Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 231381]

Is not voting in the GE defensible if you don't believe in the validity of the election due to it being a thinly-veiled strategic move from the Tories?

Asking for a friend.

Who is also me.

Almost every election is timed strategically. Even non-snap elections are held when they are because strategically it wasn't any better to hold them earlier. If you didn't vote in elections because the timing was influenced by strategic reasoning, you'd never vote in this country.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Is not voting in the GE defensible if you don't believe in the validity of the election due to it being a thinly-veiled strategic move from the Tories?

Asking for a friend.

Who is also me.

They don't want you to vote. So you can either do exactly what they want you to do or y'know, vote and help to deal some kind of blow to the Tories.

 

[Dougald]

Almost every election is timed strategically. Even non-snap elections are held when they are because strategically it wasn't any better to hold them earlier. If you didn't vote in elections because the timing was influenced by strategic reasoning, you'd never vote in this country.

Essentially. 2015 was an outlier I doubt will be repeated particularly often

 

[Juicy Bob]

Not voting out of spite or spoiling your ballot is absolutely pointless.

Sure, you may feel good about yourself. 'I really showed the system.'

However, in reality, absolutely no one else gives a fuck and it will make no difference to a single thing at all.

Don't do it.

 

[Mr. Sam]

The LDs will not work with Corbyn's Labour - we ruled that out when Corbyn three-line whipped on A50.

So principled.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/23/tim-farron-lib-dems-coalition-tories-clegg

I'll not judge the Lib Dems for entirely necessary pro-Europe posturing - but I'll also not let them pretend that's not what it is.

The only plausible route for voters in England and Wales to stop the Tories is to vote LD - especially in Tory constituencies. If you disagree with this government, get up and do something about it.

This should really just read "There is no plausible route."

 

[kmag]

None whatsoever. And being as it was suggested by the Greens, none whatsoever whatsoever.

I don't see how it would work especially for the Greens. They really only have two constituencies where they are competitive (Brighton and Bristol).

 

[Huw_Dawson]

I'll not judge the Lib Dems for entirely necessary pro-Europe posturing - but I'll also not let them pretend that's not what it is.

Yup, I can see you're taking your marching orders well. "A vote for the Lib Dems is a vote for the Tories! You can't trust the Lib Dems!"

Because all you have to do is spread uncertainty about any political opposition to guarantee that May gets that sweet 100 seat majority.

Farron is not a fan of the Tories, and the party would not vote through him joining a coalition with May even if he was. Cameron was a "one nation Conservative" and somewhat close to the centre. May is, to be blunt, the exact opposite - a small c conservative with a nasty authoritarian streak.

But that's fine for those that back Corbyn, because they don't care about who runs the country. Just spread uncertainty - a big bad Tory government is a perfect breeding ground for socialism!

It's the Lib Dems, Corbyn or May. Your choice who you want to back.

 

[Dougald]

Not voting out of spite or spoiling your ballot is absolutely pointless.

Sure, you may feel good about yourself. 'I really showed the system.'

However, in reality, absolutely no one else gives a fuck and it will make no difference to a single thing at all.

Don't do it.

I take issue with that. Spoiled ballots are counted at least, and some of us live in constituencies where it doesn't matter too much

Normally I still actually vote for an actual party, but I spoiled my ballot in 2015 and I feel better about that than some pointless token vote against a 58% Tory majority

 

[Maledict]

I take issue with that. Spoiled ballots are counted at least, and some of us live in constituencies where it doesn't matter too much

Normally I still actually vote for an actual party, but I spoiled my ballot in 2015 and I feel better about that than some pointless token vote against a 58% Tory majority

Nope, he's right.

Spoiling your ballot means literally nothing. No/one ever, *ever* considers the number of spoiled ballots. When parties discuss how to win a seat, they focus on the people who voted and the people who might be persuaded to vote. At no point in that conversation will anyone ever think about the number of spoiled ballots.

Always, always vote and always vote for a party. Those are the things that politicians and political apparatus look at when figuring out policies and what they need to respond too locally.

You may as well not bothering to vote if you spoile your ballot.

 

[Mr. Sam]

Yup, I can see you're taking your marching orders well. "A vote for the Lib Dems is a vote for the Tories! You can't trust the Lib Dems!"

Don't put words in my mouth - I'd appreciate it. While I've no doubt that Farron would join a coalition with the Tories or Labour (or the Greens or the SNP, if we're going full la la land) - and the members would vote for it, just as they did in 2010 - that wasn't my point at all. The Lib Dems are no more duplicitous and opportunistic than most politicians, which is to say very.

I'll just continue to point out obvious nonsense about the Lib Dems' steely resolve and how the only party that can stop the Tories is one with nine seats in the Commons currently polling at 11%.

My motto for this election:

Don't vote Tory. Don't be surprised when everyone else does.

 

[Real Hero]

Lib dems aren't stopping anything, this is just a good time for them to lie about stopping brexit

 

[QuicheFontaine]

How anyone can look at that Daily Mail headline and think "yes, I agree with this editorial line, the Mail are the good guys here" is beyond me. It's just so sinister.

I'll admit even I thought "Are we the baddies?" for a moment

 

[War Peaceman]

Yes, if the Lib Dems get into power via coalition they will be unable to stop Brexit. It is another convenient lie from them.

Everyone knows they would at best be a minority party in coalition.

I'll admit even I thought "Are we the baddies?" for a moment

Just for a moment? shame

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Lib dems aren't stopping anything, this is just a good time for them to lie about stopping brexit

If we win the GE, Britain stays in the single market at the very least.

But yeah guys, go home. Because the Lib Dems can't win, May gets to be PM until 2022 and there's nothing you can do.

Go out and do something about it.

 

[phisheep]

I'll just continue to point out obvious nonsense about the Lib Dems' steely resolve and how the only party that can stop the Tories is one with nine seats in the Commons currently polling at 11%.

It's not that obviously nonsense. There was an election in the 1980s (I forget which one) where post-election polling showed that 51% of people would have voted for the LibDems - or whatever their then incarnation was - if they had thought they had had a chance of winning.

51%.

It could have happened.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

It could have happened.

They'd technically have voted Alliance, but yeah.

If the GE had been held two weeks earlier in 2010, too, we'd have been the majority party.

We learned from those mistakes!

If the Lib Dems are campaigning in your local area, and they have a remote shot of winning, and you disagree with the way the country is going and would prefer the Lib Dem platform, you should vote for us.

If the local party with a shot of dethroning the Tories or holding on is actually Labour, then you should give your vote more thought. But generally speaking GAF does not like this whole Brexit, Tory-government-for-a-generation situation. There's no magical sceptre that grants May permanent control. People can still force her out.

Apathy is going to hand May a 100 seat majority if something is not done.

 

[affleck1981]

Something similar to the second poster down?

http://novaramedia.com/2014/04/23/5-election-poster-campaigns-the-parties-wish-youd-forget/

 

[HandsomeCharles]

I'll be most likely voting Lib dem, even if they have little chance of winning in my area. Nothing will ever change unless we actually make it change.

 

[Dougald]

Nope, he's right.

Spoiling your ballot means literally nothing. No/one ever, *ever* considers the number of spoiled ballots. When parties discuss how to win a seat, they focus on the people who voted and the people who might be persuaded to vote. At no point in that conversation will anyone ever think about the number of spoiled ballots.

Always, always vote and always vote for a party. Those are the things that politicians and political apparatus look at when figuring out policies and what they need to respond too locally.

You may as well not bothering to vote if you spoile your ballot.

So who do you suggest I ought to have voted for then, the party with 15% of the vote or the one with 14%? Or should I just have stayed home and let that overall Tory win percentage be slightly higher. Probably

 

[War Peaceman]

They'd technically have voted Alliance, but yeah.

If the GE had been held two weeks earlier in 2010, too, we'd have been the majority party.

We learned from those mistakes!

If the Lib Dems are campaigning in your local area, and they have a remote shot of winning, and you disagree with the way the country is going and would prefer the Lib Dem platform, you should vote for us.

If the local party with a shot of dethroning the Tories or holding on is actually Labour, then you should give your vote more thought. But generally speaking GAF does not like this whole Brexit, Tory-government-for-a-generation situation. There's no magical sceptre that grants May permanent control. People can still force her out.

Apathy is going to hand May a 100 seat majority if something is not done.

