Keir Starmer

hilts said:
Name the general election based on a coin toss or anywhere near ever. This is quite simple if someone would prefer a better political system and more honest politicians why would they vote Tory or Labour. As an individual knowing your vote will not matter and having a choice why?

The fact you insist on sticking with the my vote may alter the result only shows you have no other valid reasons.
Click to expand...
There are a few council elections that have been based on a coin toss, but that's hardly a big issue. I only said "rarely" because it's literally not "never". I have never made the point that your one vote is "the one".

You appear to be taking a general point about all our single votes adding up to make a difference, and suggesting it's all about you. It's not. Plenty of people have made the same point to you - it's the individuals that collectively make a difference. I don't care how *you* vote, but I do care if your attitude that it makes no difference is one that more and more people hold.

The "no other valid reasons" makes no sense.

I was only making one argument - I disagreed with your point that a single vote makes no difference. If you want to pedantically claim that one specific person doesn't change elections, then you're right, but it's not about one specific person, it's about everyone who believes that, in your words "the outcome will be the same as if they had never left the house."

Clearly that's not true, as we know that people voting does make a difference to the outcome.
 
bluenova said:
There are a few council elections that have been based on a coin toss, but that's hardly a big issue. I only said "rarely" because it's literally not "never". I have never made the point that your one vote is "the one".

You appear to be taking a general point about all our single votes adding up to make a difference, and suggesting it's all about you. It's not. Plenty of people have made the same point to you - it's the individuals that collectively make a difference. I don't care how *you* vote, but I do care if your attitude that it makes no difference is one that more and more people hold.

The "no other valid reasons" makes no sense.

I was only making one argument - I disagreed with your point that a single vote makes no difference. If you want to pedantically claim that one specific person doesn't change elections, then you're right, but it's not about one specific person, it's about everyone who believes that, in your words "the outcome will be the same as if they had never left the house."

Clearly that's not true, as we know that people voting does make a difference to the outcome.
Click to expand...

I'm glad we got there and you agree one vote doesn't make a difference in the outcome to a general election.

BTW I covered the people voting makes a difference several times you must have missed it. To clarify again because you know other people will vote and in sufficient numbers to make your vote not affect anything you can vote with total freedom.

It's not anti democratic or negative. I'm really not sure how telling an individual they can vote however they want without having to worry about putting the fucking awful tories in is a bad thing?

The point is so simple I do wonder why people are making such a big thing about it.
 
hilts said:
To clarify again because you know other people will vote and in sufficient numbers to make your vote not affect anything you can vote with total freedom.
Click to expand...
How do you know they’re not thinking exactly the same as you?

A general complacency about the value of an individual vote allows the candidate with the most dedicated support, even if it’s nowhere near a majority, to win an election when he doesn’t actually represent the values of most people who live there. That’s why there’s a concerted right wing campaign to paint all politicians as the same so that people won’t be arsed about voting for the alternative that we desperately need in this country.

Having said that, the corruption, incompetence and disdain that the government has for huge sections of the population should be enough this time for it to be a landslide victory for Labour even if quite a few follow your example. However it won’t be the wipeout they deserve.
 
hilts said:
I'm glad we got there and you agree one vote doesn't make a difference in the outcome to a general election.
Click to expand...
That's about the cheapest internet argument around.

Pretending the other person has agreed with you, and being smug about it is really poor.

hilts said:
I'm glad we got there and you agree one vote doesn't make a difference in the outcome to a general election.

BTW I covered the people voting makes a difference several times you must have missed it. To clarify again because you know other people will vote and in sufficient numbers to make your vote not affect anything you can vote with total freedom.

It's not anti democratic or negative. I'm really not sure how telling an individual they can vote however they want without having to worry about putting the fucking awful tories in is a bad thing?

The point is so simple I do wonder why people are making such a big thing about it.
Click to expand...

The Tories have just changed the Mayoral elections to First Past the Post, because they know that "sufficient numbers" will vote for parties that have no chance of winning. The previous voting systems showed that in many cases, those voters would happily have voted to keep the Tory out.
 
hilts said:
I'm glad we got there and you agree one vote doesn't make a difference in the outcome to a general election.

BTW I covered the people voting makes a difference several times you must have missed it. To clarify again because you know other people will vote and in sufficient numbers to make your vote not affect anything you can vote with total freedom.

It's not anti democratic or negative. I'm really not sure how telling an individual they can vote however they want without having to worry about putting the fucking awful tories in is a bad thing?

The point is so simple I do wonder why people are making such a big thing about it.
Click to expand...

If you promise to vote I'll buy you a happy meal and an extra toy.
 
Rascal said:
Can't we all just agree Starmer is a **** and the sooner he is gone the better.
Click to expand...

Damn those centrist politicians and their sensible reasoning and realistic prospects of winning.

