-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF: General election thread of LibCon Coalitionage
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
- Status
Nexus Zero
Member
J Tourettes said:
Oh snap. I did a bit of digging about our MP - annoyingly as he seems like a pretty upstanding guy with a lot of policies I like, and he was anti-war from the beginning. I'll still vote LibDem, though it doesn't sound like it matters either way!
Empty said:
I think the Tories have realised that they cant win the election if the main focus of their campaign is the "Age of Austerity". People keep saying "stop treating us like idots and be honest about the public finances" but at the same time any party who openly campaigns on such a negative message will lose the election. I pay less attention to small policy statements and "giveaways" and try to get a general idea of where each party will take us. I cant trust Labour at the moment, its so frustrating to see them come forth with all these policies in their manefesto when they've had 13 years to change them so my vote wont be "pro" anyone it will just be "anti" labour. The Tories are hoping to regain the seat from Labour in my constituency so Im leaning towards a tactical vote for the Tories.
0.157
http://www.voterpower.org.uk/clwyd-south
If we had proportional representation then I know my vote wouldn't be wasted. :lol
http://www.voterpower.org.uk/clwyd-south
If we had proportional representation then I know my vote wouldn't be wasted. :lol
interesting article in the FT:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fad850aa-40e7-11df-94c2-00144feabdc0.html
so the tories have changed eh
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fad850aa-40e7-11df-94c2-00144feabdc0.html
welps
ruh roh
urghhhhh
so the tories have changed eh
Conservative voter, living in a "very safe" Labour seat. Voter power = 0.079
There is a local feeling, however, that it is time for a change. Our MP had to repay a substantial amount of his expenses and he's been there since 1997.
EDIT: The voter power site is using the old constituency boundaries. Make sure it's giving you the right constituency here
There is a local feeling, however, that it is time for a change. Our MP had to repay a substantial amount of his expenses and he's been there since 1997.
EDIT: The voter power site is using the old constituency boundaries. Make sure it's giving you the right constituency here
sohois said:
Possibly, but Cameron will likely have to make concessions in other areas to appease the MP's who dislike those policies in order to keep the party unified. I think that is why their policy on joining a new bloc in the european parliament and robbing us of influence there is so rubbish, it is created to hold the party together rather than as a coherent and well though through strategy for international relations.
Looks like I got the wrong one too.jas0nuk said:
http://www.voterpower.org.uk/liverpool-west-derby
0.008, #632 of 650.
Well that's... disheartening.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Hmmm. 0.044 for my constituency: http://www.voterpower.org.uk/maidstone-the-weald
I'm certain I read that there was an estimated 90%+ chance of the Tories staying in, which disappoints me. However we have actually been served well by them, in all fairness (barring the Kent TV fiasco): Widdecombe, despite her horrible beliefs was excellent for us and incredibly honest.
Their new candidate, Helen Grant, is similarly respectable - she does a lot of community work (lives in my village too) and campaigned heavily for the maternity ward in Maidstone hospital.
Therefore it doesn't disappoint me so much that she'll inevitably get in. I'd actually like to vote for her but ideologically the Tories are too distant from my own (Lots of well-funded public services paid for by high taxes) views.
I'm certain I read that there was an estimated 90%+ chance of the Tories staying in, which disappoints me. However we have actually been served well by them, in all fairness (barring the Kent TV fiasco): Widdecombe, despite her horrible beliefs was excellent for us and incredibly honest.
Their new candidate, Helen Grant, is similarly respectable - she does a lot of community work (lives in my village too) and campaigned heavily for the maternity ward in Maidstone hospital.
Therefore it doesn't disappoint me so much that she'll inevitably get in. I'd actually like to vote for her but ideologically the Tories are too distant from my own (Lots of well-funded public services paid for by high taxes) views.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7094308.ece
Just another reason why this disgusting, bitter, desperate party needs to be obliterated from British politics.
Just another reason why this disgusting, bitter, desperate party needs to be obliterated from British politics.
J Tourettes
Banned
He does seem pretty decent and he voted against the digital economy bill as well. It's not outside the realms of possibility that the Libdems could swing it but it would need an 11% swing.Nexus Zero said:
Between the last elections he managed to lose 10%, so who knows?
Tim the Wiz
Banned
avaya said:
:lol Well played, sir.
jas0nuk said:
I doubt anyone does. But compare that to the core stances of the Tories (which won't disappear anytime soon, however much David Cameron tries) and I know which party I'd rather label as the "disgusting, bitter, desperate" one that "needs to be obliterated from British politics".
