CIB and other learned peeps advice on voting please?
DonDaddyD
Posts: 12,689
I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
0
Comments
-
50ft pole DDD - ask to many questions and you'll have MI6 on your doorstep.....0
-
They are just pointing out that Lab and Greens, in their view, don't stand a snowball's of actually winning, so don't waste your vote, vote for them.DonDaddyD wrote:I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
As for the residence thing... its pretty standard for promising ar$e kissing toadies.... sorry, up and coming politicians... to be "given" an appropriate constituency to run for.
I don't agree with it, and if there is a local connection its bound to be better. However, since the whip system in Westminster effectively renders this a presidential election on all major issues, how much does it really matter?0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
Which bit are you questioning? You don't have to live in a constituency to become it's MP; hence the case of the woman who lived in Soton who was MP for Luton.
The reason Labour can't win the seat is because you live in Wimbledon and it's a safe Tory seat. Mine is also a safe Tory seat, even though the outgoing MP had one of the 10 worst attendance records, one of the 10 worst voting records and still managed to rack up £176,000 in expenses last year including a second home in London, despite his first home being within the M25.Mud - Genesis Vapour CCX
Race - Fuji Norcom Straight
Sun - Cervelo R3
Winter / Commute - Dolan ADX0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
The thinking is that Labour and Green parties have such low support in the area that barring some completely unprecedented swing, the only two parties in with a chance are LibDem and Conservative. The suggestion being that even if you are a Labour or Green supporter, a vote for them will be 'wasted' as tit is one less vote for either of the two leading parties who may win the sea. There is something in this, due to our voting system, but OTOH extending that logic, you should only ever vote for the person likely to win, which is not really the idea either.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
As I said earlier, vote in a way that affects most directly the outcome of the election from your own constituency's position.
There's no legal requirement to live in the consituency - the MP for South Northamptonshire now finds himself living 20 odd miles from his due to the boundary changes. What's he supposed to do? Sell up and move? Leave his family to live in a flat in town?
If the race in yours is between Lib & Conservative, the leaflet is correct - Labour can't win and the Greens probably can't either. In an election where Labour support is falling off a cliff and the Libs seem to to be the biggest beneificiaries of that fall, the only likely outcome is a Lib / Con victory. Unlike the last 3 elections, a Con vote has some merit this time round.
How about this? To have voted the last time a conservative govt was voted into office to replace an ailing Labout govt, you'd have to be approaching 50. There are huge number of people who missed out on the last Labour govt - poor things. Still.0 -
They all try that. I got a leaflet through saying, "It's either Labour or the SNP for East Lothian!".
Except when you look at the results for last time:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/cons ... st-lothian
The SNP actually came fourth. It's just their way of saying, "If you don't vote for us, you might as well have voted for X". All rubbish, of course. :roll:0 -
the "Can't win" statement as said above refers to the gap to third.
Often in 2 party seats the top two parties (in my case lab and lib dem) are fairly close, but the third party (con) are too far short to be able to take the seat.
It usually goes on the "swing" of the vote. They will assume that there can be a certain change in the proportion of the vote from one party to another, for instance 4% from lab to lib dem. This means that lab lose 4% and lib dem gain 4% and liberals gain the seat.
For the Tories to do the same they need a much bigger swing, for instance 10%. Given they way people tend to vote 10% is extremely unlikely and therefore considered to be impossible (note the over exaggeration, its highly improbable, not impossible).
Another thing to consider is that the stats used by smaller parties (I have seen it from the greens here) come from local council elections or European elections. They often have this fact in the small print. The trouble with those stats is that smaller parties frequently get far less support in a general election making the voting pattern very different.
The lib dems are likely to be challenging at the general election stage rather then locally. Because of their spread out support they sit in second place in many areas. With their gain in support they are challenging many Lab and Con seats.
The local MP statement is just trying to win over voters who are more worried about their local issues and often wins a few votes.
It is my opinion that you should still vote for the party/candidate you believe aligns to your values best. Voting for someone else for any reason mostly defeats the point of democracy IMHO. I think there is going to be a lot of questions raised about percentage of the popular vote this time as the lib dems will gain a similar vote to labour, but get half the seats.Giant TCR advanced 2 (Summer/race)
Merlin single malt fixie (Commuter/winter/training)
Trek superfly 7 (Summer XC)
Giant Yukon singlespeed conversion (winter MTB/Ice/snow)
Carrera virtuoso - RIP0 -
Dav1 wrote:
It is my opinion that you should still vote for the party/candidate you believe aligns to your values best. Voting for someone else for any reason mostly defeats the point of democracy IMHO.
I agree with this. I hate the idea that if I voted 'tactically' I'd actually be casting a vote for someone with whose policies I largely disagreed.
