There's no such thing as a super majority in the UK parliamentary system. A party with a 50 seat majority can pass just as much legislation as a party with a 150 seat majority
All politicians are corrupted we need a party talk for the people we need a reform party not a lieing Labour party there will be revelation coming to Britain if Labour get a super majority there will fight on the street when the country has its people up rising we must save Britain 🇬🇧 from corrupted politicians
They terrified of Labour turning the UK into a socialist and left wing country that will satisfy the young voters in the short term but will harm the country in the long term.
I once met my local Tory MP and asked him why he refused to support proportional representation to make the voting system fairer. His answer? “We prefer strong governments” - but apparently not when the boot is on the other foot.
for the last 100 years FPTP has hugely helped the tories. as they were the only right wing party. whilst most of us are centre or to the left, but split between 4 or 5 parties
The real answer is that nobody would reform a system which put them where they are. Reforming a voting system is therefore a policy which would only ever be supported by a minority party.
Boy your MP is hilarious! The Tories haven't been a strong government for many many years now even with their massive majority! The Brexit referendum was done to stop infighting within the party and after that it's been nothing but disaster
And yet in the past 14 years the Tories have had 2 minority governments leading to a coalition and different kind of deal with the DUP. (Forgotten the name).
I hope Labour gets the biggest majority in history and then makes use of it. Things need to change in this country. It no longer functions on behalf of its citizens.
@@ibexdnb2879Nobody is voting for Reform. Outside of GB News' social media interfaces, this private company led by the top 0.01% of wealth has no pull.
Shutting down press organisations (even ones as loathsome as the Mail) is a bad idea - you don't want every government to have that sort of power. But banning media ownership by people who are not resident in the UK for tax purposes? Now that sounds appealing. If you want to be more radical, ban private ownership of media outlets altogether and have them run by some form of social interest non-profit (not government run).
@gabrieljean-batiste2006 it's not about non-parliamentary vs. parliamentary system, it's about written constitution vs. non-written constitution. To change the constitution a 2/3 supermajority (though the Finnish term "määräenemmistö" is usually translated "qualified majority") of the MPs is needed, but then the changes must be confirmed in the next parliament. But a supermajority of 5/6 of the MPs can decide, that the change is urgent, to make the change to enter in force immediately.
On the other hand, Attlee's last election left him with a tiny majority leading to loads of issues. They had to drag sick MPs into the house for votes. If a supermajority has any meaning in the Westminster system, it's not having that issue. Also, it does help to mitigate the effects of internal dissent, even if it might even propagate it too.
There's a cost of living crisis (actually a Tory crisis!) you know? Why spend money on the Daily Hiel when you could use its little sister paper, The Metro, as its free?
The Daily Hiel's little sister paper, The Metro is a cost free alternative you could use during the cost of living crisis (actually known as a Tory crisis!).
they have been in full panic mode for weeks. A delicious sight to behold. Most of their articles are behind a paywall now, i'd love to see the numbers of how many of the rabid commentors on that site actually pay to read that entertainment comic
Is it the Daily Mail's decision to decide the size of the "Labour party majority" or the British peoples VOTE. What next, a Tory party who refuse to leave office just has Donald Trump tried to do. FFS what have we become!
That can’t happen because as soon as Labour win a majority of seats Starmer can go to the King and ask to form a government this kicking the Tories out.
A supermajority in the US Senate means that a motion will command 3/5 of the votes, allowing it to be put straight to vote without debate, thus preventing a filibuster. The term supermajority in regard to UK politics makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
If 48/52 was a majority to take the U.K. out of the EU, and was described as ‘the will of the people’ then a Labour majority of 100-150 will be described as?
@@georgebutler44 If they were genuine, rational political actors then I would agree with you. But the current Conservative Party are dishonest, selfish and corrupt. They wouldn’t hold the government to account, they would engage in yet more smears, schemes and untruths. They don’t deserve the position of official opposition. A Lib Dem opposition would be a much more productive and workable scenario. And how does a drastically diminished Tory vote represent a huge portion of the country being unrepresented? Are you as concerned about the voice of millions of us being completely ignored over the last 14 years? The FPTP system doesn’t fairly represent the choices of the electorate anyway.
The Tories have come in for a lot of stick lately and deservedly so. But people are ignoring who it was that enabled them to bring the country to its knees, and that was the British public. You voted for them, again and again, for 14 years. You get the government you deserve.
