Queen distressed by Blair legacy

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

UKIP?

UKIP if you want to. The lady's not for kipping

[dreko07]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

UKIP?

LOL maybe SNP, so Phil can have a bit more time at home.

Originally Posted by dreko07

LOL maybe SNP, so Phil can have a bit more time at home.

Athens?

[dreko07]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Athens?

same to you

Originally Posted by foreverwar

UKIP?

I'm curious. If the Queen asked for your advice, which party would you recommend she vote for?

The Tories perhaps?

Originally Posted by freezin

I'm curious. If the Queen asked for your advice, which party would you recommend she vote for?

The Tories perhaps?

I would recommend she didn't vote, as it could be seen to influence other voters, and as the Head of State she cannot be seen to be "partial" (imho).

btw, I would not recommend any party to anyone - if people need to be told who to vote for, democracy is doomed; they should make up their own minds, hopefully based upon an informed opinion (not on tabloid headlines, scare-mongering, twisted statistics, and pandering to people's worst insecurities and fears).

Anyway, I'm more of a Whig than a Tory

[Xaccers]

How do we know she doesn't vote in secret via post?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

How do we know she doesn't vote in secret via post?

Because "secret ballots" aren't really very secret (unfortunately) - someone would surely sell the info to the Super Soaraway
The ballot papers contains a serial number: it is possible, but illegal, to trace all the votes to the people who cast them. The number is there to stop electoral fraud (works so well lately).

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I would recommend she didn't vote, as it could be seen to influence other voters, and as the Head of State she cannot be seen to be "partial" (imho).

btw, I would not recommend any party to anyone - if people need to be told who to vote for, democracy is doomed; they should make up their own minds, hopefully based upon an informed opinion (not on tabloid headlines, scare-mongering, twisted statistics, and pandering to people's worst insecurities and fears).

I agree that the Queen should not vote, but you have really surprised me in saying that you are more Whig than Tory. Only a few months ago you claimed to have:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

... voted Tory all my life.

A change of heart it seems.

And I also agree that people should not be told who to vote for. But I think it is a little cheeky to suggest that anyone bases their opinions of political parties on anything other than the policies they offer. An honest public political debate would go a long way to ensuring the voters hold informed opinions too. But I don't expect either mainstream politicians or any sector of the mainstream media to play a part in bringing that about!

Originally Posted by freezin

I agree that the Queen should not vote, but you have really surprised me in saying that you are more Whig than Tory. Only a few months ago you claimed to have:

Originally Posted by foreverwar
... voted Tory all my life.

A change of heart it seems.

And I also agree that people should not be told who to vote for. But I think it is a little cheeky to suggest that anyone bases their opinions of political parties on anything other than the policies they offer. An honest public political debate would go a long way to ensuring the voters hold informed opinions too. But I don't expect either mainstream politicians or any sector of the mainstream media to play a part in bringing that about!

No change of heart, my little UKIP-voting chum - I have voted (and continue to vote) Tory, but I favour the Whig (as was) philosophy; since the Whig Party no longer stands for HM Parliament (as it split into the Tory and Liberal Parties in the 1860's), it would be a tad difficult to vote for them, don't you think? I joined the TRG in the early 1980's, and have "leant that way" ever since.

Basing one's vote solely on anything other than a party's policies is like choosing consultants solely on their advertisements/website - I would rather do a bit of research, see what they did previously, talk to previous customers, find out if they delivered; so "a little cheeky to suggest that anyone bases their opinions of political parties on anything other than the policies", no - "common sense", yes.

Originally Posted by foreverwar

No change of heart, my little UKIP-voting chum - I have voted (and continue to vote) Tory, but I favour the Whig (as was) philosophy; since the Whig Party no longer stands for HM Parliament (as it split into the Tory and Liberal Parties in the 1860's), it would be a tad difficult to vote for them, don't you think? I joined the TRG in the early 1980's, and have "leant that way" ever since.

Ah the Tory Reform Group. Now I understand where you're coming from.

Basing one's vote solely on anything other than a party's policies is like choosing consultants solely on their advertisements/website - I would rather do a bit of research, see what they did previously, talk to previous customers, find out if they delivered; so "a little cheeky to suggest that anyone bases their opinions of political parties on anything other than the policies", no - "common sense", yes.

All common sense, and any voter would be wise to consider the likelihood of any party's policies being carried out as well as the policies themselves. But I wonder who you had in mind when you said that people should make up their own minds "hopefully based upon an informed opinion (not on tabloid headlines, scare-mongering, twisted statistics, and pandering to people's worst insecurities and fears)."

And as for UKIP, I have voted for them in the past (and have never hidden by euphemisms) , and I might in the future. I'll also consider several other parties, but having done my "research" seen "what they did previously", been a "previous customer" (unwilling most of the time) and didn't like what they "delivered", I know I won't be voting for Labour, the Lib Dems or the Tories, and the TRG is a definite turn-off imo!

I'll vote for any party that can kick out my present long standing MP on the basis he's a useless MP and I'd definitely like a change.

Tho' I suppose I could be quickly changing my mind if they are an even lazier MP.