You live in fantasy land when it concerns Liberal Democrat chances, but you are right about apathy and getting involved.

 

[Rodelero]

I'll admit even I thought "Are we the baddies?" for a moment

Why did you dismiss that thought exactly?

 

[phisheep]

Apathy is going to hand May a 100 seat majority if something is not done.

Yeah, but if something is done we get Corbyn? It's really a bit of a conundrum.

 

[Real Hero]

If we win the GE, Britain stays in the single market at the very least.

But yeah guys, go home. Because the Lib Dems can't win, May gets to be PM until 2022 and there's nothing you can do.

Go out and do something about it.

I will, I'll suck it up and vote Labour. Voting for the Lib Dems does not make you more 'involved' than anyone else.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Yeah, but if something is done we get Corbyn? It's really a bit of a conundrum.

So the alternative, as bonkers as it sounds, is for folks to rally to the Lib Dems.

You live in fantasy land when it concerns Liberal Democrat chances, but you are right about apathy and getting involved.

It's not a fantasy land I'm living in - I fully expect May to get that insane majority. But I also expect us to pick up a lot of seats. And the only way to stop May, and more specifically stop us leaving the single market, is for the Lib Dems to win as many seats from the Tories as possible. And hope that Labour don't actually collapse.

If Labour lose 50 seats to the Tories, but we win 65 more seats, May gets forced back into being a minority government and hard Brexit is dead. Indeed, it would destroy any mandate the referendum had.

 

[Morat]

Yeah, but if something is done we get Corbyn? It's really a bit of a conundrum.

Oh come on. Whatever you may think about Corbyn's competence, he is not Theresa
bloody May. I don't like his position on Brexit either, but this is a case of the lesser of two evils at minimum.

 

[Ragnar Blackmane]

Yeah, but if something is done we get Corbyn? It's really a bit of a conundrum.

Corbyn would probably destroy the country at least slightly less for the upcoming decades. That's something, right?

Still would vote for Lib-Dems if I was living in the UK.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Post-Article 50, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have functionally the same EU policy, the Lib Dems just posture more.

 

[PJV3]

Yeah, but if something is done we get Corbyn? It's really a bit of a conundrum.

To get Corbyn we would need to slip into another dimension, getting something similar to now is the very best getting something done would achieve.

 

[Mr. Sam]

It's not that obviously nonsense. There was an election in the 1980s (I forget which one) where post-election polling showed that 51% of people would have voted for the LibDems - or whatever their then incarnation was - if they had thought they had had a chance of winning.

51%.

It could have happened.

While I'm not any kind of statistician, and I don't doubt that 51% of people polled said they would've voted SDP-Liberal Alliance (great sci-fi-ey name; should've kept it), I do question how true that is. That is to say, I believe they said that, I don't believe it would have come to fruition.

It's similar to that "X number of people said they would vote for a new centrist party" stat that keeps getting thrown around, my theory on which is that everybody who doesn't have a clear party allegiance considers themselves a centrist (and even some who do), despite what other facts might suggest (and what a centrist is can be pretty relative).

Which leads me on to Theresa May's "just about managing" line, which I think is genius because even people with their own homes and well-paying jobs consider themselves "just about managing"...

I may be going on of something of a tangent.

I know it may seem that I like to hit the Lib Dems with a stick, but I'm really rather fond of them. To my earlier point that leftists will fight like cats in a bag at the slighest provocation, see: this thread. It's Lib Dems vs. Labour Moderates vs. Corbynites in a fight to see who can despair the most completely!

 

[Spaghetti]

I mean, moral validity aside, you are essentially playing in to the Tories thinly veiled strategic move at this point.

That is a stupid reason. Don't be a fuckwit. Vote.

Elections have always been timed as strategically as possible.

Almost every election is timed strategically. Even non-snap elections are held when they are because strategically it wasn't any better to hold them earlier. If you didn't vote in elections because the timing was influenced by strategic reasoning, you'd never vote in this country.

They don't want you to vote. So you can either do exactly what they want you to do or y'know, vote and help to deal some kind of blow to the Tories.

I mean, I'm in a safe as houses Labour seat either way so I guess I'm speaking from the privileged (depending on your point of view) position of being comfortably numb in political stasis until my MP either dies or retires. Me and everybody I know could not vote and the guy would still return with a 30% lead on the second place candidate.