The difference being, is that the civil service is clearly left wing and refused to do what the government wanted. With a Labour majority, you will get all sorts of extreme left ideology policies.
What is functionally the difference between an 80 seat majority and a 200 seat majority? Any majority above 20-25 gives the government almost complete free-reign to enact anything they want, so there's no real difference between 80 and 200.
Absolutely they are just petrified they get wiped out. It’s a tactic apparently that worked well in a Queensland election in Australia where the poll lead of the party out in front was slashed as a result of the ‘don’t give them too much power’ tactic.
Not strictly true. The House of Lords is entitled to reject any policies that contradict/do not appear in the manifesto the government were elected on. So technically they can't just do 'anything'. Unfortunately the Lords is pretty toothless these days so this doesn't work in practice, especially with contemptuous politicians we've had over the last decade or so. We definitely need to reform parliament and the electoral system.
a super M allows for more of the back benchers to take the Question Period off. with only a slight lead of a few seats the govt might fall due to a non confidence Vote.
@@johnbeechybut the OP asked what the difference was between a majority of 80 and one of 200, not the difference between 8 and 200. We all know with a very small majority a party is at risk of losing votes to a small number of rebels or to losing their majority through the death or disgrace of a few MPs. The 80 vs 200 comparison is pointing out the deafening hypocrisy of the Tory press, wetting themselves over a Starmer government only a few years after cuming in their pants about a Boris one.
I'm not English, but even I know that SUPERmajority is a non sense. Why? A comfortable majority is what is needed, everything else is secondary with this political system. The members can be 'whipped' to vote for legislation, so as long as the party has (comfortable) majority, it is given. I'm not scared of this SUPERmajority thing.
It’s phenomenal that the person who said they wanted the Tories “absolutely obliterated, smashed to the ground.” was once a Tory. That is a startling fact.
Owen Jones thinks it excuses him from being a Tory enabler, which he surely is. His channel is 95% rants about Israel / Palestine conflict now…..but then being a comfortably off metropolitan elite, he hasn’t got to worry about paying for his heating
Owen Jones is a nasty, spiteful hypocrite who just doesn’t want to be wrong. His obsession with Corbyn has made him a Tory enabler; he can’t support any Labour leader who can achieve what his beloved Jezza never could. Actually win something. I actually believe Jones would rather have another 5 years of the Tories just out of spite. Labour are better off without his ‘support’
He's doing it because he doesn't agree with many of Labour's positions, especially regarding Gaza, and because it's obvious to everyone that Labour are going to win comfortably anyway. Whether you agree with him, or not, he's only standing for what his believes.
@@David_Bower Owen Jones is a metropolitan elite playing at politics. He is a self indulgent socialist. The millions of people suffering food and fuel insecurity aren’t spending their days worrying about a Middle East conflict over which we have zero control….they are worried about getting enough to eat and paying the bills
I am lifelong conservative voter but it is now abundantly clear that labour and kier starmer need their day in the sun. If he holds to the middle ground I think he could be in power for the long run
Harold Wilson said that it was easier to manage the parliamentary Labour Party when he had a small majority (1964) than when he had a large one (1966). This was because those MPs who were discontented could express their discontent when there was a large majority, because they could do so without threatening the government, unlike than if there was a small majority. That said, I would like to see a large Labour majority because the Tories need to be told that the country is finished with their divisive policies - the victimisation of the poor and of immigrants, the endless corruption, some of which has come out during this campaign and the fact that they have left the country in a far worse state than what they inherited in 2010.
A majority of 20 is enough to dominate a Parliament. Why the Tories are worried is that Al the nice freebies their MPs used to get will disappear and donors will not waste their money on the Tories.
The Conservatives had a HUGE majority back when Johnson took over ... Labour were STILL able to challenge and ultimately overturn this majority mainly due to inept and corrupt Tory practices and no little intelligent debate and commonsense from Labour .
they both dislike labour, but for different reasons. the mail because they wont gun down immigrant boats, jones because of gaza and them being too centrist.
At least you got a rise in the bottom tax rate threshold, since 2016 that threshold has been eaten away by Tory chancellors and should be 1570 Also in 2010 the IMF and the EU were pedalling Austerity only the US didn't try it though everyone abandoned it by 2012. You kind of need context anyway since then the Lib-Dems have drifted back left and abandoned NeoLiberal economics.
There's nothing at all complicated about this. The tories are all too aware of how they abused a supermajority and how they would if they had the chance again. Their worry is that they judge Labour by their own standards of depravity and greed. It's a mistake most arrogant, entitled types make.
