Martin McGuinness resigns, Stormont in chaos

[lichtgilphead]

1 hour ago, The Master said:

On a point of order, the Tories did actually used to be hindered by FPTP because their "heartlands" were a small number of large (geographically-speaking) constituencies, while Labour had a large number of small constituencies.

It used to be that a 3 point lead for Labour gave them a majority, while the Tories would need 11 points. 

Of course, things have now changed. Scotland no longer being "in the bag" for Labour being a significant leveller. 

Obviously, you'll be able to show that the Tories & Labour have been more disadvantaged than the SNP in Scotland at any UK election apart from the last one?

If not, what was the point of your post?

I'm not sure that the SNP percentage of the vote has ever been rewarded by more seats than they deserved apart from the GE2015. Please feel free to correct me. 

[RedRob72]

DUP won't get 30 seats
Pleasing
 

Sinn Fein 'Standing up for Equality, Respect & Integrity'!
Are you having a laugh!?

Mike Nesbitt must be bitterly regretting his SDLP pledge now, although looked almost relieved that he was going after his resignation announcement.

[The Master]

18 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Obviously, you'll be able to show that the Tories & Labour have been more disadvantaged than the SNP in Scotland at any UK election apart from the last one?

If not, what was the point of your post?

I'm not sure that the SNP percentage of the vote has ever been rewarded by more seats than they deserved apart from the GE2015. Please feel free to correct me. 

The point of my post was to point out that 2015 was the first time in Christ knows how long that a relatively* small Tory lead in the popular vote translated into a majority in Parliament.

Previously, FPTP favoured Labour. 

I was mostly replying to the final sentence of the partial quote from your post, viz., the claim that FPTP benefits the Tories.

 

*Bearing in mind that, even still, a 6.5pp lead for the Tories over Labour could only muster a working majority of 12; Tony Blair had a majority of 66 in 2005 with a mere 1.8pp lead.

[sureiknow]

DUP win.

[sparky88]

4 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Obviously, you'll be able to show that the Tories & Labour have been more disadvantaged than the SNP in Scotland at any UK election apart from the last one?

If not, what was the point of your post?

I'm not sure that the SNP percentage of the vote has ever been rewarded by more seats than they deserved apart from the GE2015. Please feel free to correct me. 

Its always been a wee shame for the SNP.

[LongTimeLurker]

3 hours ago, sureiknow said:

DUP win.

...and this is probably as bad is it gets for Unionism for at least the next 15 to 20 years as adjustments will no doubt be made in response to what happened to make the main Unionist party more transfer friendly again and dissuade smaller fringe party candidates and independents from running, so if anything a missed opportunity for SF as they were not that far off having the first minister's job and that would have really thrown the cat amongst the pigeons. What people also lose sight of is that although the Alliance party don't call themselves Unionist they are basically the legacy of the pro-Sunningdale faction of the early 1970s UUP in terms of where they attract most of their votes, so the so called end of a Unionist majority is more a case of semantics than practical politics.

[invergowrie arab]

5 hours ago, sureiknow said:

Why does that matter?

30 seats is the magic number for petitions of concern that can block legislation.

Acts need to have "cross community support" 30 votes from one community is what is needed.

This now means N.Ireland can catch up with the rest of us on things like equal marriage.

[invergowrie arab]

57 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

...and this is probably as bad is it gets for Unionism for at least the next 15 to 20 years as adjustments will no doubt be made in response to what happened to make the main Unionist party more transfer friendly again and dissuade smaller fringe party candidates and independents from running, so if anything a missed opportunity for SF as they were not that far off having the first minister's job and that would have really thrown the cat amongst the pigeons. What people also lose sight of is that although the Alliance party don't call themselves Unionist they are basically the legacy of the pro-Sunningdale faction of the early 1970s UUP in terms of where they attract most of their votes, so the so called end of a Unionist majority is more a case of semantics than practical politics.

Agree with this.

An SF FM would have been real fun and games.

In terms of day to day policy this is a bit of a disaster for the DUPs influence over Stormont.

In terms of the constitution I can't see that this changes very much.

[1320Lichtie]

Lack of coverage over it is pretty ridiculous.

[doulikefish]

Just now, 1320Lichtie said:

Lack of coverage over it is pretty ridiculous.

Its quite revealing compared to the coverage that mays speech got compared to things not going the "correct " way

[Jacksgranda]

On ‎23‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 15:31, RedRob72 said:

Michelle O'Neill appointed as The Shinners new 'Leader of The North'

 

On ‎23‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 21:35, WaffenThinMint said:

Reckon this could backfire big time for SF.

Despite the rhetoric, those who idolise gangsters always want some sort of "big man" character at the front & behind closed doors are likely to object to a "wummun" in charge of "their" party as much as they objected to Foster for more than ideological reasons, in much the same way there were plenty that never could accept Bernadette Devlin for more than merely taking her seat in the Commons (even if it was just so she could punch government ministers!).

