The General Election Thread

[whp.blue]

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.

A few years ago I am sure the BNP would have gained a few seats if we had had PR.

Once they had a few Mp's they some how become more palatable and at the following election more people may have voted for them as they would be seen as more mainstream.

after all they would have had a few MP's so they can't be that extreme can they?.

 

[Len Rum]

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.

A few years ago I am sure the BNP would have gained a few seats under PR once they had a few Mp's they some how become more palatable and at the following election more people may vote for them as they are seem as more mainstream after all they have a few MP's so they can't be that extreme can they?.

?
Come again mate.
( or just carry on breathing heavily).

 

[whp.blue]

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.

A few years ago I am sure the BNP would have gained a few seats under PR once they had a few Mp's they some how become more palatable and at the following election more people may vote for them as they are seem as more mainstream after all they have a few MP's so they can't be that extreme can they?.

?
Come again mate.
( or just carry on breathing heavily).

sorry even I struggled a but with that I have tried to sort it out a bit with my edit
but I think it is time I went to bed

 

[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?

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.

As I'm sure you know, there are many variations of PR. My preferred system is irrelevant to this discussion.

But to over simplify things, if the BNP for example were supported by 35% of the electorate, I see nothing democratic in modelling a system to ensure they don't have the major say in how the country is run.

I'm aware nothing will change until well after I'm long gone. If ever. But I think this country needs a major overhaul in terms of its political landscape.

We laugh and sneer at the undemocratic way other countries go about their business. Yet in the House of Lords we have the second largest unelected political body anywhere in the world.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I'm aware nothing will change until well after I'm long gone. If ever. But I think this country needs a major overhaul in terms of its political landscape.

We laugh and sneer at the undemocratic way other countries go about their business. Yet in the House of Lords we have the second largest unelected political body anywhere in the world.

Completely agree, mate. The system is not fit for purpose.

 

[nobody can eat fifty eggs]

I'm aware nothing will change until well after I'm long gone. If ever. But I think this country needs a major overhaul in terms of its political landscape.

We laugh and sneer at the undemocratic way other countries go about their business. Yet in the House of Lords we have the second largest unelected political body anywhere in the world.

Completely agree, mate. The system is not fit for purpose.

This.

British politics is fucked and democracy is the real loser. More and more young people in Britain are not voting now and it's mainly through apathy.

 

[TangerineSteve17]

I'm aware nothing will change until well after I'm long gone. If ever. But I think this country needs a major overhaul in terms of its political landscape.

We laugh and sneer at the undemocratic way other countries go about their business. Yet in the House of Lords we have the second largest unelected political body anywhere in the world.

Completely agree, mate. The system is not fit for purpose.

This.

British politics is fucked and democracy is the real loser. More and more young people in Britain are not voting now and it's mainly through apathy.

i am not 'down with the kids' or have my finger on the pulse by any stretch, but I wouldn't discount the 50-60 year olds. My parents don't vote. If they did they would Labour, that's just how they see things. I bet there are loads of those types, despondent, just living their lives. Uninterested in their kids and grandkids lives, how the country should be run, space, whatever. Times will change.

 

[mackenzie]

The voters aged between 55 and 80 will be a key group for the Tories. They are the ones who usually vote after all. That's why the Tories have protected many Pensioners from austerity measures.

 

[inbetween]

I'm aware nothing will change until well after I'm long gone. If ever. But I think this country needs a major overhaul in terms of its political landscape.

We laugh and sneer at the undemocratic way other countries go about their business. Yet in the House of Lords we have the second largest unelected political body anywhere in the world.

Completely agree, mate. The system is not fit for purpose.

This.

British politics is fucked and democracy is the real loser. More and more young people in Britain are not voting now and it's mainly through apathy.

Younger people are irrelevant though, they represent a small demographic that is aligned only to themselves hence the apathy as politicians will only seek to appease the many. Young people won't be voting on pension policies will they for example yet they are extremely important to everyone who works.

I am 26 and I will be voting because I want to get a better house and a better this and that, this election will have a big impact on that. The system is irrelevant, you pick the party you like the policies of and you vote them in. It is not about the system it is about who you want to govern the country and set the pace for possibly your entire career and financial future. Not caring about this election is just complete ignorance and a lost opportunity to actually put down your small say in what you want to happen.

 

[Lucky13]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

 

[inbetween]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Can only see a majority or some sort of coalition including the torys again. The UKIP share will likely not translate into seats so factor in a lot of them will probably go tory. Ed came across well the other week but his policies are just madness.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Can only see a majority or some sort of coalition including the torys again. The UKIP share will likely not translate into seats so factor in a lot of them will probably go tory. Ed came across well the other week but his policies are just madness.