Always the same with these tories. No empathy, no self awareness. Never take a problem seriously until it affects them personally. Cry about it, Tories. You’re just another playground bully who crumbled when finally feeling the weight of the real world. If you’re strong, you’ll learn. But you’re not, so you won’t. As ever.
I've often heard the term "supermajority" used in the American political system. As I understand it (willing to be corrected) a supermajority describes one party being in charge of the Senate, Congress and the White House.
The Tories had a majority of 80 which should have meant they had no trouble enacting their policies. Why isn't this classed as a "supermajority" by them?
Tories had a significant majority last time around and that was a disaster. Two prime ministers later and people will literally wade through c**p to vote them out.
Sometimes when I am in a public place where newspapers are available for customers, I pick up the daily mail and check the date against my iPhone, this is probably the only accurate information printed in this rag
If the government had a majority of 1, then one back-bench rebel could block the government. If the government held every single seat in parliament, then there would be no opposition to hold the government to account. This is mathematically impossible in this election because none of the parties are contesting every seat. When the Labour opposition were holding the government to account in the previous Parliament, how many MPs did you actually hear from on a regular basis? Basically the shadow cabinet plus a few back-benchers who specialise in a specific issue like Stella Creasy on Payday loans. So, whether it is an 80 seat majority or a 200 seat majority, it isn't really going to make any practical difference. What will make a difference is whether the Tories or Lib Dems are the official opposition, and that is the real choice we have in this election.
I think the Mail are looking down the road to the next GE after this one. Labour could lose a fair number of seats in five years time and still have a majority. If the Tories are crushed this time, it's an awful long way back.
Think about this for a second... If Labour are in office for 20 years it will mean they won 4 elections in a row. What the Tories are saying is.. "Vote Labour and you'll be so happy that you'll keep voting for them".
Spot on Natasha re Owen Jones. His reasoning is based purely on the fact that Starmer is not Corbyn. If Corbin had managed a large majority, he would have rejoiced in it.
While I despise the Tories and Reform, I observed back in 2019 how unhealthy it was that Johnson secured an 80 seat majority with only 43% of those who voted actually backing him. Ironically, he called it the "Brexit" election when 57% of those who voted actually picked anti-Brexit parties, but there we are. Now we face the prospect of Labour securing a super majority of 150 - 300 with a similar, or even lesser percentage of those who vote. I just pray the Lib Dems beat the Tories to become the official opposition. Main take: our voting system is no longer fit for purpose and we need PR!
Dear LBC, Stop talking about a Labour supermajority, there is no such thing as a supermajority in UK elections or Parliament. Stop regurgitating CCHQ's propoganda.
Its time for the 2 biggest parties to step aside and allow a smaller party to take a chance at making change in the country. Britain is meant to be a Democracy after all.
Governments just need a working majority. Very large majorities are a bit of a liability, as you have a lot of your MPs who can't be part of the government, so have the time and freedom to make trouble.
I've always understood super majority as a 60% majority. It is thought to neutralise the 'can't be bothered' to better reflect the electorate position. Less that 50% of the electorate voted actively for Brexit. With the changes in demographics the brexit vote is becoming less valid as the months go by.
On the idea of a coalition of the parties, a great statesman once said "great questions if our times will not be solved by debates and resolutions of majorities" unless you've got all the time in the world I suppose to wait for endless committees to make decisions which I don't think we have.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "SUPERMAJORITY" OUTSIDE OF THE USA !!! OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. ANY PARTY CAN ONLY HAVE A "MAJORITY" BIG OR SMALL.
Daily Mail people are bad faith actors and can be dismissed out of hand. Big majorities are the norm under FPTP. If you don’t want big majorities, then you need some form of PR.
In the shape the UK finds itself Labour is going to struggle regardless of having a super majority. There are tough seas ahead regardless of who Captains the ship of state.
The Lib Dems weren't able to keep the tories in check - we ended up with the 2012 Health & Welfare Bill which was devastating to the NHS and social care provision.
Tories have an absolute cheek to complain about a Labour super majority with all the damage they did with there one
There's no such thing as a super majority in the UK parliamentary system. A party with a 50 seat majority can pass just as much legislation as a party with a 150 seat majority
All politicians are corrupted we need a party talk for the people we need a reform party not a lieing Labour party there will be revelation coming to Britain if Labour get a super majority there will fight on the street when the country has its people up rising we must save Britain 🇬🇧 from corrupted politicians
They terrified of Labour turning the UK into a socialist and left wing country that will satisfy the young voters in the short term but will harm the country in the long term.