It seems a bit silly of the Lib Dems to go along with the 'Can't win here' tactic since on a national level if everybody went along with this, they would get no votes.0 -
See this where I just can't agree. For the first time in almost a generation we don't have a clear cut winner lined up. Votes count. The choice is simple - vote in such a way that Brown stays as PM, or in such a way that Cameron has a greater chance of taking over. Nothing else matters. Voting Green / UKIP / BNP / Mad Hatters Tea Party because there seems to be no difference between Lib / Lab / Con [oh if only there weren't] is a wasted vote. Not on a macro scale - obviously your one poxy solitary vote doesn't make the slightest difference - but the mentality has to change, where everyone accepts that as part of the greater collective we all vote, and vote in a way that matters. If you want to send a signal that you support the Greens / UKIP / BNP or whoever, send them a cheque for twenty quid with a note telling them to keep up the good work. For today though, ulitmately you're voting either for Brown or for Cameron to be the next PM. Like it or not, that's who you gonna get tomorrow. No-one else wll be PM tomorrow night.Dav1 wrote:Voting for someone else for any reason mostly defeats the point of democracy IMHO.0 -
CiB wrote:
See this where I just can't agree. For the first time in almost a generation we don't have a clear cut winner lined up. Votes count. The choice is simple - vote in such a way that Brown stays as PM, or in such a way that Cameron has a greater chance of taking over.Dav1 wrote:Voting for someone else for any reason mostly defeats the point of democracy IMHO.
It's not simple.
Even if it were a simple choice between Brown & Cameron, their ability to govern depends on how much support they have. There's a world of difference between a thumping majority and a slim victory, even before we get into horse-trading to form a coalition or minority government.
There's a whole pile of other stuff that I'd like to expound on, too. The impact of a large vote for a party without representation, the tradeoffs between PM and party (if the press is to be believed, I may be the only person in the country who has time enough for Gordon Brown but not for the party he leads) and the whole principle of voting for what you believe in.
That may be true, but their agenda and ability to implement it, will be defined by the support they get in parliament and the perception of whether it is representative of the voter's intentions. If we all vote either Tory or Labour on the premise that they are the only electable options then we're stuck with them forever. Only if (say) the green party gets 30% of votes but no seats will there be a change to the voting system.Nothing else matters. Voting Green / UKIP / BNP / Mad Hatters Tea Party because there seems to be no difference between Lib / Lab / Con [oh if only there weren't] is a wasted vote. Not on a macro scale - obviously your one poxy solitary vote doesn't make the slightest difference - but the mentality has to change, where everyone accepts that as part of the greater collective we all vote, and vote in a way that matters. If you want to send a signal that you support the Greens / UKIP / BNP or whoever, send them a cheque for twenty quid with a note telling them to keep up the good work. For today though, ulitmately you're voting either for Brown or for Cameron to be the next PM. Like it or not, that's who you gonna get tomorrow. No-one else wll be PM tomorrow night.
If the entire electorate votes Tory or Labour, there's no reason to change. Now if you want either the Tories or Labour to win, irrespective of fair representation of other parties, then that's fine for you. I don't think it's really democracy, though.
...and, above all else, I think democracy is very important.
Cheers,
W.0 -
I agree with WG warburton.
Ithink it shows that we have a broken system if you waste your vote if its not for a main party. This election is different in that the lib dems are actually worth voting for under the current system.
I think for the first time in a long time the percentage of the popular vote is going to be looked at. If you go vote loony/green/UKIP/BNP/respect... their percentage will also come under the eye of those wanting a complete overhaul of our electoral system.
Whilst it may be a wasted vote in terms of who gets into office, it does send a message that the issue this party stands for are improtant.
Look at the BNP for instance. A small party that will not get any seats. But their support has forced the issue of immigration to the front of the political discussion despite the drive most have to ignore them.
Votes for the green party has helped drive some of the enviromental debate
UKIP support keeps the issue of europe membership going.
A vote for the loonies is a none of the above...
I personally believe that there is no such thing as a wasted vote, just a broken system.Giant TCR advanced 2 (Summer/race)
Merlin single malt fixie (Commuter/winter/training)
Trek superfly 7 (Summer XC)
Giant Yukon singlespeed conversion (winter MTB/Ice/snow)
Carrera virtuoso - RIP0 -
Many thanks for all the responses.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
Lib Dems hate waffles?
They've lost my vote. I'm pro-waffles.0 -
Its an interesting conundrum. In this election more than any other recent election the actual number of votes cast for each party may have a bearing, should it be necessary to form a coalition government. For that reason alone, there is a strong argument for just voting for the party with the policies you find the most acceptable (please note, this is NOT a presidential election - you should be voting for a party based on its policies, rather than an individual based on his personality, in my opinion).