What we really need is a load of far left anti semitic protesters in opposition to another Conservative government next year.
 
hilts said:
Unfortunately even though the Labour members voted for a change/discussion about a change Starmer has decided he's not for that kind of nonsense in his party.

That is just another reason why some should really question the guy they are supporting. But he's not a Tory so posters from Manchester as an example with big labour majorities will still vote Labour.

You know just to get the Tories out innit:-)
Click to expand...
The problem is that I like many others who want a progressive, socialist leaning govt have no one to vote for. We have been lied to by Starmer and his ilk. So what do we do?
I live in the Withington constituency which will be a Labour seat and in fact I probably will follow your advice to vote for who I believe in and end up not voting. A vote for Labour makes no difference. But that’s not the way it should be
 
Stiff Little Wingers said:
The problem is that I like many others who want a progressive, socialist leaning govt have no one to vote for. We have been lied to by Starmer and his ilk. So what do we do?
I live in the Withington constituency which will be a Labour seat and in fact I probably will follow your advice to vote for who I believe in and end up not voting. A vote for Labour makes no difference. But that’s not the way it should be
Click to expand...
Withington was Lib Dem for 10 years between 2005 - 2015 and will be a target seat for them at the next election.
 
hilts said:
Name the general election based on a coin toss or anywhere near ever. This is quite simple if someone would prefer a better political system and more honest politicians why would they vote Tory or Labour. As an individual knowing your vote will not matter and having a choice why?

The fact you insist on sticking with the my vote may alter the result only shows you have no other valid reasons.
Click to expand...
So no point anyone voting...
 
Stiff Little Wingers said:
The problem is that I like many others who want a progressive, socialist leaning govt have no one to vote for. We have been lied to by Starmer and his ilk. So what do we do?
I live in the Withington constituency which will be a Labour seat and in fact I probably will follow your advice to vote for who I believe in and end up not voting. A vote for Labour makes no difference. But that’s not the way it should be
Click to expand...
The answer for me is to not vote. Not voting should be an option in any democracy. Voting sometimes is just rubber-stamping a continuation of the same old. The major political parties don't care who you vote for as long as it's them and they take advantage of the identity politics where most blindly vote Labour or Tory anyway.

Look at the way things are now. We see the energy put into discussions on this forum but the fact is we're going to get a Labour government next time. Nobody however talks about the Labour policies because nobody cares, they just want the Tories out and that's where all of the energy goes.

So the Tories will be booted out but then we'll get stuck with a government which is stuck in the mud because it has a weak policy base and no real policy mandate from the country. Labour can't even cobble together a policy mandate amongst its own members. That'll all fall apart in 6 years and then of course we'll get the Tories again and the carousel continues.

For me Westminster politics is irrelevant to us. It is local government that can make a difference and the irony is far less people participate in local politics. Just for example, Andy Burnham will do far more for Manchester than any central government whether that is Labour or the Tories. That's because he's in Manchester and living for Manchester whereas Labour and the Tories are living for themselves.

If someone like Burnham was given the power and resources to sort out the local impact of countrywide issues such as what's happening on the railways then it would get sorted. I'd be massively in favour of that, let Westminster fight amongst itself over headlines and polls whilst powers and resources are devolved to local governments to get stuff done.
 
inbetween said:
The answer for me is to not vote. Not voting should be an option in any democracy. Voting sometimes is just rubber-stamping a continuation of the same old. The major political parties don't care who you vote for as long as it's them and they take advantage of the identity politics where most blindly vote Labour or Tory anyway.

Look at the way things are now. We see the energy put into discussions on this forum but the fact is we're going to get a Labour government next time. Nobody however talks about the Labour policies because nobody cares, they just want the Tories out and that's where all of the energy goes.

So the Tories will be booted out but then we'll get stuck with a government which is stuck in the mud because it has a weak policy base and no real policy mandate from the country. Labour can't even cobble together a policy mandate amongst its own members. That'll all fall apart in 6 years and then of course we'll get the Tories again and the carousel continues.

For me Westminster politics is irrelevant to us. It is local government that can make a difference and the irony is far less people participate in local politics. Just for example, Andy Burnham will do far more for Manchester than any central government whether that is Labour or the Tories. That's because he's in Manchester and living for Manchester whereas Labour and the Tories are living for themselves.

If someone like Burnham was given the power and resources to sort out the local impact of countrywide issues such as what's happening on was the railways then it would get sorted. I'd be massively in favour of that, let Westminster fight amongst itself over headlines and polls whilst powers and resources are devolved to local governments to get stuff done.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m coming more and more to your view especially with Labour as it is. But if there was a real alternative to the Tories such as a Corbyn led Labour Party then I’d vote for them.
I’d make voting compulsory but with an option saying “none of the candidates represent my views enough for me to support them”
Locally led solutions are the way forward but how can people like Burnham furnish change without the right amount of money
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top