@@kityhawk2000True, although a larger majority allows for more gentle whipping. So the party in power takes longer to tear itself apart
@@leming400 Or the opposite, a large majority can mean more disagreement with the party and harder for the leadership keep control.
I once met my local Tory MP and asked him why he refused to support proportional representation to make the voting system fairer. His answer? “We prefer strong governments” - but apparently not when the boot is on the other foot.
for the last 100 years FPTP has hugely helped the tories. as they were the only right wing party. whilst most of us are centre or to the left, but split between 4 or 5 parties
The real answer is that nobody would reform a system which put them where they are. Reforming a voting system is therefore a policy which would only ever be supported by a minority party.
Boy your MP is hilarious! The Tories haven't been a strong government for many many years now even with their massive majority! The Brexit referendum was done to stop infighting within the party and after that it's been nothing but disaster
5 prime ministers in 8 years
“Strong governments” 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
And yet in the past 14 years the Tories have had 2 minority governments leading to a coalition and different kind of deal with the DUP. (Forgotten the name).
I hope Labour gets the biggest majority in history and then makes use of it. Things need to change in this country. It no longer functions on behalf of its citizens.
Starver will sell off what's left after the tories have filled their pockets.
The mail is a horrible and disgusting paper 😢
Promoting the petty wants of the mega rich and big business at the expense of its idiotic readers who desperately need a dose of socialism.
What mainstream paper isn't?
Socialism is a bankrupt 19th century ideology. Get a new book.
The Daily Mail would have no problems with a tory supermajority or even a reform one. That's all there is to say on the subject.
Exactly.
Vote Reform
@@ibexdnb2879 Why aren't there Conservative or Labour bots? It's almost like you're unelectable and Russia has to stoop very low to get votes!
@@ibexdnb2879Nobody is voting for Reform.
Outside of GB News' social media interfaces, this private company led by the top 0.01% of wealth has no pull.
@@ibexdnb2879 Why?
Daily Mail needs shutting down.
Give it 10 years (if that) and it’ll die off along with its boomer fan base. Does anyone under 70 actually read it?
That's why they're in panic mode!
Shutting down press organisations (even ones as loathsome as the Mail) is a bad idea - you don't want every government to have that sort of power. But banning media ownership by people who are not resident in the UK for tax purposes? Now that sounds appealing. If you want to be more radical, ban private ownership of media outlets altogether and have them run by some form of social interest non-profit (not government run).
@@samhunter1205I mean it's just a business like any other. Same as Amazon stores and warehouses in the UK while Bezos lives in the US
But they are so entertaining with their ridiculous headlines
The idea of a super majority in British politics is a nonsense, it's an American import.
All about creating fear in the readership.
Tories do love to import the American Republican terms/rhetoric.
@gabrieljean-batiste2006 it's not about non-parliamentary vs. parliamentary system, it's about written constitution vs. non-written constitution. To change the constitution a 2/3 supermajority (though the Finnish term "määräenemmistö" is usually translated "qualified majority") of the MPs is needed, but then the changes must be confirmed in the next parliament. But a supermajority of 5/6 of the MPs can decide, that the change is urgent, to make the change to enter in force immediately.
Didn't the Tories have an 80 seat majority and could donate they wanted? But when it's labour it's the end of the world? Haha
On the other hand, Attlee's last election left him with a tiny majority leading to loads of issues. They had to drag sick MPs into the house for votes. If a supermajority has any meaning in the Westminster system, it's not having that issue. Also, it does help to mitigate the effects of internal dissent, even if it might even propagate it too.
The Daily Mail would be my first choice for emergency use toilet paper.
I wouldn’t even touch it for that.
I wouldn't even inlict the rag on my ringpiece never mind my eyes!
There's a cost of living crisis (actually a Tory crisis!) you know? Why spend money on the Daily Hiel when you could use its little sister paper, The Metro, as its free?
No. You'll block your drains.
The Daily Hiel's little sister paper, The Metro is a cost free alternative you could use during the cost of living crisis (actually known as a Tory crisis!).
The Daily Fail.
The Daily Heil
'The DAILY HEIL FAIL'...
The Daily Heil
If only we could vote out Rupert Murdoch and his horrible right wing media monopoly on the press.
they have been in full panic mode for weeks. A delicious sight to behold. Most of their articles are behind a paywall now, i'd love to see the numbers of how many of the rabid commentors on that site actually pay to read that entertainment comic
All labour has to do is get the money stolen by tories back.