J Tourettes
Banned
anyone got a letter about the NHS care records service? looks like it's basically putting your info in a centralised place so 'the right people' ( i assume thats doctors) can access it. records stuf about 'your prescriptions, allergies and bad reactions to medicines'. your permission has to be asked before they can access it.
and i dont reply by the 5th july then my consent is assumed.
and i dont reply by the 5th july then my consent is assumed.
Johnlenham
Member
In Maidstone & The Weald, one person does not really have one vote, they have the equivalent of 0.044 votes.
:lol
:lol
This annoys me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Benn
Please, just because you're related Tony Benn doesn't mean shit. Can't believe shes actually trying to become a MP despite still being a student. :lol . Another person who sees being a politican as being a career.
She also supported the Iraq war so she can fuck off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Benn
Please, just because you're related Tony Benn doesn't mean shit. Can't believe shes actually trying to become a MP despite still being a student. :lol . Another person who sees being a politican as being a career.
She also supported the Iraq war so she can fuck off.
blame space
Banned
voting in the UK sounds like an RPG
Well 40% is a best case scenario and that still leaves the rest of the country voting for progressive parties. The people of the United Kingdom do not support Tory policies, but the FPP system returns Tory governments. Electoral reform will bring Lab/Lib coalition governments.jas0nuk said:
blazinglord
Member
Actually, our current electoral system has an inbuilt advantage to Labour. The Tories need more votes than Labour to win a seat.Sir Fragula said:
People seem to forget that Labour won the last three elections on the platform of New Labour and explicitly shifted rightward in order to appeal to Middle England. Even in this election, I've noticed Labour is being very populist and right-wing on the issue of keeping DNA records of innocent people.
I think people sorely underestimate the political spectrum of the average UK voter - the electorate is far more right-wing than people realise. If (heaven forbid) we end up getting PR, I don't think it's guaranteed that there will be a permanent Lab/Lib coalition. Labour and Liberal Democrats came third and fourth respectively in the European parliament elections after the Conservatives and UKIP which gained a combined 44.2% of the vote. If that was the result of Westminster parliament, they could have hypothetically joined the odious BNP with their 6.2% and gained a majority. Is that the sort of electoral system people want? Because that is what we will get if Lib Dems forces Labour to drop AV in favour of PR in the event of a hung parliament.
blazinglord said:
European elections have poor turnouts and historically bring out poor results for Pro-EU parties, which happen to be Labour and the Lib Dems, so i'm not sure how good an example that is of the political leanings in this country, though i agree that the electorate is less left wing than adding the votes for the two biggest left wing parties would suggest; many labour voters read like the sun and are actually very conservative in many many ways, such as immigration or capital punishment, it's just they hate Thatcher or have other sources of long standing tribalism pushing them towards Labour, on top of the middle englanders labour grabbed when they decided to move to new labour.
As for your other point. If over 50% of the population in your hypothetical example voted for parties who would work on the same platform as BNP or even UKIP, then yes, we as a population deserve that piece of shit government and i don't have a problem with a system that allows that.
blazinglord
Member
So 93.8% of the population must have a coalition government in which a minority partner will have disproportionate influence despite being inflicted on the country by only 6.2% of the population? Well, I think we shall just have to agree to disagree because I will always choose a system that while might not be entirely democratic, at least guarantees a government that is firmly within the mainstream.Empty said:
blazinglord said:
No, because the other two parties in coalition government would have to be very right wing to even consider allying with the BNP. If the Tories and UKIP suddenly did that now they would be out of elected politics for the next century. What i'm saying is that if over 50% of the population votes for hypothetical crazy parties who could find common ground and ally with the BNP then we deserve a hypothetical crazy government. As far as i'm concerned, STV guarantees mainstream governments as the parties still have a desire to exist beyond a four year election cycle so will by moderated on their choices of coalition deals by self-preservation.
blazinglord
Member
Well the example of Italy shows that it is not unheard of, when trust is at historic lows in MPs and mainstream parties, for the electorate to become more attuned to fringe parties. Nor is it unheard of for parties and politicians to sacrifice principles in return for power in the inevitable back-room deals that goes on in the aftermath of an election. As much as I admire your faith in the electorate's will to put the common greater good above self-interests, I have long given up on that idealism. PR will be a grave mistake in my view and I sincerely hope that it will not be introduced without serious consideration of the consequences.Empty said:
Dark Machine
Member
blazinglord said:
Well until then, I will enjoy my 0.157 worth of a vote which the current system gives me. You know if you turn back the clock a hundred or so years then your argument is basically "Giving anyone without earnings over £xxxx/Women/people under 25/working class people the vote, basically extending the franchise at all is a BAD idea!" PR gives more people more power, it improves turnout and means that my vote (even in a safe seat or stronghold) still counts if I vote against the dominant party. So yeah, I like it.
blazinglord
Member
Well it's true, I'm not entirely unsympathetic to some restrictions on suffrage - I do not support lowing the voting age to 16 or extending suffrage to prisoners, both of which proposed by Labour.Dark Machine said:
Nor am I entirely convinced that the sudden introduction of PR will increase voters turnout. The current decline in voters turnout could well be due to relative contentment with the current system that has offered stability.
