Go on, get your fat ass out and vote

rick_chasey

Don't give a sh!t for who, or even if you spoil your ballot.

Go on. Get on with it.

First.Aspect

Voted a week ago. I placed my ballot in the red ballot box set into the stone wall opposite my front door.

DrLex

Do you mind? He's just big-boned!

itboffin

First Aspect wrote:

Voted a week ago. I placed my ballot in the red ballot box set into the stone wall opposite my front door.

Ditto although I had to add a box for my name, they seemed to have missed it off my form.

#winning

tailwindhome

I'll vote the day the add a "None of the above" option to the ballot paper.
Or, the parties intending to form a government decide to actually stand in my constituency

anthdci

I was there at 7.05 on my way to work. Second person to vote at that station. Common Labour!

iPete

2nd in 1st out, hopefully pick up a KOM for my efforts but I lost valuable seconds during eeny meeny miny moe.

gabriel959

Voting this eve, only local elections for me but to be fair I would be spoiling my vote at the Generals if I could vote in them.

dhope

Instructions unclear, arrested for turning up at the local school/polling station with fat ass out.
Will try again this evening.

surrey_commuter

No vote for me as I continue to wage my war of attrition for proportional representation

dhope

Surrey Commuter wrote:

No vote for me as I continue to wage my war of attrition for proportional representation

Your input has been counted this time too, proportionally.

elbowloh

Left home at 6.25, so no time to vote this morning.

Will have to vote tonight. Still undecided tbh. Not sure whether to vote tactically or for who I actually would support.

Not much to choose from if i'm to be honest.

surrey_commuter

dhope wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

No vote for me as I continue to wage my war of attrition for proportional representation

Your input has been counted this time too, proportionally.

well if Dominic Raab's 18,593 gets slashed to a tie then I will hang my head in shame

rubertoe

Should Voting be compulsory, even if you go in and spoil or they have a box that says none of the above?

rick_chasey

dhope wrote:

Instructions unclear, arrested for turning up at the local school/polling station with fat ass out.
Will try again this evening.

dhope

rubertoe wrote:

Should Voting be compulsory

No

rubertoe wrote:

have a box that says none of the above?

Yes

Not sure what use the statistic would be, but quantifying how unimpressed people are would be interesting
Though it might lead to people that would normally vote for someone actually voting for no-one

kurako

dhope wrote:

rubertoe wrote:

Should Voting be compulsory

No

rubertoe wrote:

have a box that says none of the above?

Yes

Not sure what use the statistic would be, but quantifying how unimpressed people are would be interesting
Though it might lead to people that would normally vote for someone actually voting for no-one

The 'none of the above' option is to spoil your ballot paper. Anything apart from one cross in one box will do the trick.

dhope

Kurako wrote:

dhope wrote:

rubertoe wrote:

Should Voting be compulsory

No

rubertoe wrote:

have a box that says none of the above?

Yes

Not sure what use the statistic would be, but quantifying how unimpressed people are would be interesting
Though it might lead to people that would normally vote for someone actually voting for no-one

The 'none of the above' option is to spoil your ballot paper. Anything apart from one cross in one box will do the trick.

Yes, but there is not a distinction between obviously spoiled papers vs people that have ballsed up the paper and not noticed (a tiny % I know)
Which leads to not being able to state a "This % of the population actively turned up to abstain"

seajays

When you skip voting
It's not rebellion
It's surrender

surrey_commuter

When the referendum on PR was held in 2011 the turnout and Yes vote were equally underwhelming so whilst people may be disaffected by both the choice of candidates and the electoral system the biggest driver would appear to be apathy

On a turnout of 42.2 per cent, 68 per cent voted No and 32 per cent voted Yes. Ten of the 440 counting districts recorded 'Yes' votes above 50 per cent; six in London, and those in Oxford, Cambridge and Edinburgh Central and Glasgow Kelvin in Scotland.[2]

elbowloh

Surrey Commuter wrote:

dhope wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

No vote for me as I continue to wage my war of attrition for proportional representation

Your input has been counted this time too, proportionally.

well if Dominic Raab's 18,593 gets slashed to a tie then I will hang my head in shame

Mole Valley?

seajays

Not voting simply means you're ignored, and you get to live with what the other people vote for. Whilst you may not agree with every policy of a particular party, there has to be some that you agree with more of, and there have to be some that you agree with less of. You should still vote therefore.



