attempt will be any different? |
| 05-07-2008 02:55 PM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
I know. But my point is, you haven't got a party. You're talking about becoming PM - without a party, it can't be done... I'm going to have a party formed though. |
| 05-06-2008 10:07 AM | |
| FatFreddysCat | How many parliamentary candidates do you expect to have standing in the next General Election? |
| 05-06-2008 09:46 AM | |
| Lentil Burger |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
We may not in legal terms elect a Prime Minister but we elect a political party based on what the leader of that party is telling us - then when the party wins, that leader is usually the Prime Minister. I know. But my point is, you haven't got a party. You're talking about becoming PM - without a party, it can't be done. Quote:
I can't remember who off the top of my head but I'm sure there was one Prime Minister who didn't have a parliamentary majority...
That's always a possibility. In a hung parliament, no single party commands a majority. Traditionally, two parties form a coalition government, and the leader of the larger party becomes PM, granting cabinet seats to members of the smaller party. However, if no two parties can reach agreement, then one of two things take place - the leader of the larger party will be invited to form a minority government, or parliament will be dissolved and another election held. |
| 05-06-2008 07:29 AM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
Oh no you won't. Seriously... do you think money is the only thing governing your chances of getting elected? Then there's the minor detail that we don't actually elect prime ministers in this country... we elect MPs. To become Prime Minister, you have to be able to command a parliamentary majority and be invited to form a government by the monarch. woo pantomime! Oh yes I will No, I don't think money is the only thing governing my chances of getting elected. But it certainly helps - it allows for more publicity so more chance of voters. Of course it's important to have a decent set of policies too. We may not in legal terms elect a Prime Minister but we elect a political party based on what the leader of that party is telling us - then when the party wins, that leader is usually the Prime Minister. I can't remember who off the top of my head but I'm sure there was one Prime Minister who didn't have a parliamentary majority... this did make it difficult for some laws to get through, but it would be counter-productive to the other parties if they kept blocking laws for no reason other than they didn't like the main party. In addition, some people already want to be part of my political party and I intend to get more people. The invitation to become a government is basically just procedure now, as many years ago the rights of parliament over the moarch were asserted. If a certain party is voted for by enough of the population, they will become the new government. Theoretically the Queen could use her royal prerogative to prevent those elected from becoming a new government, but that's highly unlikely. It's like the right to refuse Royal Assent to a law (making it unenforcable) - the right has never been formally removed, but it's now seen as simply a procedure and hasn't been used for a long, long time. |
| 05-06-2008 05:05 AM | |
| Bof |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
To become Prime Minister, you have to be able to command a parliamentary majority and be invited to form a government by the monarch. You have butterflies inviting people to form governments in your country? 
|
| 05-06-2008 03:20 AM | |
| Lentil Burger |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
Yes I will. Oh no you won't. Seriously... do you think money is the only thing governing your chances of getting elected? Then there's the minor detail that we don't actually elect prime ministers in this country... we elect MPs. To become Prime Minister, you have to be able to command a parliamentary majority and be invited to form a government by the monarch. |
| 05-05-2008 10:16 PM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lentil Burger
No you won't. Yes I will. |
| 05-05-2008 06:33 AM | |
| Lentil Burger |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
If I can afford to advertise as much as the Big Three parties, then I'll have just as good a chance (if not better) of being elected as them. No you won't. |
| 05-03-2008 09:17 AM | |
| FatFreddysCat |
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionSpirit
I want to become Prime Minister, but I don't want to get companies to help me if they're either cruel or are going to decide the policies for me (as seems to happen with the "Big 3" political parties)... so how can I make enough money to advertise enough to have a fair chance of winning the next election? Any ideas? You raise money by the subscriptions and donations of party members and supporters, as all the other parties do. And/or by approaching ethically sound companies for donations. |
| 04-29-2008 06:41 AM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz
I'd vote for a pirate. And, as things go, there are more pirates* today than prime ministers so you definitely have a better chance of being the former than the latter. Although, of course, to be both would be a coup to be remembered. *A member of the crew of a ship that does not possess a commission from a sovereign nation. A ship or a member of the crew of a ship that is not registered (commissioned) with any sovereign nation. More of them out there than you'd think. ETA: That's not even taking into account software, music, video and game piracy! Just piracy on the high seas. If I can afford to advertise as much as the Big Three parties, then I'll have just as good a chance (if not better) of being elected as them. |
| 04-29-2008 05:54 AM | |
| Kiz |
I'd vote for a pirate. And, as things go, there are more pirates* today than prime ministers so you definitely have a better chance of being the former than the latter. Although, of course, to be both would be a coup to be remembered. *A member of the crew of a ship that does not possess a commission from a sovereign nation. A ship or a member of the crew of a ship that is not registered (commissioned) with any sovereign nation. More of them out there than you'd think. ETA: That's not even taking into account software, music, video and game piracy! Just piracy on the high seas. |
| 04-29-2008 05:51 AM | |
| LionSpirit |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz
Become a pirate. I've always wanted to be a pirate. Thanks for your very serious and helpful reply Here's mine: http://www.venganza.org/
|
| 04-29-2008 05:46 AM | |
| Kiz | Become a pirate. I've always wanted to be a pirate. |
| 04-29-2008 05:42 AM | |
| LionSpirit | I want to become Prime Minister, but I don't want to get companies to help me if they're either cruel or are going to decide the policies for me (as seems to happen with the "Big 3" political parties)... so how can I make enough money to advertise enough to have a fair chance of winning the next election? Any ideas? |
| Posting Rules | |