Yes put the profiteers in prison and find a way to get us back in the E.U.
And fund the NHS with an extra £350 million a week.
And get proportional representation to prevent tories from winning seats.
The mail is toilet paper
Talking of which, the DM editor Lord Ashcroft was hiding in a toilet when being questioned being chased about his tax affairs.
Not even worthy for that purpose.
The daily mail is for entertainment purposes not news.
Not even for that use: it will make that body part MUCH DIRTIER.
Wipeout to Help out folks.
Is it the Daily Mail's decision to decide the size of the "Labour party majority" or the British peoples VOTE. What next, a Tory party who refuse to leave office just has Donald Trump tried to do. FFS what have we become!
Well said.
Haha, I wouldn't put it past the petulant Sunak, Rees-Mogg etc.
That can’t happen because as soon as Labour win a majority of seats Starmer can go to the King and ask to form a government this kicking the Tories out.
A newspaper openly telling people how to vote is ridiculous and pathetic. Sad that we all know someone who will do as they say
@@spud95128 Sheep, springs to mind!...
Who reads Daily Mail apart from it's blinkered ageing and dwindling readership.
Cattle fodder for the Cattle
Ignorant to say the least
Correct 💯👍
I'm 70 NEVER read mail or express, they are everything that's wrong in this country.
I hate the rag but I believe it is the largest daily paper in the UK.
@MrBizteck yesterday's newspaper for yesterday's politics
A supermajority in the US Senate means that a motion will command 3/5 of the votes, allowing it to be put straight to vote without debate, thus preventing a filibuster. The term supermajority in regard to UK politics makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Daily Mail is no reputable source, i gave up at that point.
The Daily Fail.
Quite frankly if I thought Genghis Khan had the best chance of beating the Tories I'd vote for him.
If 48/52 was a majority to take the U.K. out of the EU, and was described as ‘the will of the people’ then a Labour majority of 100-150 will be described as?
the will of anti-tory sentiment
Supermajority. Keep up! 😂
@@collapsiblechair9112Precisely. 😂
That 48/52 was in a referendum..
@@jamonit7169 erm....and a vote in an Election is....think about it....Buehller....Buehller....
Never listened to this woman before, I like her. Constructs debate well and knows her stuff.
The desperation from the Tories and the Tory leaning press is lovely to see 🍿😁
They're just projecting, given the level of spite that exists in the world of the Tory.
Tories warning the public about Labour, is like the demolishing man warning you about the house builder
They didnt complain when tories got a massive majority in 2019 did they 🤔
44% of votes cast is not a majority.
No such thing as a supermajority in the UK
The same Mail that ran page after page on Rayner, yet have sweet FA to say about gamblegate. Cartoon paper for their cartoon seeking readership
More Tory panic & tears… delicious!
There’s a moreish almost _umami_ flavour to their panic. Now who’s project fear?
They're all panicking like f**k, its fantastic to watch 😂
@@georgebutler44 We don't have to imagine, that in effect is what we have had for the last 14 years.
@@georgebutler44Ah, there's the Tory disdain and fear for the youth. You've done enough damage, move on.
@@georgebutler44 If they were genuine, rational political actors then I would agree with you. But the current Conservative Party are dishonest, selfish and corrupt. They wouldn’t hold the government to account, they would engage in yet more smears, schemes and untruths. They don’t deserve the position of official opposition. A Lib Dem opposition would be a much more productive and workable scenario.
And how does a drastically diminished Tory vote represent a huge portion of the country being unrepresented? Are you as concerned about the voice of millions of us being completely ignored over the last 14 years? The FPTP system doesn’t fairly represent the choices of the electorate anyway.
The Tories have come in for a lot of stick lately and deservedly so. But people are ignoring who it was that enabled them to bring the country to its knees, and that was the British public. You voted for them, again and again, for 14 years. You get the government you deserve.
The difference being, is that the civil service is clearly left wing and refused to do what the government wanted. With a Labour majority, you will get all sorts of extreme left ideology policies.
@@Steve-s8k Ooh, hardly! Talk to Owen Jones or, Oh Jeremy Corbyn, dear.
@@SuezWSuezW Starmer never got rid of them, so lot are still on par with Corbyn.
What is functionally the difference between an 80 seat majority and a 200 seat majority?
Any majority above 20-25 gives the government almost complete free-reign to enact anything they want, so there's no real difference between 80 and 200.