On the other hand, in many seats it is a two horse race, and if its close between the front two and the rest are trailing, a tactical vote is likely to have more direct impact. So, in the Wimbledon seat for example, you should vote Lib Dem to keep out the Tories (
only joking, I'm entirely impartial...) even if that might mean that your preferred party (could be for example the Greens) will get a smaller share of the overall popular vote as a result.
It isn't a straight fight between Cameron and Brown for a number of reasons. The main one - as stated above - we don't have a presidential system here and you are voting for a party. Also, and probably equally important, Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.0 -
Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.
At last a post I can agree with.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
Lib Dems hate waffles?
They've lost my vote. I'm pro-waffles.
+1 !!! I should have paid attention to their manifestos!
I have to admit that I have no idea on any of the parties' stance on waffles. It just hasn't received the sort of media coverage that other issues have seen.
What about muffins... and scones!! Surely none of the parties is against scones?
Cheers,
W.0 -
TailWindHome wrote:Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.
At last a post I can agree with.
The down side being we might get Mandleson or Ed Balls instead!!!!!!Mud - Genesis Vapour CCX
Race - Fuji Norcom Straight
Sun - Cervelo R3
Winter / Commute - Dolan ADX0 -
Not that I imagine any on here would but a rather obvious demonstration why the BNP are not to be voted for.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... 663681.stmLe Cannon [98 Cannondale M400] [FCN: 8]
The Mad Monkey [2013 Hoy 003] [FCN: 4]0 -
MonkeyMonster wrote:Not that I imagine any on here would but a rather obvious demonstration why the BNP are not to be voted for.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... 663681.stm
If someone spat at me, I might react the same way, and I'm not even a member of the BNP.0 -
Asprilla wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.
At last a post I can agree with.
The down side being we might get Mandleson or Ed Balls instead!!!!!!
On a technical point, could Mandelson actually become PM, if he is already a member of the House of Lords? I would have thought not, but I'm not that up on parliamentary conventions.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
while normally these leaflets are right, local events can just do it, I was around when this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/w32.stm happened.
in short labour tried to drop in Maggie Jones, and it back fired. they lost have still have lost the strongest seat in wales and one with history as well.
was most amusing watching labour go from arrogance to horror, before the vote one could see the way the wind was blowing Ms jones was lone lady at the counting....0 -
rjsterry wrote:Asprilla wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.
At last a post I can agree with.
The down side being we might get Mandleson or Ed Balls instead!!!!!!
On a technical point, could Mandelson actually become PM, if he is already a member of the House of Lords? I would have thought not, but I'm not that up on parliamentary conventions.
I believe so, but can't identify chapter and verse. [ETA: no statutory bar to doing, but constitutional convention since 1911 says no. Generally the PMis the leader of the winning party in the Commons, and the Parliament Act 1911 establishes the supremacy of the Commons over the Lords. Were he a hereditary peer, he could now stand for election as an MP (previously he would have had to have renounced his peerage first). As a life peer, he can't renounce his peerage though (labour have some draft legislation still in train that would allow him to - oh, the irony!), so would have to break the convention to rule from the Lords]
They'd be mad to put in another unelected leader; this time unelected in every way conceivable. It would be Postman Pat instead.
With luck Balls will lose his seat (BIG fingers crossed!)0 -
Greg66 wrote:rjsterry wrote:Asprilla wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.
At last a post I can agree with.
The down side being we might get Mandleson or Ed Balls instead!!!!!!
On a technical point, could Mandelson actually become PM, if he is already a member of the House of Lords? I would have thought not, but I'm not that up on parliamentary conventions.
I believe so, but can't identify chapter and verse.
They'd be mad to put in another unelected leader; this time unelected in every way conceivable. It would be Postman Pat instead.
With luck Balls will lose his seat (BIG fingers crossed!)
We're unlikely to get either in a Lib/Lib coalition
See
It was a typo which I rather amusingly quoted
Whoosh!“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
It's all a bit confusing, isn't it? Here's a handy guide.WGWarburton wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:I got a letter from my local Lib Dem MP. Amongst the waffle hate and reveals that that the two other candidates don't live in Wimbledon, they live in Cardiff and Scotland respectively, she also stated that neither Labour or the Green Party can actually become the MP for the area, it's between Lib Dem and Conservative, how is this the case?
Lib Dems hate waffles?
They've lost my vote. I'm pro-waffles.
+1 !!! I should have paid attention to their manifestos!
I have to admit that I have no idea on any of the parties' stance on waffles. It just hasn't received the sort of media coverage that other issues have seen.
What about muffins... and scones!! Surely none of the parties is against scones?
Cheers,
W.
The Tories generally favour American cakes like muffins.