Not voting will not change the system. Don't be lulled into thinking it will.

surrey_commuter

elbowloh wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

dhope wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

No vote for me as I continue to wage my war of attrition for proportional representation

Your input has been counted this time too, proportionally.

well if Dominic Raab's 18,593 gets slashed to a tie then I will hang my head in shame

Mole Valley?

Walton and Esher... but am moving to Epsom which has been held by a Conservative since its creation in the Redistribution of Seats Act 1885.

which is actually quite funny

surrey_commuter

Seajays wrote:

Not voting simply means you're ignored, and you get to live with what the other people vote for. Whilst you may not agree with every policy of a particular party, there has to be some that you agree with more of, and there have to be some that you agree with less of. You should still vote therefore.



Not voting will not change the system. Don't be lulled into thinking it will.

But who I vote for is irrelevant.... if I had voted last time it would have raised Mr Raab's majority to 18,594 or lowered it to 18,592. And that is assuming I voted for the party that came 2nd. I fail to see what earthly difference that would have made. By a tiny fraction I deem not voting to be more likely to help bring about change.

The Rookie

anthdci wrote:

I was there at 7.05 on my way to work. Second person to vote at that station. Common Labour!

Not many of the 'common man' any more, though why you chose to mention it I'm not sure.

Or does it reflect badly on your ability to rationally and intelligently decide who to vote for?

tailwindhome

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/features/ ... 5042797753

dyrlac

I was 10th in line at 0657 but was well scalped by some guy on a hybrid in baggy shorts (wearing an AFC Wimbledon top) who was 8th. Voted purely for mood affiliation though as Hammond's majority in Wimbers in 2010 was 11,408.

DonDaddyD

Will vote after work and after I go to the gym. So around 9pm tonight, maybe a tad later.

Voting Lib Dem.

timothyw

Surrey Commuter wrote:

But who I vote for is irrelevant.... if I had voted last time it would have raised Mr Raab's majority to 18,594 or lowered it to 18,592. And that is assuming I voted for the party that came 2nd. I fail to see what earthly difference that would have made. By a tiny fraction I deem not voting to be more likely to help bring about change.

And as an added bonus, you get to sit around eating biscuits during that time you saved, so inevitably bringing forth the revolution. :roll:

Of course individually it makes almost no difference if you personally don't vote, but that's rather missing the big picture isn't it?

If you recognise the need for change, surely you could at the very least vote for a candidate that supports electoral reform/the kind of change that you are hoping for, whether they are a realistic prospect or not. You might just help them keep their deposit and do that bit better next time. But then again, this might require researching the candidates, which is once again less time to eat biscuits.

dhope

Surrey Commuter wrote:

By a tiny fraction I deem not voting to be more likely to help bring about change.

How?
Non voters outnumbered any other party last time.
What change did it bring about?

When every party that could conceivably get into power does so by being voted for, how is it in the interest of any of them to cater for non voters. Pick the group that advocates STV or PR or whichever you think is closest to achieving some measure of the change you want.

Bah. I'm avoiding social media today for this very reason. I think I have about as little faith in the electorate as I do those being elected :roll:


Edit: Yeah, what TimW said

surrey_commuter

TimothyW wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

But who I vote for is irrelevant.... if I had voted last time it would have raised Mr Raab's majority to 18,594 or lowered it to 18,592. And that is assuming I voted for the party that came 2nd. I fail to see what earthly difference that would have made. By a tiny fraction I deem not voting to be more likely to help bring about change.

And as an added bonus, you get to sit around eating biscuits during that time you saved, so inevitably bringing forth the revolution. :roll:

Of course individually it makes almost no difference if you personally don't vote, but that's rather missing the big picture isn't it?

If you recognise the need for change, surely you could at the very least vote for a candidate that supports electoral reform/the kind of change that you are hoping for, whether they are a realistic prospect or not. You might just help them keep their deposit and do that bit better next time. But then again, this might require researching the candidates, which is once again less time to eat biscuits.

Oh Dearest Timmy why do you need to make it personal? why would I be spending my time eating biscuits? why assume I know nothing about politics?
How is not voting missing the big picture?
How would knowing the LibDems support PR take any time whatsoever and they don't need my help to save their deposit