Absolutely they are just petrified they get wiped out. It’s a tactic apparently that worked well in a Queensland election in Australia where the poll lead of the party out in front was slashed as a result of the ‘don’t give them too much power’ tactic.
Not strictly true. The House of Lords is entitled to reject any policies that contradict/do not appear in the manifesto the government were elected on. So technically they can't just do 'anything'. Unfortunately the Lords is pretty toothless these days so this doesn't work in practice, especially with contemptuous politicians we've had over the last decade or so. We definitely need to reform parliament and the electoral system.
a super M allows for more of the back benchers to take the Question Period off. with only a slight lead of a few seats the govt might fall due to a non confidence Vote.
@@johnbeechybut the OP asked what the difference was between a majority of 80 and one of 200, not the difference between 8 and 200. We all know with a very small majority a party is at risk of losing votes to a small number of rebels or to losing their majority through the death or disgrace of a few MPs. The 80 vs 200 comparison is pointing out the deafening hypocrisy of the Tory press, wetting themselves over a Starmer government only a few years after cuming in their pants about a Boris one.
I'm not English, but even I know that SUPERmajority is a non sense. Why? A comfortable majority is what is needed, everything else is secondary with this political system. The members can be 'whipped' to vote for legislation, so as long as the party has (comfortable) majority, it is given.
I'm not scared of this SUPERmajority thing.
It’s phenomenal that the person who said they wanted the Tories “absolutely obliterated, smashed to the ground.” was once a Tory. That is a startling fact.
Not really,I've always been anti Tory but the present crop are unlike anything we've had before.
@@anthonysteel6877Britain got rich murdering or enslaving absolutely anyone they could and stealing their countries... don't kid yourself.
ex chain smokers r usually the first to demand 'smoking be banned'.
@@johnbeechy Not true. I'm an ex-smoker and have no problem with cigarette smoke but I detest vaping.
@@PanglossDr I'm an ex smoker and only vape now
I agree that we should all vote tactically but to vote tactically to keep the Tories out & drop them into 3rd place
Bet Torries think super majority for Tories is not a problem
Shhhh... don't mention anything about "bets".😂
This was an absolutely amazing segment. Great callers and a fantastic host, more of this LBC! She’s informed polite and honest,
Owen Jones thinks it excuses him from being a Tory enabler, which he surely is.
His channel is 95% rants about Israel / Palestine conflict now…..but then being a comfortably off metropolitan elite, he hasn’t got to worry about paying for his heating
Owen Jones is a nasty, spiteful hypocrite who just doesn’t want to be wrong. His obsession with Corbyn has made him a Tory enabler; he can’t support any Labour leader who can achieve what his beloved Jezza never could. Actually win something. I actually believe Jones would rather have another 5 years of the Tories just out of spite. Labour are better off without his ‘support’
He is a shill.
He purports to support Labour until election time, then latches on to something to pillory them on.
He's doing it because he doesn't agree with many of Labour's positions, especially regarding Gaza, and because it's obvious to everyone that Labour are going to win comfortably anyway. Whether you agree with him, or not, he's only standing for what his believes.
@@David_Bower Owen Jones is a metropolitan elite playing at politics.
He is a self indulgent socialist.
The millions of people suffering food and fuel insecurity aren’t spending their days worrying about a Middle East conflict over which we have zero control….they are worried about getting enough to eat and paying the bills
Terrified that they & their views are going to be sidelined by reality.
Daily Mail owner a NonDom?
Get every Tory out.
I am lifelong conservative voter but it is now abundantly clear that labour and kier starmer need their day in the sun. If he holds to the middle ground I think he could be in power for the long run
At least you are honest now. Didn't vast inequality and abject child poverty resonate before?
Harold Wilson said that it was easier to manage the parliamentary Labour Party when he had a small majority (1964) than when he had a large one (1966). This was because those MPs who were discontented could express their discontent when there was a large majority, because they could do so without threatening the government, unlike than if there was a small majority.
That said, I would like to see a large Labour majority because the Tories need to be told that the country is finished with their divisive policies - the victimisation of the poor and of immigrants, the endless corruption, some of which has come out during this campaign and the fact that they have left the country in a far worse state than what they inherited in 2010.
Thank you Karen for your total honesty.
A majority of 20 is enough to dominate a Parliament. Why the Tories are worried is that Al the nice freebies their MPs used to get will disappear and donors will not waste their money on the Tories.