Labour do as well, but pretend that they're talking about English muffins, made by Hovis, to appease their traditional support.
The Lib Dems quite like brioche, but try to keep quiet about it.
The Greens prefer organic fairtrade muesli bars.
UKIP distrust any cake that isn't British.
The BNP will ban any cakes that aren't white (be warned - this would be the end of all things chocolate).
Respect only eat Palestinian honey cakes, and dismiss anyone who likes "Western" cakes as an imperialist oppressor.
The SNP will take any cake they feel like, paint it tartan and claim it was invented in Scotland.N00b commuter with delusions of competence
FCN 11 - If you scalp me, do I not bleed?0 -
Spiny_Norman wrote:It's all a bit confusing, isn't it? Here's a handy guide.
The Tories generally favour American cakes like muffins.
Labour do as well, but pretend that they're talking about English muffins, made by Hovis, to appease their traditional support.
The Lib Dems quite like brioche, but try to keep quiet about it.
The Greens prefer organic fairtrade muesli bars.
UKIP distrust any cake that isn't British.
The BNP will ban any cakes that aren't white (be warned - this would be the end of all things chocolate).
Respect only eat Palestinian honey cakes, and dismiss anyone who likes "Western" cakes as an imperialist oppressor.
The SNP will take any cake they feel like and deep fry it.
Fixed0 -
Spiny_Norman wrote:It's all a bit confusing, isn't it? Here's a handy guide.
The Tories generally favour American cakes like muffins.
Labour do as well, but pretend that they're talking about English muffins, made by Hovis, to appease their traditional support.
The Lib Dems quite like brioche, but try to keep quiet about it.
The Greens prefer organic fairtrade muesli bars.
UKIP distrust any cake that isn't British.
The BNP will ban any cakes that aren't white (be warned - this would be the end of all things chocolate).
Respect only eat Palestinian honey cakes, and dismiss anyone who likes "Western" cakes as an imperialist oppressor.
The SNP will take any cake they feel like, paint it tartan and claim it was invented in Scotland.
Don't forget the SNP will deep fry it too... Le Cannon [98 Cannondale M400] [FCN: 8]
The Mad Monkey [2013 Hoy 003] [FCN: 4]0 -
Greg66 wrote:rjsterry wrote:Asprilla wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Brown is unlikely to remain PM in a Lib/Lib coalition.
At last a post I can agree with.
The down side being we might get Mandleson or Ed Balls instead!!!!!!
On a technical point, could Mandelson actually become PM, if he is already a member of the House of Lords? I would have thought not, but I'm not that up on parliamentary conventions.
I believe so, but can't identify chapter and verse.
They'd be mad to put in another unelected leader; this time unelected in every way conceivable. It would be Postman Pat instead.
With luck Balls will lose his seat (BIG fingers crossed!)
Not sure Brown is any less elected than Blair, Major, Thatcher, etc. If he wasn't elected, he wouldn't be in the HoP in the first place. The general public don't get to choose the PM in any direct way. And no, I'm not just being clever; I think the fact that people are actually voting for their local MP as well as (and perhaps before) expressing a preference for which party governs, has been somewhat overlooked. The 3 debates, while useful in getting people interested again, have accentuated this problem.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
It couldn't happen to a nicer bloke. The Tories at least showed they had a sense of humour when they set out to unseat Balls and called it their 'castration strategy'Greg66 wrote:With luck Balls will lose his seat (BIG fingers crossed!)
Let's hope Harriet Harperson suffers the same fate."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
rjsterry wrote:Not sure Brown is any less elected than Blair, Major, Thatcher, etc. If he wasn't elected, he wouldn't be in the HoP in the first place. The general public don't get to choose the PM in any direct way. And no, I'm not just being clever; I think the fact that people are actually voting for their local MP as well as (and perhaps before) expressing a preference for which party governs, has been somewhat overlooked. The 3 debates, while useful in getting people interested again, have accentuated this problem.
I get all that, no argument. The oddity about Brown though is that he wasn't really elected by his own party to lead it (unlike Major and Callaghan, the former of whom went on to win an election). More, well, anointed.0 -
rjsterry wrote:
Not sure Brown is any less elected than Blair, Major, Thatcher, etc. If he wasn't elected, he wouldn't be in the HoP in the first place. The general public don't get to choose the PM in any direct way. And no, I'm not just being clever; I think the fact that people are actually voting for their local MP as well as (and perhaps before) expressing a preference for which party governs, has been somewhat overlooked. The 3 debates, while useful in getting people interested again, have accentuated this problem.
+1
@ TailWindHome - whoosh indeed, I have now caught up though.
@ Greg66 - is the "Postman Pat" comment a snide dig at Alan Johnson's working class roots? Got to love you compassionate Tories...0