There's too much of SF's support, especially amongst its massive geriatric population who regard John Wayne's The Quiet Man as a blueprint of utopia where "wummun" know their place, getting the dinner ready whilst the menfolk punch f**k out of each other inbetween pints. Not that the Unionists are much better, but the "big house" mentality as Ian Paisley called it (absent amongst the republican mob) makes the likes of Sylvia Hermon acceptable enough (the "right background, 'un that") in the same manner Alf Garnett type Tories accepted Thatcher.

Things have changed, but in some respects not that much.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

1 hour ago, invergowrie arab said:

This now means N.Ireland can catch up with the rest of us on things like equal marriage.

Probably but not necessarily. Jim Allister of TUV is likely to agree with the DUP on most issues like that, so that leaves them needing one more. Will be interesting to see what happens with the speaker's job because that could change the arithmatic as well and leave them two away and unable to get to 30 without at least one UUP MLA.

[Glenconner]

In a while, crocodile.

hee hee

[Jacksgranda]

On ‎13‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 15:01, Jacksgranda said:

Somebody has to try to break the log jam. If we carry on voting the way we normally do, we'll end up with the DUP and Sinn Fein back as the two biggest parties (although not necessarily in that order) and complain about it! Even if the UUP and SDLP pick up only a couple of extra seats each it might give them a bit more of a say so. Although my unofficial soundings seem to suggest that Sinn Fein will hold steady while the DUP may shrink a bit.

Colm Eastwood (SDLP leader) wasn't so forthcoming about his voting intentions, and what he would like SDLP supporters to do, when he was being interviewed.

And there is still the unknown factor of the ones who voted in the Brexit referendum but don't vote in council/assembly/national elections.

Down to one unionist in Mid Ulster. The only saving grace being we also have one SDLP man. Although if Sinn Fen put the screws on at the next election, they might get 4 in. If  I had had to bet which unionist wouldn't have got it it wouldn't have been Sandra Overend, tbh.

Thought Buchanan might have been on a sticky wicket because a/ he only got elected the last time and hasn't had long to get his profle raised b/ he wasn't McCrea (although I got a hint after the last election that the local DUP weren't happy with McCrea and were quietly satisfied with him not getting re-elected without them having to go to the bother of deselecting him) c/ the DUP were on the back foot because of RHI.

In his favour he would have got all the unionist votes up round home - Pomeroy. There just aren't enough unionist votes to transfer in a second MLA in a tight race or a big turn out as the Sinn Fein transfers will get the SDLP candidate in.

[Jacksgranda]

25 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Probably but not necessarily. Jim Allister of TUV is likely to agree with the DUP on most issues like that, so that leaves them needing one more. Will be interesting to see what happens with the speaker's job because that could change the arithmatic as well and leave them two away and unable to get to 30 without at least one UUP MLA.

The DUP had it last time, Sinn Fein before that so it may be Sinn Fein's "turn". Not sure how it works, could it go to Alliance, UUP etc?

[doulikefish]

Will foster try to take the top job again or will that be absolute chaos???Surely the dup will put somebody else up

[Jacksgranda]

They are not going to kow tow to Sinn Fein's assertion that they (Sinn Fein) won't accept her as First Minister, so there's our first crisis. That'll take 3 weeks to settle on its own, never mind all the other "red lines" they have thrown about - or not, depending who was their spokesman on any particular day.

According to what I've heard - and quite frankly I haven't been paying a lot of attention - the parties have 3 weeks to reach agreement. Conor Murphy was quite confident earlier in the week that that could be achieved. That being the case, why not have had these talks before collapsing the institutions?

Although I think Conor's idea of negotiations is "This is what I want, and don't forget they haven't gone away, you know", so three weeks might be a tad optimistic in the real world.

[LongTimeLurker]

7 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

The DUP had it last time, Sinn Fein before that so it may be Sinn Fein's "turn". Not sure how it works, could it go to Alliance, UUP etc?

Did some googling and it looks like it can be anyone, but the nominee needs to have cross-community support, which effectively means that the DUP and SF both have to agree:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_Northern_Ireland_Assembly

 

[Jacksgranda]

Just now, LongTimeLurker said:

Did some googling and it looks like it can be anyone, but the nominee needs to have cross-community support, which effectively means that the DUP and SF both have to agree:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_Northern_Ireland_Assembly

 

It won't be "Smiling" Jim Allister, then...

[doulikefish]

7 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

They are not going to kow tow to Sinn Fein's assertion that they (Sinn Fein) won't accept her as First Minister, so there's our first crisis. That'll take 3 weeks to settle on its own, never mind all the other "red lines" they have thrown about - or not, depending who was their spokesman on any particular day.

According to what I've heard - and quite frankly I haven't been paying a lot of attention - the parties have 3 weeks to reach agreement. Conor Murphy was quite confident earlier in the week that that could be achieved. That being the case, why not have had these talks before collapsing the institutions?

Although I think Conor's idea of negotiations is "This is what I want, and don't forget they haven't gone away, you know", so three weeks might be a tad optimistic in the real world.

Going to be fun and games then