They fear the Tory party will cease to exist
All Selfservatives together.
A radio station that lets the caller speak without interruptions and with respect. Try listening to Talk radio!
Every vote that isn’t tactical in a marginal seat will end up getting or keeping a Tory in power
Vote tactically
Get the Tories OUT !!
That list is going to be handy for those that want to oust Tory MP's. Work both ways.
Who reads the Daily mail and listens to Owen Jones.. LOL.... Tony cuenca
The Conservatives had a HUGE majority back when Johnson took over ... Labour were STILL able to challenge and ultimately overturn this majority mainly due to inept and corrupt Tory practices and no little intelligent debate and commonsense from Labour .
Well Carol, it's people like you that contributed towards the UK being where it is today.
Congratulations on being a Tory voter. Bravo....
Absolutely true .
I don't believe Owen Jones would have said the same for Corbyn😂
Would the Tories complain about a "super majority" if they were 20+% ahead? No, didn't think so.
they just care about themselves.
Poo in the tap water, rivers
daily mail and Owen Jones - horseshoe politics.
True tbf - so different, and yet so similar. Absolutism has never been popular in Britain.
@@methanedirigible It's not just Britain. It's the whole democratic world that is becoming polarised, deliberately in my opinion, by outside forces.
they both dislike labour, but for different reasons. the mail because they wont gun down immigrant boats, jones because of gaza and them being too centrist.
Owen Jones does appear to be an egotistical and politically illiterate individual
Luke Akehurst hasn't been ejected for antisemitism unlike thousands of actual Jews, so not consistent on that allegedly important issue.
liberal and tory coalition still gave us austerity.
At least you got a rise in the bottom tax rate threshold, since 2016 that threshold has been eaten away by Tory chancellors and should be 1570
Also in 2010 the IMF and the EU were pedalling Austerity only the US didn't try it though everyone abandoned it by 2012. You kind of need context anyway since then the Lib-Dems have drifted back left and abandoned NeoLiberal economics.
Only change you will get if you vote Reform.... 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
There's nothing at all complicated about this.
The tories are all too aware of how they abused a supermajority and how they would if they had the chance again.
Their worry is that they judge Labour by their own standards of depravity and greed.
It's a mistake most arrogant, entitled types make.
Always the same with these tories. No empathy, no self awareness. Never take a problem seriously until it affects them personally.
Cry about it, Tories. You’re just another playground bully who crumbled when finally feeling the weight of the real world. If you’re strong, you’ll learn. But you’re not, so you won’t. As ever.
I've often heard the term "supermajority" used in the American political system. As I understand it (willing to be corrected) a supermajority describes one party being in charge of the Senate, Congress and the White House.
OK this is completely irrelevant but i really like the matching eye shadow, top, and headphone highlights, lol
lol.....a dozen militant feminists have just fainted with horror. When they wake up, expect e-mails!!
Supermajority? Superbullshit more like
The Tories should be scared when telegraph readership is saying they want the party smashed to the ground.
The Tories had a majority of 80 which should have meant they had no trouble enacting their policies. Why isn't this classed as a "supermajority" by them?
The Tories believe nothing actually applies to them, they’re above it all
It's scare tatic by the tories to try and make sure nobody else's can have a look at what's on the books left behind...
Tories had a significant majority last time around and that was a disaster. Two prime ministers later and people will literally wade through c**p to vote them out.
Join the revolution ,Vote reform
No such thing.
Sometimes when I am in a public place where newspapers are available for customers, I pick up the daily mail and check the date against my iPhone, this is probably the only accurate information printed in this rag
If the government had a majority of 1, then one back-bench rebel could block the government.
If the government held every single seat in parliament, then there would be no opposition to hold the government to account. This is mathematically impossible in this election because none of the parties are contesting every seat.
When the Labour opposition were holding the government to account in the previous Parliament, how many MPs did you actually hear from on a regular basis? Basically the shadow cabinet plus a few back-benchers who specialise in a specific issue like Stella Creasy on Payday loans.
So, whether it is an 80 seat majority or a 200 seat majority, it isn't really going to make any practical difference.
What will make a difference is whether the Tories or Lib Dems are the official opposition, and that is the real choice we have in this election.
I think the Mail are looking down the road to the next GE after this one. Labour could lose a fair number of seats in five years time and still have a majority. If the Tories are crushed this time, it's an awful long way back.
@@martinmurphy9679 If it is like 1922 when the Liberal Party finished 3rd behind Labour, then nobody alive today will see a future Tory government.
First caller is absolutely right - a majority is a majority.
You can't trust a Prime Minister with a one inch forehead and doesn't know when to carry an umbrella.
Super majority is an American political term, it had no meaning in the UK whatsoever. Why parrot deliberate tory misinformation. ?
Think about this for a second... If Labour are in office for 20 years it will mean they won 4 elections in a row. What the Tories are saying is.. "Vote Labour and you'll be so happy that you'll keep voting for them".
Dowden on Sky this morning said the ultimate aim is for the conservators os to have an absolute majority. Total hypocrites.
Dowden will be out of a job next weekend, all being well 🙏
No such thing as a supermajority in Britain. A regular majority guarantees the legislation will pass, and that's it.
No. You are so wrong. Did the Rwanda bill go through with their 80-seat majority? Stop giving this supermajority nonsense oxygen, please ffs.
Spot on Natasha re Owen Jones. His reasoning is based purely on the fact that Starmer is not Corbyn. If Corbin had managed a large majority, he would have rejoiced in it.
If you are concerned about large majorities, you support proportional representation.
"Absolutely obliterated". So powerful to hear that
While I despise the Tories and Reform, I observed back in 2019 how unhealthy it was that Johnson secured an 80 seat majority with only 43% of those who voted actually backing him. Ironically, he called it the "Brexit" election when 57% of those who voted actually picked anti-Brexit parties, but there we are. Now we face the prospect of Labour securing a super majority of 150 - 300 with a similar, or even lesser percentage of those who vote. I just pray the Lib Dems beat the Tories to become the official opposition. Main take: our voting system is no longer fit for purpose and we need PR!
Starmer's already ruled out PR, which means Labour will win, then eventually lose again. And then we'll end up back where we are now in 30 yrs time 🙄
A majority is a majority regardless if it’s 10 or 210
Dear LBC, Stop talking about a Labour supermajority, there is no such thing as a supermajority in UK elections or Parliament. Stop regurgitating CCHQ's propoganda.
That is almost exactly what she said in the first minute of the clip.😂
I saw that headline of Tory tactical voting. Is it just for our reader in Brighton and Hove… vote Green.
Not seen this presenter before as only listen to lbc on RUclips but she’s great. Fantastic discussion. I’ll be looking out for more.
It doesn't matter what the majority size is, a decent majority is all that is needed to pass your legislation. That is how our system works.
I would say that labour and the tories have a lot to worry about reform are going trounce both parties at the election
It's the daydreaming about the ozone layer that gets me.
labour and Tories and both terrified of reform and Nigel
I don’t remember the Tories complaining in 2019, funny that 🤔
The irony and hypocricy is that the tories were fine with their own massive majority…. But when its not them..
Its time for the 2 biggest parties to step aside and allow a smaller party to take a chance at making change in the country. Britain is meant to be a Democracy after all.
Governments just need a working majority. Very large majorities are a bit of a liability, as you have a lot of your MPs who can't be part of the government, so have the time and freedom to make trouble.
I've always understood super majority as a 60% majority. It is thought to neutralise the 'can't be bothered' to better reflect the electorate position. Less that 50% of the electorate voted actively for Brexit. With the changes in demographics the brexit vote is becoming less valid as the months go by.
We need big changes, which needs a big majority. If they’re more competent and less corrupt than the last shower, we might make it to Christmas.
On the idea of a coalition of the parties, a great statesman once said "great questions if our times will not be solved by debates and resolutions of majorities" unless you've got all the time in the world I suppose to wait for endless committees to make decisions which I don't think we have.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "SUPERMAJORITY" OUTSIDE OF THE USA !!!
OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. ANY PARTY CAN ONLY HAVE A "MAJORITY" BIG OR SMALL.
Aw poor Daily Volkischer Beobachter. Concerned for it's gammony 'readership'
In 2024 what kind of people buy the daily mail? People are desperate
Daily Mail people are bad faith actors and can be dismissed out of hand.
Big majorities are the norm under FPTP. If you don’t want big majorities, then you need some form of PR.
We think were going to lose but we don't want a thrashing.
In the shape the UK finds itself Labour is going to struggle regardless of having a super majority. There are tough seas ahead regardless of who Captains the ship of state.
Why are you promoting the idea of a Super majority? There is no such thing in UK politics! You either have a majority or you don't!
The Lib Dems weren't able to keep the tories in check - we ended up with the 2012 Health & Welfare Bill which was devastating to the NHS and social care provision.