The Wasted Vote
Discussion
eharding said:
Einion Yrth said:
wolves_wanderer said:
Mon Ami Mate said:
In the previous two elections the Conservative Party had focussed on core vote and heavily defeated..
and now they are taking their core vote for granted...Mon Ami Mate said:
Where do your political instincts lie? What are your dreams and aspirations? Do you favour big authoritarian Government, tax and spend, non stop nannying, pro EU, open borders, Human Rights Act, burgeoning welfare and state ownership or do you prefer small state libertarianism, pro capitalist, individual freedom, aspirational, free market rewarding those that have talent and take risks and responsibility?
.
Tricky one. Whilst I err towards the latter I do believe a certain amount of the former is required for there to be a fair society..
As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of purely capitalist societies in the world where there's no tax and little state interference. Most of them tend to be s
tholes. There needs to be a balance.Pesty said:
Unless the core vote and the tactical voters all vote UKIP.
It seems its the Tory tactical voters that are keeping out UKIP not Ukip keeping out the conservatives out to me.
As per the other thread - and I'm still waiting for someone to suggest a different simulation - if we model the huge Eastleigh swing to UKIP at a General Election, the result is a Labour absolute majority.It seems its the Tory tactical voters that are keeping out UKIP not Ukip keeping out the conservatives out to me.
How much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
Einion Yrth said:
Well primarily by itself in the persons of Cameron and Osborne, but yes, unfortunately those who will gain are most likely to be the labour party. I'm none too happy about it but while Cameron is the leader of the Conservative party my vote lies elsewhere.
So, who did you vote for in the 2005 Conservative leadership election?eharding said:
So, who did you vote for in the 2005 Conservative leadership election?
As I'm sure you know really, I'm just a voter - my opinion doesn't matter and I didn't get a vote. I still won't vote for a representative of a party that has those individuals in charge though. For the record though I would have voted for David Davis I suspect.
Countdown said:
Tricky one. Whilst I err towards the latter I do believe a certain amount of the former is required for there to be a fair society.
As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of purely capitalist societies in the world where there's no tax and little state interference. Most of them tend to be stholes. There needs to be a balance.
Any examples? I would tend to say the closer a country sticks to the model of small, limited government, protecting people's basic rights to liberty and property, the less of a sAs I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of purely capitalist societies in the world where there's no tax and little state interference. Most of them tend to be s
tholes. There needs to be a balance.t hole it is. I'm thinking Hong Kong, Switzerland type places.Conversely as the government gets bigger and more involved in everything countries tend to become much more s
t hole like - North Korea at the extreme end. It's not so much a balance between big government and no government, as having the right sort of government.
Einion Yrth said:
eharding said:
So, who did you vote for in the 2005 Conservative leadership election?
As I'm sure you know really, I'm just a voter - my opinion doesn't matter and I didn't get a vote. I still won't vote for a representative of a party that has those individuals in charge though. For the record though I would have voted for David Davis I suspect.eharding said:
As per the other thread - and I'm still waiting for someone to suggest a different simulation - if we model the huge Eastleigh swing to UKIP at a General Election, the result is a Labour absolute majority.
How much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
Then a Conservative victory in 2020, with a right wing Tory party committed to EU withdrawal and serious tax and regulation cuts and free of global warming bHow much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
ks, unopposed by UKIP.If 5 years of Labour is what it takes to get there so be it. I don't see any point in voting for a party who promise to be s
t and still disappoint, because the other party might just be even stter.AJS- said:
Countdown said:
Tricky one. Whilst I err towards the latter I do believe a certain amount of the former is required for there to be a fair society.
As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of purely capitalist societies in the world where there's no tax and little state interference. Most of them tend to be stholes. There needs to be a balance.
Any examples? I would tend to say the closer a country sticks to the model of small, limited government, protecting people's basic rights to liberty and property, the less of a sAs I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of purely capitalist societies in the world where there's no tax and little state interference. Most of them tend to be s
tholes. There needs to be a balance.t hole it is. I'm thinking Hong Kong, Switzerland type places..Ite, usually through force of arms.
HK, Switzerland, Singapore, and Monaco are low direct tax but they have quite a lot of indirect taxes or the cost of living is quite high. Also AIUI their economies rely significantly on exports and a BoP surplus. Without this they would struggle to maintain their standards of living.
AJS- said:
If 5 years of Labour is what it takes to get there so be it. I don't see any point in voting for a party who promise to be st and still disappoint, because the other party might just be even stter.
