Election 2019, Week 1

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Anonymouse

Frankly, I don't trust him. Or Corbyn. Or any of them. I don't really believe democracy works any more in this country. NONE OF THE ABOVE is the only proper answer IMO.

"Suppose They Gave An Election And Nobody Came?" - now that I'd pay to see!

There is an answer, stand yourself. If nobody is representing you and your views or you don't trust them. There might be others that have the same views.
Not voting or standing really does give you no right to complain about politicians not doing what you want, or the state of things.

I'd be for compulsory voting, but 'none of the above' certainly would have to be an option on the ballot paper.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Mr K

There is an answer, stand yourself. If nobody is representing you and your views or you don't trust them. There might be others that have the same views.

Yeah, 'cos that worked really well for the BNP and similar didn't it.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Anonymouse

I can't remember if I've said this before, but since the UK is (in theory) a democracy I'm going to say it anyway.

From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long:

If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for...but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.
If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires.

- Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough For Love

I have followed this rule for decades. Unfortunately, when I first started doing so, I was led (or pushed) to a logical conclusion Heinlein might not have thought of: what happens when you want to vote against all the parties because you don't trust or agree with any of them? The only logical answer to this is to vote for none, i.e. not to vote at all. So except for the 1997 election, I haven't voted for decades.

(Even then, I was acting in accordance with Heinlein's principle - I wasn't voting for Labour, because Tony Blair always got my back up with that creepy smile; I was voting against the Tories because I'd bloody well had enough of 'em and so, I imagine, had millions of other voters. Of course "New Labour" turned out to be just a different flavour of Conservatism, but that's another debate.)

This, however, does not mean, as several politicians have said, that I and the millions who agree with me are apathetic. This is not the case. We do care. We simply object to all the available choices. Which is why I want to see a new choice added to the ballot paper, one familiar to Richard Pryor fans from the remake of Brewster's Millions:

NONE OF THE ABOVE.

Give us that option and I will quite happily vote. Such an option would mean that abstainers would no longer effectively be disenfranchised because their voice wasn't heard. With that option, they would have to be heard - and with millions voting that way as I strongly suspect they would, it would make all the parties sit up and take notice.

This option seems to me to be the ultimate expression of democracy: a way of telling all the parties you don't agree with any of them, without wasting your vote by spoiling the ballot paper or being self-disenfranchised by not voting at all.

For the record, I voted for Brexit, which I'm sure will come as no surprise to y'all. I am frankly disgusted with the way successive Prime Ministers (none of whom we actually voted for!) have dragged their feet over this. We, the electorate who pay their damn salaries, told them what we wanted them to do. It is their responsibility and their duty to do as they were damn well told. The size of the Referendum majority was and is irrelevant. It was a majority vote. They should therefore abide by it. End of.

"But will you be voting this time?" I hear you cry. Hmm. Good question. I haven't decided yet. Though Boris Johnson seems to be pushing for what I and millions of others told the government what we wanted done, I'm not convinced by him or what he's offering.

Frankly, I don't trust him. Or Corbyn. Or any of them. I don't really believe democracy works any more in this country. NONE OF THE ABOVE is the only proper answer IMO.

"Suppose They Gave An Election And Nobody Came?" - now that I'd pay to see!

H'mm. You seem to be facing the same sort of dilemma as our Parliamentarians. You don't like the choices available, but you don't know what you do want!

[Mr K]

The Tories are revolting !

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...d-vote-lib-dem

Former Tory MP and prominent columnist Matthew Parris has said he will quit the party after 50 years in a call for Conservatives who oppose Brexit to support the Liberal Democrats in the election.

The Times journalist said he will cast his vote for the remain-backing party in the 12 December ballot “to defeat Tory zealotry over Europe” as he joined a growing list of prominent members to quit.

He's always seemed to me like a sensible chap.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

What exactly is he offering, to tear up the last ten years of tory rule and blame others for his and his parties short comings, we've screwed it up for a decade so give us another go at it isn't reason to vote for him imo. Plus if his own brother doesn't trust him, why should we.

The last 10 years has not been representative of 'Tory rule' because we have been in austerity during that time. An austerity caused by a banking crisis that could have been avoided had Gordon Brown and his cronies not spent all our money on socialist policies.

Now that we are coming out the other side of the tunnel, Boris is able to present us with an exciting agenda for the next five years, which will contain many of the things that the public have been crying out for without bankrupting the economy.

---------- Post added at 11:04 ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

The Tories are revolting !

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...d-vote-lib-dem


He's always seemed to me like a sensible chap.

Another MP determined to frustrate the will of the people. These are the politicians we want out of the Conservative Party, so good riddance, I say.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Another MP determined to frustrate the will of the people. These are the politicians we want out of the Conservative Party, so good riddance, I say.

He's not an MP OB, do try reading.....

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Mr K

The Tories are revolting !

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...d-vote-lib-dem

He's always seemed to me like a sensible chap.

Seems like a hardened pro-EU person to me, obviously Boris got the measure of him quite early.
Probably a nice enough chap, but one wonders why he took so long to jump. Can't see him getting very far, but fair play for his principles.

In other news, Government puts a ban on Fracking. That will please many, and pee off those with money who saw a nice profit from it. I'm in the anti-fracking camp myself.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Mr K

The Tories are revolting !

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...d-vote-lib-dem


He's always seemed to me like a sensible chap.

He was a sensible chap but when a party that he has supported all his life becomes a sect rather then a broad church then he and millions with him will go elsewhere.

[MalteseFalcon]

Undecided at the moment between voting for my current Tory pro Brexit MP or abstaining. Will make my mind up nearer the time if I vote or not.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by denphone

He was a sensible chap but when a party that he has supported all his life becomes a sect rather then a broad church then he and millions with him will go elsewhere.

How is it possible to support Leave and Remain at the same time?
The issue is that the Remain side insist on imposing their will, regardless of a democratic vote. If they more accepting of the result, it would be less of an issue.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by nomadking

How is it possible to support Leave and Remain at the same time?
The issue is that the Remain side insist on imposing their will, regardless of a democratic vote. If they more accepting of the result, it would be less of an issue.

Jeremy Corbyn seems to manage alright.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

He was a sensible chap but when a party that he has supported all his life becomes a sect rather then a broad church then he and millions with him will go elsewhere.

A 'sect'? This is the only party (apart from Brexit) that is determined to deliver on the result of the referendum.

That word is more appropriate to describe Corbyn's Labour Party.

---------- Post added at 14:24 ---------- Previous post was at 14:14 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

He's not an MP OB, do try reading.....

Thank you for correcting, but it wasn't clear in that article that he was an ex-MP, just that he was an ex-Tory MP.

Incidentally, your assumption that some of those who voted Conservative last time were oldies and have died off only to be replaced by younger socialist-minded people has received a bit of a knock.

According to newspaper reports, the age at which a voter was more likely to have voted Tory than Labour, is now 40, down from 47 at the 2017 election.

This is the finding of a MORI poll. As well as that, a YouGov poll has revealed that Labour has lost many young voters since the last election, most notably to the Green Party.

[jfman]

Labour will deliver a Brexit if the people approve of the deal. What’s unreasonable about that?

---------- Post added at 15:10 ---------- Previous post was at 15:07 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The last 10 years has not been representative of 'Tory rule' because we have been in austerity during that time. An austerity caused by a banking crisis that could have been avoided had Gordon Brown and his cronies not spent all our money on socialist policies.

Now that we are coming out the other side of the tunnel, Boris is able to present us with an exciting agenda for the next five years, which will contain many of the things that the public have been crying out for without bankrupting the economy.

---------- Post added at 11:04 ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 ----------



Another MP determined to frustrate the will of the people. These are the politicians we want out of the Conservative Party, so good riddance, I say.

Rolling back the function of the state is classic Tory policy. Austerity is just a mechanism to justify it.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Labour will deliver a Brexit if the people approve of the deal. What’s unreasonable about that?

---------- Post added at 15:10 ---------- Previous post was at 15:07 ----------



Rolling back the function of the state is classic Tory policy. Austerity is just a mechanism to justify it.

What's unreasonable is:

1. The public has already voted but as it doesn't give the answer some wanted they want a pointless re-run of it.

2. Corbyn is promising a choice between a new deal which keeps us in the Customs Union or remain. Both are remain options. You can't be both in the customs union and be able to forge new trade deals, and that completely takes away the advantage of leaving the EU.

As for your final comment, austerity was necessary to avoid the country going bankrupt. There is nowt wrong with rolling back the state so that it doesn't take over the whole economy. It's our hard earned money that pays for the state sector, remember.

[jfman]

It’s hardly a pointless re-run if it’s a detailed outcome vs the status quo. Not my thoughts, that was Jacob Rees-Mogg!

It’s our public services too that are suffering. The country was never in danger of “going bankrupt”, indeed other countries have in the past used public sector investment projects to drive growth in the economy.

The “our hard earned money” line is the oldest line in the neo-liberal capitalist handbook. It ignores that money moves round the economy driving demand and promoting growth. Doctors, nurses and teachers spend money in the economy.

Money sitting in offshore accounts doesn’t do any of this. It just sits waiting to be inherited, with no tax paid on it when that happens.