Why should you vote? The data!

[BliarOut]

Here's why you should vote.

Previous election results said:

Year-Con---Lab---Lib 1987-12.52---08.01---6.47 1992-12.80---09.55---5.40 1997-08.78---11.35---4.68 2001-07.71---09.06---4.25

Note how in 2001 voter apathy amongst the Tories meant Labour managed to romp home with a majority, despite getting less votes than they did in 1987, when they lost.
Looking at the numbers (From hmso.gov) Labour won in 1997, fair and square. In 2001 however, they lost almost two million voters.

Being petulant and opting not to vote IS a vote for Labour. Only 9 million out of the entire population voted in their favour at the last election. Voter turnout was just 59.3%.

If you want to change how the country is being run, do something about it on May 5th

[The Wiz]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that it took fewer votes on average to elect a Lbour MP than it did a Conservative one. So ... if you don't want a Labour govt then get out and vote ...

[lanciachris]

Still objectionable to have to vote for a tt to get rid of a bigger tt.

Wheres this PH party i keep hearing about?

[JagLover]

Apathy is the Labour parties biggest weapon

and they have encouraged it by pretending to be closer to the Tories than is in fact the case.

[SuckMyChrsitmas]

"and they have encouraged it by pretending to be closer to the Tories than is in fact the case."

I would argue that there is absolutely no pretence about it whatsoever.

[JagLover]

SuckMyChrsitmas said:

"and they have encouraged it by pretending to be closer to the Tories than is in fact the case." I would argue that there is absolutely no pretence about it whatsoever.

It is the language that has changed that is all. Labour used to loudly proclaim that it would squeeze the rich until the pips squeeked.

Now it promises not to increase taxes and that it will help 'hard working' families while, yes you've guessed it, squeezing anyone who is even remotly well off.