Given what happened between 1997 and 2010, there doesn't seem to be any question of might. If 13 years of Labour government didn't return a hard-right Conservative government, what makes you think another 5 years of Labour would?t and still disappoint, because the other party might just be even stter.Just 5 more years of damage, 5 more years of uncontrolled immigration, 5 more years of reckless spending, and frankly 5 more years to skew the electoral system in their favour.
But then, unless things have changed, you're not actually a UK resident, are you? So thanks for offering to let the rest of us endure another Labour government.
I believe that the Labour party is going to win the next election, in which case the most important thing that voting UKIP or Conservative will determine is the future vector of Conservative policy - although a significant minority of parliamentary seats for UKIP would help legitimise their agenda as part of mainstream British politics, which could have interesting repercussions across the board.
I'm not sure the FPP necessarily prevents minority parties having influence. Even before they got the chance to enter coalition the Liberal Democrats were succesfully influencing public policy. For instance, the current system of punitive VED based on CO2 emissions was originally mooted by them. The bds.
ds.Pesty said:
Cameron just on the news saying he will not move to the right because they came 3rd. So they wont change, if any tory voters on here are expecting a move from the center you are going to be disappointed. if you want change voting UKIP seems the only way.
He looked rattled to me. What is this new angry politician we are seeing. like clegg getting all rambo saying he will not stand for his party being put down etc etc. i bet they have been coached to do it.
I find this bit really interesting..He looked rattled to me. What is this new angry politician we are seeing. like clegg getting all rambo saying he will not stand for his party being put down etc etc. i bet they have been coached to do it.
I read a newspaper article on what Cameron said, below the article are lots of angry comments from the great unwashed - clearly they believe him.
If he'd come out and said "clearly what the public want is a more right wing government, so we'll go that way" The great unwashed wouldn't believe him and be just as angry.
Its not a unique situation either, we never believe them when they say they will do something, equally when they say they won't do something we pour scorn on them.
My guess is that they will look to go more right wing, but he can't come out and say that can he? you can just see the headline - "PM admits policies have failed". Better to do it by stealth in slow time.
Far as wasted votes go, the main problem is we don't trust any of them. Just a case of picking the best of a bad bunch.
Crafty_ said:
Far as wasted votes go, the main problem is we don't trust any of them. Just a case of picking the best of a bad bunch.
I trust the monster raving loony partyAs lets face it
Tories, labour, lib dems etc = Insane people trying to convince you they are sane
Monster raving loony party = Sane people trying to convince you they are insane
eharding said:
So, you care enough about the leadership of the Tory party to vote for a different party to express opposition to that leadership, rather than actually join the Conservative party and be entitled to vote on the leadership directly?
What are you dribbling on about? This isn't just the leader of your party, it purports to be the Prime sodding Minister, I have every right to an opinion and to apply any and all pressure that I think I can to try and get it to get its head out of its harris. Voting for it certainly isn't on my agenda.AJS- said:
eharding said:
As per the other thread - and I'm still waiting for someone to suggest a different simulation - if we model the huge Eastleigh swing to UKIP at a General Election, the result is a Labour absolute majority.
How much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
Then a Conservative victory in 2020, with a right wing Tory party committed to EU withdrawal and serious tax and regulation cuts and free of global warming bHow much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
ks, unopposed by UKIP.If 5 years of Labour is what it takes to get there so be it. I don't see any point in voting for a party who promise to be s
t and still disappoint, because the other party might just be even stter.Last time we got a Labour Gov't we could afford it. Next time , we can not. The markest wil have zero confidence in Balls in respect of borrowing & deficits etc - he is a dyed-in-the-wool Keynsian when Keynsian economic theory has widely been debunked.
We will be at the IMF within 3 years
Wombat3 said:
AJS- said:
eharding said:
As per the other thread - and I'm still waiting for someone to suggest a different simulation - if we model the huge Eastleigh swing to UKIP at a General Election, the result is a Labour absolute majority.
How much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
Then a Conservative victory in 2020, with a right wing Tory party committed to EU withdrawal and serious tax and regulation cuts and free of global warming bHow much of a swing would it take for a UKIP government? Seriously?
ks, unopposed by UKIP.If 5 years of Labour is what it takes to get there so be it. I don't see any point in voting for a party who promise to be s
t and still disappoint, because the other party might just be even stter.Last time we got a Labour Gov't we could afford it. Next time , we can not. The markest wil have zero confidence in Balls in respect of borrowing & deficits etc - he is a dyed-in-the-wool Keynsian when Keynsian economic theory has widely been debunked.
We will be at the IMF within 3 years
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff