If Brexit is cancelled, how will you vote on the next GE?

[bitchstewie]

AshVX220 said:

bhstewie said:

That'll be this Brexit party?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/20/lead...

Christ.

Unfortunately, due to the nature of the media (both social and MSM) anyone who stands for the Brexit Party, particularly in a higher position will be subject to having every SJW in the country trying to dig up dirt on them.

If it weren't for this fact, I'd put myself forward, but there are things in my past (from a long time ago) that I'd rather like to keep in the past.

They will be under far more microscopes than any other current MP or candidate, probably even more so than a UKIP candidate (UKIP was properly sunk when they brought in the likes of Tommy Robinson).

I kind of get that, but there's a world of difference between a few dodgy tweets v stuff posted very recently that's utterly hateful.

There's an easy way to avoid it.

I would say I'm shocked that 30% of NP&E say they'd vote for that kind of thing. But I'm not.

[Northbloke]

I don't get the "won't vote" option, that would mean they get away with their duplicity.

I will vote for literally anybody but the Top 3 to be decided nearer the time.

They need to be reminded that they are our servants not vice versa. And would we be any worse off with 650 new faces in there?

So kick out the current incumbent wherever you are!

(Oh and I've been e-mailing my current MP during this mess (decent chap) but I've now told him if we don't leave I would not vote for him under the Tory banner but would as an independent.)

Edited by Northbloke on Friday 22 March 12:11

[AshVX220]

Kermit power said:

AshVX220 said:

Kermit power said:

fido said:

I clicked Brexit Party but it would be a toss up between UKIP and Brexit party depending on which one is the more genuine Brexit party. I think UKIP have gone a bit too Tommy Robinson to qualify as a decent party but if the current government won't enact what they were voted to do then we'll vote in one that does. In any case I suspect May knows the deal, so to as speak, and will get us out of the EU with a minor delay.

Really?

For a General election - not a trivial little protest election like the Parish Council or the European parliament but one which hands over the power to the party that wins to do everything, set tax policy, defence, run the NHS, transport, policing, absolutely everything important - you'd really, honestly be willing to vote for a party with no candidates, no leader (she just resigned because she got caught being "a bit too Tommy Robinson") no policies, and no track record, purely for their attitude over Brexit?

I'd like to think my track record on here is one of reasoned debate rather than attacking individuals, but that's just absolutely, completely and utterly batst fking mental, and I'm absolutely lost for words!!!

Check the poll, a lot of people seem to agree with fido..... So they must all be batst fking mental.

A European election I could understand, but a GE? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and I honestly don't believe even a fraction of those people would actually vote for "The Brexit Party" on the day...

Most people live in a constituency that is almost guaranteed to return a certain colour rosette, therefore a vote for Brexit Party could be a good protest, after all the rise of UKIP is what lead to this whole thing anyway.

[PositronicRay]

Leicester Loyal said:

Not Cons or Labour. I've picked Brexit but I'd like to see their other policies too.

You won't have to worry too much about policies, it's a protest party and a protest vote.

[chow pan toon]

AshVX220 said:

Kermit power said:

fido said:

I clicked Brexit Party but it would be a toss up between UKIP and Brexit party depending on which one is the more genuine Brexit party. I think UKIP have gone a bit too Tommy Robinson to qualify as a decent party but if the current government won't enact what they were voted to do then we'll vote in one that does. In any case I suspect May knows the deal, so to as speak, and will get us out of the EU with a minor delay.

Really?

For a General election - not a trivial little protest election like the Parish Council or the European parliament but one which hands over the power to the party that wins to do everything, set tax policy, defence, run the NHS, transport, policing, absolutely everything important - you'd really, honestly be willing to vote for a party with no candidates, no leader (she just resigned because she got caught being "a bit too Tommy Robinson") no policies, and no track record, purely for their attitude over Brexit?

I'd like to think my track record on here is one of reasoned debate rather than attacking individuals, but that's just absolutely, completely and utterly batst fking mental, and I'm absolutely lost for words!!!

Check the poll, a lot of people seem to agree with fido..... So they must all be batst fking mental.