 

[King_Moc]

It's not a fantasy land I'm living in - I fully expect May to get that insane majority. But I also expect us to pick up a lot of seats. And the only way to stop May, and more specifically stop us leaving the single market, is for the Lib Dems to win as many seats from the Tories as possible. And hope that Labour don't actually collapse.

If Labour lose 50 seats to the Tories, but we win 65 more seats, May gets forced back into being a minority government and hard Brexit is dead. Indeed, it would destroy any mandate the referendum had.

You absolutely are living in a fantasy land. Even in 2010, lib dems only won (I think) 59 and that was when people actually liked them.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Post-Article 50, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have functionally the same EU policy, the Lib Dems just posture more.

We're now post Article 50 without any limitations on May's authority to get a Tory deal because Labour fell over.

Corbyn's lot describe Brexit as an opportunity. Lib Dems want us to rejoin as promptly as possible. Very different.

You absolutely are living in a fantasy land. Even in 2010, lib dems only won (I think) 59 and that was when people actually liked them.

Our high water mark was 65 (or 62? My memory is bad), before 2010. And that was on, if memory serves, 16% of the vote. We are currently at about 11 or 12%.

But yeah, it's impossible guys - Labour's already given up, so May gets a majority until 2022.

There's a difference between campaigning for a better tomorrow and rolling over and crying.

If Labour are expecting, almost wanting, to lose this, what exactly is the point of the Labour Party?

 

[phisheep]

Oh come on. Whatever you may think about Corbyn's competence, he is not Theresa bloody May. I don't like his position on Brexit either, but this is a case of the lesser of two evils at minimum.

Not to me, since I am most often a Conservative voter. I would need considerable persuasion otherwise.

So the alternative, as bonkers as it sounds, is for folks to rally to the Lib Dems.

That is a possibility. Pointless voting Labour here even if I wanted to, as it's an old-style West Country Tory/LibDem marginal (well, was marginal up to the last election).

It depends very much who the LibDems put up locally. There is one extremely good candidate who I know, like and respect and would have a good shot at it, but for some reason he decided not to stand last time round.

I know, like and respect our current Tory MP too. He is staunchly on the sane end of the party.

 

[King_Moc]

We're now post Article 50 without any limitations on May's authority to get a Tory deal because Labour fell over.

Corbyn's lot describe Brexit as an opportunity. Lib Dems want us to rejoin as promptly as possible. Very different.



Our high water mark was 65, before 2010. And that was on, if memory serves, 16% of the vote. We are currently at about 11 or 12%.

But yeah, it's impossible guys - Labour's already given up, so May gets a majority until 2022.

There's a difference between campaigning for a better tomorrow and rolling over and crying.

Bear in mind that most people that say they will vote lib dem don't go through with it. They were polling at over 30% (and above labour) prior to the 2010 election. I think they got less than a third of that in the end.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Why did you dismiss that thought exactly?

I remembered it was the front page of the Daily Mail

 

[TimmmV]

If Labour lose 50 seats to the Tories, but we win 65 more seats, May gets forced back into being a minority government and hard Brexit is dead. Indeed, it would destroy any mandate the referendum had.

Or, the Lib Dems drop their promises like they did in 2010, and cosy up with the Tories again in a coalition

 

[Deleted member 231381]

We're now post Article 50 without any limitations on May's authority to get a Tory deal because Labour fell over.

Corbyn's lot describe Brexit as an opportunity. Lib Dems want us to rejoin as promptly as possible. Very different.

Farron isn't running on rejoining. He's running on retaining single market membership. Even that is politically unrealistic because that would imply retaining freedom of movement, which will never be politically defensible. Realistically, as part of any given coalition, the Liberal Democrats would at most be able to push for a relatively open access deal... which is the same policy as Labour.

Right now, the Liberal Democrats know they're at most going to win 25 seats and they're definitely not going to have to form a government - or even be in a coalition. So they've identified a small portion of the electorate which cares very strongly about one thing, and promised them this thing, even though it can never come about.

That's fine and all - it's important to follow your principles - but acting like there's some huge gulf between the Lib Dems and Labour on this is facile. In office, they'd do exactly the same thing, but Labour is a major party and can't afford to pander to a small portion of the electorate in the way the Lib Dems can.

That said, you've never been realistic about these things, so if you want, we can do an avatar bet. If in the GE, the Lib Dems get more vote share than Labour, you can pick my avatar. Other way round, I pick yours.

 

[Mr. Sam]

Bear in mind that most people that say they will vote lib dem don't go through with it. They were polling at over 30% (and above labour) prior to the 2010 election. I think they got less than a third of that in the end.

Actually, they won 23% of the vote to Labour's 29%, a 1% increase on their 2005 showing. They lost five seats because firstpastthepostlol.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Or, the Lib Dems drop their promises like they did in 2010, and cosy up with the Tories again in a coalition

To play devil's advocate, this would still not be as bad as the Tories governing alone!

But as I said above, the Tories want hard Brexit, with us out of the single market. We wouldn't go into coalition with any party that did that.

If the Lib Dems pulled off an upset big enough to knock the Tories into minority, I'd personally argue that the referendum argument was null. That referendum was good until the day of another general election.

If the Lib Dems campaign on annulling Brexit, then this is another Brexit referendum, as much as the Tories don't want to admit it.

Farron isn't running on rejoining. He's running on retaining single market membership. Even that is politically unrealistic because that would imply retaining freedom of movement, which will never be politically defensible. Realistically, as part of any given coalition, the Liberal Democrats would at most be able to push for a relatively open access deal... which is the same policy as Labour.

Right now, the Liberal Democrats know they're at most going to win 25 seats and they're definitely not going to have to form a government - or even be in a coalition. So they've identified a small portion of the electorate which cares very strongly about one thing, and promised them this thing, even though it can never come about.

That's fine and all - it's important to follow your principles - but acting like there's some huge gulf between the Lib Dems and Labour on this is facile. In office, they'd do exactly the same thing, but Labour is a major party and can't afford to pander to a small portion of the electorate in the way the Lib Dems can.

That said, you've never been realistic about these things, so if you want, we can do an avatar bet. If in the GE, the Lib Dems get more vote share than Labour, you can pick my avatar. Other way round, I pick yours.

See, you're going on about this being unrealistic.

The fact is, I know full well it's unrealistic.

But here's the other thing:

If we sit around saying how May is going to get a 100 seat majority, it is going to happen. And if you have an iota of hope that Britain can be a better place, then you should be fighting for that, not saying "oh this is just the Lib Dems playing politics."

If Labour has given up the ghost, if it cannot even scare the Tories out of holding an election, if its supporters now tell us of how impossible it is to hope, then what is the point of the Labour Party.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The Lib Dems already aren't doing that, though.

 

[Real Hero]

That said, you've never been realistic about these things, so if you want, we can do an avatar bet. If in the GE, the Lib Dems get more vote share than Labour, you can pick my avatar. Other way round, I pick yours.

The stakes have never been higher

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The stakes have never been higher

I have some great kawaii animu renditions of Corbyn I've been saving for exactly this sort of occasion.

 

[Funky Papa]

Dongs are still forbidden, btw.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Dongs are still forbidden, btw.

What about pictures of Michael Gove?

 

[Burai]

Or, the Lib Dems drop their promises like they did in 2010, and cosy up with the Tories again in a coalition

People are going to have to wake the fuck up and get over that shit.

Unless people are honestly saying that this Tory majority shitshow is in any way better than the coalition we had before.

 

[Funky Papa]

What about pictures of Michael Gove?

Pricks too.

 

[DECK'ARD]

What about pictures of Michael Gove?

I don't think GAF wants a mass exodus of people from the forum.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

 

[King_Moc]

Actually, they won 23% of the vote to Labour's 29%, a 1% increase on their 2005 showing. They lost five seats because firstpastthepostlol.

Not sure where I got that from then. Either way, they look like they'll do poorly once more this time.

 

[Leyasu]

Make no mistake about it - Labour are going to get destroyed. The Conservative political broadcast could be Theresa May beating a nurse with a pillowcase full of batteries and they'd still gain seats.

This. Plus UKIP will not get nowhere near 3m votes this time.

Conservatives are going to end up like a voted in dictatorship with all the seats that they are going to win.

Labour are fucked.