At the end of the day, what happens, happens. If it comes to the situation where we have a referendum on the introduction of PR - I will personally be voting no. But if a simple majority votes yes, then it will be the result I will accept (and support) despite my own feelings that the flaws of PR outweigh the positives.
blazinglord
Member
Personally I prefer the Tories' proposal to equalise the size of constituencies. That would be fair.Chinner said:
jas0nuk said:
No I don't support that strategy, it's as vile as the Tories coming up with the usual bile about "Britain is broken" it's just getting worse nonsense which was totally refuted by the Economist a couple of weeks ago. You know the Economist, the well known socialst pamphlet.
Now, you being young and naive still believeing that "people know best" when it comes to spending their own money, that "buisness knows best" and "taxes are baaaad" is what is TRULY amusing. Harsh realities in store for you.
The reason that the Tories would never win is because they may have 40% (unlikely) of the vote but every resulting government would be a Lib-Lab coalition because this country is not centre-right. It is actually brazenly centre-left. In a PR system you will see Lib-Lab coalition dominate with Greens joining along. If we were to have 100% turnout the Conservative party, like most right wing party's across the planet would never win an election. No matter the system you have in place. Turnout is the achilles heel of the left.
The size disparity of constituencies is the LEAST important problem with the voting system.blazinglord said:
We need PR. I am a leftist. I vote for left wing policies. My concern is keeping the Tories [and the BNP and UKIP] out of government; and to do that I have to vote Labour even though the Liberal Democrats represent me better. If I vote Liberal Democrat my constuency will more likely turn Conservative. How is that supporting democracy?
Nicktendo86
Member
Wow my vote is worth 0.732 in Bethnal Green & Bow. That clown Galloway is fucking off to Limehouse so I wont get the satisfaction of voting him out but ah well.
BBC said:
Professor Chris Ham, chief executive of the King's Fund, said the NHS was in much better shape than a decade ago.
"What we can say with confidence is that the NHS has moved out of intensive care and into active rehabilitation.
"It's on the road to real improvement to deliver world-class standards of care but it isn't there yet."
He said the next government would have to tackle the difficult challenge of building on the improvement and paying far greater attention to prevention of ill health, but with reduced investment.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8611234.stm
b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but throwing the money at the NHS is not the answer. What absolute bollocks.
So many myths perpetuated as fact, it's disgusting. Public services ALWAYS benefit from better funding.
blazinglord
Member
All I'm saying is that there is no guarantee that fringe parties like the UKIP and BNP will be kept out of government under PR. Whereas under FPTP, it is virtually guaranteed that the BNP and the UKIP will never even gain a seat in Westminster parliament let alone form a government. If we have a referendum on PR then you must vote according to your conscience, but I'm urging you to not go into the booth thinking that PR will automatically install in a permanent left-wing coalition. If we get PR, the rules of the game changes completely and nobody can confidently predict the electoral makeup in ten years time.Sir Fragula said:
I will add though, that Britain has done rather well under FPTP and it has in fact allowed parties to introduce leftist policies (Labour, the Liberals and the Whigs are examples of this). Fixing what is not broken by importing this continental model of voting may have unforeseen consequences that ends up not sitting well with centrist-minded voters. Perhaps I'll be proved wrong and it will be the best thing that could ever happen to Britain - we shall see.
http://www.voterpower.org.uk/hampstead-kilburn
Wow, turns out my vote holds a lot of weight. o.o;;
I will be voting labour, despite the fact that Glenda Jackson is awful.
Thankfully Lib Dems were the ones biting at Labours heals last time around, but I still feel that a vote for Labour for me will be more useful.
Wow, turns out my vote holds a lot of weight. o.o;;
I will be voting labour, despite the fact that Glenda Jackson is awful.
Thankfully Lib Dems were the ones biting at Labours heals last time around, but I still feel that a vote for Labour for me will be more useful.
blazinglord said:
The BNP will never be in a position to win power or become part of a coalition government. It would be political suicide for any party to ally with them.
Fixing what is not broken? It is a broken system when the party that takes power more than likely had 60% of the electorate that turned out vote against it.
PR promotes turnout. PR leads to socialist governments and in the unlikely event of a right-wing government they tend to be populist instead since they would have no coalition if that weren't the case. Win-win.
Nexus Zero
Member
If they democratise the Lords perhaps well get one of each.Parl said:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked