The General Election Thread

[Scottyboi]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

Yep. The more important the thing, the less choice there is. 2 parties really, it's either this or that at the moment. There where the apathy comes from.

Needs a trillionaire sheikh to upset the apple cart and buy a small party like citeh!

 

[malg]

Yep, the right wing press will be sharpening the knives, and the disparaging will continue apace.
But it'll be nicely balanced out by the left wing press.

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

I don't quite see it like that, although I am a big supporter of PR voting and I do wish we'd ditch First Past the Post.

To me the democratic process in this country is sort of like a filter system and the smaller parties which gain support do have a part to play in that. Ultimately the two main parties are democratically watered down by the necessity to be flexible and appeal to as many people as possible.

If a smaller party (I'll use the example of UKIP) gains popularity, then both Labour and Conservatives will shift their views on the issues that have led to the smaller parties getting more popular in order to mitigate. We've seen this with both parties claiming they'll be getting tougher on immigration. Essentially the two big parties are centered on the national average of opinion. One slightly to the left of it and the other slightly to the right.

It's like a system of compromise where Lab/Con appease public opinion that crops up through show of support for a smaller party.

What's happened in the last few years is that people have taken issue with the individuals in the parties rather than their policies, which is why it seems like none but the most staunch supporters are really happy with Labour or Conservative at the moment. It's not the parties themselves or their policies, it's the people running them.

I think eventually, as younger voters get increasingly dispersed and drawn away from the big parties, Labour and Conservative are both going to have to invent a 'new crop' of politicians that appeal to the public and get voters back on board. Gone are the days where families are entrenched red or blue voters, the young have access to so much information these days that give it 50 years and the political landscape could look very different.

I'm of the opinion that the political system we have at the moment works, it has after all stood the test of time better than nearly any other in the world. It does however need a bit of modernising.

 

[cibaman]

Yep, the right wing press will be sharpening the knives, and the disparaging will continue apace.
But it'll be nicely balanced out by the left wing press.

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

I usually choose my newspaper based on its sports coverage. It doesnt bother me if the political stance is different to my mine. Makes them a bit more interesting if anything. Who wants to continually read stuff that you agree with?

 

[blue cigar]

Yep, the right wing press will be sharpening the knives, and the disparaging will continue apace.
But it'll be nicely balanced out by the left wing press.

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

I usually choose my newspaper based on its sports coverage. It doesnt bother me if the political stance is different to my mine. Makes them a bit more interesting if anything. Who wants to continually read stuff that you agree with?

Yes,thats what i do. I get the times because the sports pages are fantastic,i have started taking more notice of the news sections but cant see much bias either way?

 

[Damocles]

Yep, the right wing press will be sharpening the knives, and the disparaging will continue apace.
But it'll be nicely balanced out by the left wing press.

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

I usually choose my newspaper based on its sports coverage. It doesnt bother me if the political stance is different to my mine. Makes them a bit more interesting if anything. Who wants to continually read stuff that you agree with?

Based on the sales and readership split of newspapers and the popular media, almost everybody in the known world.

 

[law74]

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

I usually choose my newspaper based on its sports coverage. It doesnt bother me if the political stance is different to my mine. Makes them a bit more interesting if anything. Who wants to continually read stuff that you agree with?

Based on the sales and readership split of newspapers and the popular media, almost everybody in the known world.

The morning after the Dortmund game at Eastland's I east sitting in the hotel having breakfast and noticed a delegate for the Labour party conference with the daily mail and the torygraph on his table, he said he liked to keep up to date on what the enemy were thinking

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Yep, the right wing press will be sharpening the knives, and the disparaging will continue apace.
But it'll be nicely balanced out by the left wing press.

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

It doesn't make any difference, which is exactly the point I was making with the (ironic?) comments.
It's just that we're constantly berated with strident paranoia about how the right wing press is forcing folk to believe what they shouldn't be believing, namely some socialist paradise that is the only place to be. I'm merely pointing out the left wing press attacks the simplistic view some tories have in equal measure, but no **** is interested in reading it.
Daily Mirror must pull it's finger out.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Yep, the right wing press will be sharpening the knives, and the disparaging will continue apace.
But it'll be nicely balanced out by the left wing press.

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

we're constantly berated with strident paranoia about how the right wing press is forcing folk to believe .

The right wing press don't force anything, but they do frame the debate.

They've framed our present predicament entirely in terms of the deficit and a sizeable chunk of the electorate now see it that way.

 

[whp.blue]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

I don't quite see it like that, although I am a big supporter of PR voting and I do wish we'd ditch First Past the Post.

To me the democratic process in this country is sort of like a filter system and the smaller parties which gain support do have a part to play in that. Ultimately the two main parties are democratically watered down by the necessity to be flexible and appeal to as many people as possible.

If a smaller party (I'll use the example of UKIP) gains popularity, then both Labour and Conservatives will shift their views on the issues that have led to the smaller parties getting more popular in order to mitigate. We've seen this with both parties claiming they'll be getting tougher on immigration. Essentially the two big parties are centered on the national average of opinion. One slightly to the left of it and the other slightly to the right.

It's like a system of compromise where Lab/Con appease public opinion that crops up through show of support for a smaller party.

What's happened in the last few years is that people have taken issue with the individuals in the parties rather than their policies, which is why it seems like none but the most staunch supporters are really happy with Labour or Conservative at the moment. It's not the parties themselves or their policies, it's the people running them.

I think eventually, as younger voters get increasingly dispersed and drawn away from the big parties, Labour and Conservative are both going to have to invent a 'new crop' of politicians that appeal to the public and get voters back on board. Gone are the days where families are entrenched red or blue voters, the young have access to so much information these days that give it 50 years and the political landscape could look very different.

I'm of the opinion that the political system we have at the moment works, it has after all stood the test of time better than nearly any other in the world. It does however need a bit of modernising.

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

 

[Chancy Termites]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

Well stop perpetuating the idea that it is a two party system then. Once you accept that it doesn't have to be the case, then you can start to vote for the others.

 

[cibaman]

Surely if you read the right wing press then your mind is already made up. Pretty much the same if you read the left wing press. So, what difference does it make.

I usually choose my newspaper based on its sports coverage. It doesnt bother me if the political stance is different to my mine. Makes them a bit more interesting if anything. Who wants to continually read stuff that you agree with?

Based on the sales and readership split of newspapers and the popular media, almost everybody in the known world.

There seem to be a few people on Bluemoon that take a perverse delight in reading stuff they dont agree with.

 

[cibaman]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

I don't quite see it like that, although I am a big supporter of PR voting and I do wish we'd ditch First Past the Post.

To me the democratic process in this country is sort of like a filter system and the smaller parties which gain support do have a part to play in that. Ultimately the two main parties are democratically watered down by the necessity to be flexible and appeal to as many people as possible.

If a smaller party (I'll use the example of UKIP) gains popularity, then both Labour and Conservatives will shift their views on the issues that have led to the smaller parties getting more popular in order to mitigate. We've seen this with both parties claiming they'll be getting tougher on immigration. Essentially the two big parties are centered on the national average of opinion. One slightly to the left of it and the other slightly to the right.

It's like a system of compromise where Lab/Con appease public opinion that crops up through show of support for a smaller party.

What's happened in the last few years is that people have taken issue with the individuals in the parties rather than their policies, which is why it seems like none but the most staunch supporters are really happy with Labour or Conservative at the moment. It's not the parties themselves or their policies, it's the people running them.

I think eventually, as younger voters get increasingly dispersed and drawn away from the big parties, Labour and Conservative are both going to have to invent a 'new crop' of politicians that appeal to the public and get voters back on board. Gone are the days where families are entrenched red or blue voters, the young have access to so much information these days that give it 50 years and the political landscape could look very different.

I'm of the opinion that the political system we have at the moment works, it has after all stood the test of time better than nearly any other in the world. It does however need a bit of modernising.

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

I've never been a fan of PR for those reasons.

But I cant help but think that our electoral system is going to crack under the weight of a succession of failed minority parties.

 

[Chancy Termites]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

Holy shit I've just watched that and I'm speechless. She was complaining about the massive size of the housing benefit bill. HOUSING IS EXPENSIVE BECAUSE YOUR PARTY OVERSAW A MASSIVE CREDIT BUBBLE, AND ALL THAT MONEY HAD TO GO SOMEWHERE, SO A LOAD OF IT WENT INTO PROPERTY. THE INCREASE IN THE SUPPLY OF MONEY CAUSED AN INCREASE IN THE VALUE OF ASSETS AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE LAST LABOUR GOVERNMENT'S POLICIES, YOU THICK TWUNT.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H7rX3_sqXo[/video]

 

[Damocles]

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

What you think is a positive is what I think is the biggest drawback.

The democracy of the people should be upheld over and above every other consideration. If they vote in the New Nazis then they vote in the New Nazis. It's not your job or my job or anybody elses to tell people who they are and are not allowed to vote for based on our own preferences. Instead people should be represented by whomever they chose and PR is closer to that than FPTP which forces tactical voting and minority rule.

 

[whp.blue]

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

What you think is a positive is what I think is the biggest drawback.