Only on here which is thankfully unrepresentative of the country as a whole where most people (leavers or remainers) are not so monomaniacal about the EU.

[alfie2244]

chow pan toon said:

nly on here which is thankfully unrepresentative of the country as a whole where most people (leavers or remainers) are not so monomaniacal about the EU.

CMD made that mistake.

[2gins]

Don't know what to make of the Tories any more, but certainly can't endorse them after this st show.

Corbyn's been a disgrace, using this crisis as a lever to get a sniff of the big boy trousers.

The Lib Dems are a bunch of untrustworthy duplicitious crapweasels.

None of the rest matter.

It looks like a spoiled ballot for me. I'll probably sign the entrance sheet at the polling station and then walk out with bits of ballot paper hanging from my mouth and stuck to my face/shirt.

[AshVX220]

alfie2244 said:

CMD made that mistake.

Indeed, the rise of UKIP showed exactly how many people across the board were getting disgruntled with the direction the EU were taking at the time.

[Pan Pan Pan]

hyperblue said:

Honestly no idea anymore.

I voted remain, accepted the result and considered the Conservatives would be more competent than Labour at managing the withdrawal process. Therefore they got my vote last time. However, they have fked up big time and are unfit for office, as are Labour.

My local MP Peter Kyle is Labour and seems to do a decent job representing his constituency and is a thorn in Jeremy Corbyn’s side. But I cannot bring myself to vote for him as vote for Labour would only encourage Corbyn.

I just want someone sensible in charge!

In the 2016 referendum the leave side won by a majority of over 1 million people. It would have been straightforward if either Camoron, or May had acted democratically and enacted the majority vote of the UK. Instead Camoron just f*cked off, and despite May repeating hundreds of times that she would carry out the wishes of the majority vote which was the largest in UK political history, she allowed her majority remain MP`s to mess up the process of Brexit, by allowing them to vote at odds to the constituents they were `supposed' to be representing.
I have no problem with a remain supporting MP, supporting remain, in any HoC vote, provided they were representing a constituency which had a majority vote for remain.
What is truly disgusting is an MP who ignores the wishes of their constituents, and votes for their own personal preference instead of the way that the thousands of ordinary people whose votes it was, that put that particular MP into the H0C.
If democracy is badly damaged by the actions of MP`s who did not represent their constituents wishes and just followed their personal preference, a great part of the blame for the damage to democracy lies squarely on their shoulders.

[Leicester Loyal]

Kermit power said:

AshVX220 said:

Kermit power said:

fido said:

I clicked Brexit Party but it would be a toss up between UKIP and Brexit party depending on which one is the more genuine Brexit party. I think UKIP have gone a bit too Tommy Robinson to qualify as a decent party but if the current government won't enact what they were voted to do then we'll vote in one that does. In any case I suspect May knows the deal, so to as speak, and will get us out of the EU with a minor delay.

Really?

For a General election - not a trivial little protest election like the Parish Council or the European parliament but one which hands over the power to the party that wins to do everything, set tax policy, defence, run the NHS, transport, policing, absolutely everything important - you'd really, honestly be willing to vote for a party with no candidates, no leader (she just resigned because she got caught being "a bit too Tommy Robinson") no policies, and no track record, purely for their attitude over Brexit?

I'd like to think my track record on here is one of reasoned debate rather than attacking individuals, but that's just absolutely, completely and utterly batst fking mental, and I'm absolutely lost for words!!!

Check the poll, a lot of people seem to agree with fido..... So they must all be batst fking mental.

A European election I could understand, but a GE? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and I honestly don't believe even a fraction of those people would actually vote for "The Brexit Party" on the day...

It's obviously a vote vs the current established and two fingers up to them. Why the hell would we vote for Con or Lab again after this total mess?

[Pan Pan Pan]

Northbloke said:

I don't get the "won't vote" option, that would mean they get away with their duplicity.

I will vote for literally anybody but the Top 3 to be decided nearer the time.

They need to be reminded that they are our servants not vice versa. And would we be any worse off with 650 new faces in there?

So kick out the current incumbent wherever you are!

(Oh and I've been e-mailing my current MP during this mess (decent chap) but I've now told him if we don't leave I would not vote for him under the Tory banner but would as an independent.)

Edited by Northbloke on Friday 22 March 12:11

If MPs voted in the HoC the way the majority of their constituents wished them to, then I would continue to vote for that MP, because they are democratically following the wish of the ordinary people they have been put in parliament to represent.
If however an MP voted contrary to the wishes of the majority of their constituents, then that MP should be de selected, as they cannot be trusted to correctly represent the wish of the people they are in parliament to represent.Instead they have ignored the wish of their constituents in favour of their own personal preferences, and that cannot be right.

[TameRacingDriver]

Northbloke said:

I don't get the "won't vote" option, that would mean they get away with their duplicity.

Because people realise that its futile and people will just continue to vote for one of the big 2 anyway? That democracy is essentially a concept that exists in theory but in reality.... Nothing will ever change in this country unless people start thinking outside of the box, and get together and make change happen. Never happen... So yes I agree with you, vote for someone outside the big 2 or 3 but can totally understand why people are now say they've had enough...

Edited by TameRacingDriver on Friday 22 March 12:31

[Nickgnome]

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

Hard to argue with this, although there are options that would at least acknowledge the wishes of 52% of the population.

Sorry it wasn’t 52% of the population (34M). It was 52% of those that voted.

So actually 26% of the population.

[ElectricSoup]

Pan Pan Pan said:

If MPs voted in the HoC the way the majority of their constituents wished them to, then I would continue to vote for that MP, because they are democratically following the wish of the ordinary people they have been put in parliament to represent.
If however an MP voted contrary to the wishes of the majority of their constituents, then that MP should be de selected, as they cannot be trusted to correctly represent the wish of the people they are in parliament to represent.Instead they have ignored the wish of their constituents in favour of their own personal preferences, and that cannot be right.

Still not getting that MPs are there to represent constituents' INTERESTS according to their best judgement, not their views or wishes.

When will this ever get through? You are supposed to vote for a candidate based on that, not whether they'll do the majority bidding at all times, unquestioningly.

[Hub]

At the moment probably Independent Group - though I don't know how they will increase party membership, file candidates and gear themselves up for a major election campaign at short notice.

I have fairly moderate views and am quite a floating voter, but I'm fed up with the current system. Conservatives are too divided, Lib Dems are dead but there is a gap in the system for a similar party. I think the next GE could be a much more splintered vote than usual - this poll suggests as such too.

[Piha]

AshVX220 said:

Piha said:

I couldn't vote for anything Nigel Farage is involved in after he was photographed with Fraser Anning.



I would never vote tory or Labour as they don't represent the electorate IMO and are more focused on Party survival than the people they serve. I would head towards one of the parties with a good social and green manifesto but most importantly, a focus on jobs. Is there a party that can offer that?

Based on your previous posts, I would suggest you wouldn't vote for Farage regardless of who he's photographed with (not a dig, just an observation).

I wouldn't vote for any "personality". I have stated what the important issues are that I would vote for.

What is your opinion on Nigel being photographed with that Australian politician?

[TTmonkey]

Nickgnome said:

Sorry it wasn’t 52% of the population (34M). It was 52% of those that voted.

So actually 26% of the population.

Please stop undermining the will of the people by stating bloody facts.

[Bill]

ElectricSoup said:

Still not getting that MPs are there to represent constituents' INTERESTS according to their best judgement, not their views or wishes.

When will this ever get through? You are supposed to vote for a candidate based on that, not whether they'll do the majority bidding at all times, unquestioningly.

Indeed. They're meant to look out for all their constituents, not just the most extreme on any particular issue.

They're voting against a st deal, because it's st. They're voting against no deal because most, of not all, remainers don't want that and many leavers don't either.

If anything the ERG lot are more likely to be going against the majority of their constituents by chasing no deal.

[grumbledoak]

Nickgnome said:

Sorry it wasn’t 52% of the population (34M). It was 52% of those that voted.

So actually 26% of the population.

And the Remainers were?

[Michaelbailey]

Honestly cant bring myself to vote for any of them.
Id always normally vote labour but theres no way in hell I would vote Corbyn in.