The democracy of the people should be upheld over and above every other consideration. If they vote in the New Nazis then they vote in the New Nazis. It's not your job or my job or anybody elses to tell people who they are and are not allowed to vote for based on our own preferences. Instead people should be represented by whomever they chose and PR is closer to that than FPTP which forces tactical voting and minority rule.

I understand your argument but Politics is a car crash now and that has been moderated by FPTP for a couple of hundred years or so. People now are incandescent about the thought of UKIP gaining MP's under PR parties like BNP and EDL and even worse would be able to collate every nutter from across the Country and gain several seats and that is very dangerous for our way of life. That could and probably would also lead to the rise of Islamic based parties knowing they would be pooling votes from all over the country and that would also have disastrous consequences.

PR would also open the door for a charismatic racist gaining political power very quickly and that could get very messy.
PR would allow change to happen very quickly and is a vessel for knee jerk reactions imagine an election coinciding with a terrorist atrocity we could have an extremist party in power over night.
I am quite right wing in my views but even I worry about the potential threat PR carries.

 

[tidyman]

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

Why should they be weeded out though?

If 1% of the electorate vote for a "lunatic" then surely 1% of parliament should be made up of those lunatics, in a fair and just system?

 

[whp.blue]

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

Why should they be weeded out though?

If 1% of the electorate vote for a "lunatic" then surely 1% of parliament should be made up of those lunatics, in a fair and just system?

So if 35% of the population voted for a racist party you would be happy to see them form a government as the biggest party because under PR the government of the day would probably be a coalition and need a whole lot less than 35% to be the biggest party.

Also if PR was ever introduced lunatic parties would increase as they make more sense as they can show results immediately
FPTP is a flawed system but it also acts as a buffer against extremists remove that buffer at your peril.

 

[Chancy Termites]

Under PR every lunatic fringe party Like the greens would have an influence and there is no way that could be good for the average person in this country. I feel that with PR would come an explosion of extremist parties who would be able to get one or two MP's under the first past the post system they are weeded out

What you think is a positive is what I think is the biggest drawback.

The democracy of the people should be upheld over and above every other consideration. If they vote in the New Nazis then they vote in the New Nazis. It's not your job or my job or anybody elses to tell people who they are and are not allowed to vote for based on our own preferences. Instead people should be represented by whomever they chose and PR is closer to that than FPTP which forces tactical voting and minority rule.

I understand your argument but Politics is a car crash now and that has been moderated by FPTP for a couple of hundred years or so. People now are incandescent about the thought of UKIP gaining MP's under PR parties like BNP and EDL and even worse would be able to collate every nutter from across the Country and gain several seats and that is very dangerous for our way of life. That could and probably would also lead to the rise of Islamic based parties knowing they would be pooling votes from all over the country and that would also have disastrous consequences.

PR would also open the door for a charismatic racist gaining political power very quickly and that could get very messy.
PR would allow change to happen very quickly and is a vessel for knee jerk reactions imagine an election coinciding with a terrorist atrocity we could have an extremist party in power over night.
I am quite right wing in my views but even I worry about the potential threat PR carries.

I think you're overstating the risks. If the majority of the electorate are nutters then yes, you could end up with nutters getting elected. However, if most of the electorate are reasonable then then extreme politicians will only get a small number of votes. If we had PR then I'm sure it would take a year or two for politicians' egos to be curtailed but sooner or later they'd end up realising that they had to work together to get laws passed and I for one think that would be a good thing.

 

[law74]

Anyone else feel quite sad that its always going to be the main two parties that battle it out?

I don't like either of them, but no other party is going to get a sniff as we all Vote to stop the opposite party gaining a seat. No wonder so many people can't be arsed voting.

Lucy Powell had a shitter today as well on BBC1 was hard to watch.

Holy shit I've just watched that and I'm speechless. She was complaining about the massive size of the housing benefit bill. HOUSING IS EXPENSIVE BECAUSE YOUR PARTY OVERSAW A MASSIVE CREDIT BUBBLE, AND ALL THAT MONEY HAD TO GO SOMEWHERE, SO A LOAD OF IT WENT INTO PROPERTY. THE INCREASE IN THE SUPPLY OF MONEY CAUSED AN INCREASE IN THE VALUE OF ASSETS AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE LAST LABOUR GOVERNMENT'S POLICIES, YOU THICK TWUNT.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H7rX3_sqXo[/video]

Or as the realist would say the tories started selling off social housing and nuliebor continued, neither thought to replace these dwellings meaning that the "market" was free to charge what it liked for rental properties and still nothing has been done to address the issue