The other day there was a 4 point Labour lead, personally, I don't think these polls will be representative of who will win until after Easter, the electorate doesn't usually get election frenzy until about a month prior.

 

[Len Rum]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Can only see a majority or some sort of coalition including the torys again. The UKIP share will likely not translate into seats so factor in a lot of them will probably go tory. Ed came across well the other week but his policies are just madness.

Not asking you to write an essay but which of his policies are 'madness' ?

 

[cibaman]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Can only see a majority or some sort of coalition including the torys again. The UKIP share will likely not translate into seats so factor in a lot of them will probably go tory. Ed came across well the other week but his policies are just madness.

I expect both Labour and the Tories to be much more wary about entering into any sort of partnership unless the numbers stack up to give them a working majority. The party leaders will want to do a deal at all costs in order to keep their jobs. But behind the scenes there will be a lot more internal debate, driven by potential leadership candidates, as to whether its in their long term interests to form a government that could fall apart after 6 months.

It could be that each of the major parties will decide theyd be better off temporarily in opposition, bring in a new leader and then position themselves for the second election. A case of "After you". "No, after you".

 

[CityStu]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Can only see a majority or some sort of coalition including the torys again. The UKIP share will likely not translate into seats so factor in a lot of them will probably go tory. Ed came across well the other week but his policies are just madness.

Not asking you to write an essay but which of his policies are 'madness' ?

I have absolutely no faith that he can cut the deficit whilst not increasing taxes and not cutting to the extent the Tories plan to. In his audience questions in the recent televised show and Lucy Powell on Daily Politics this week, they outlined a 3 pronged plan. The first was an increase to the 50p tax rate for the highest earners. The IFS have predicted that that will bring in between bugger all and £2bn. The second prong was to make efficiencies in government departments. The IFS estimated that that would bring in at most £1bn on top of what the Tories were already doing (and I have no confidence that Labour will be more efficient in public departments than the Tories). So far, that's £1-3bn of a £75bn deficit. Their last prong revolved around getting people off zero hours contracts and into tax paying jobs - increasing their tax base. Given that there are 700k people on zero hours contracts in the country and around a third of those will want the flexibility of zero hours contracts, they seem to be estimating that each person moving from zero hours to a full time contract is going to be paying £150k of tax. It simply doesn't add up.

Considering that they can't carry out any of their admittedly good plans in the NHS and education without a strong economy, I simply don't consider them worthy of my vote at the moment. Balls doesn't seem nearly as sharp as Osbourne, slimy as he is.

 

[Lucky13]

Can only see a majority or some sort of coalition including the torys again. The UKIP share will likely not translate into seats so factor in a lot of them will probably go tory. Ed came across well the other week but his policies are just madness.

Not asking you to write an essay but which of his policies are 'madness' ?

I have absolutely no faith that he can cut the deficit whilst not increasing taxes and not cutting to the extent the Tories plan to. In his audience questions in the recent televised show and Lucy Powell on Daily Politics this week, they outlined a 3 pronged plan. The first was an increase to the 50p tax rate for the highest earners. The IFS have predicted that that will bring in between bugger all and £2bn. The second prong was to make efficiencies in government departments. The IFS estimated that that would bring in at most £1bn on top of what the Tories were already doing (and I have no confidence that Labour will be more efficient in public departments than the Tories). So far, that's £1-3bn of a £75bn deficit. Their last prong revolved around getting people off zero hours contracts and into tax paying jobs - increasing their tax base. Given that there are 700k people on zero hours contracts in the country and around a third of those will want the flexibility of zero hours contracts, they seem to be estimating that each person moving from zero hours to a full time contract is going to be paying £150k of tax. It simply doesn't add up.

Considering that they can't carry out any of their admittedly good plans in the NHS and education without a strong economy, I simply don't consider them worthy of my vote at the moment. Balls doesn't seem nearly as sharp as Osbourne, slimy as he is.

Red Ed Balls endorses The Budget

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/11482141/Budget-2015-Ed-Balls-admits-Labour-would-not-reverse-George-Osbornes-flagship-measures.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budg ... sures.html</a>

 

[law74]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Why is it good news for the "working" tax payer? so their taxes can continue to top up the wages of the workers that dont earn enough to survive?

 

[Moriati]

If you are in a Conservative/Labour/LibDem stronghold your votes are wasted, the only votes that count under the FPTP system are in the marginal seats.

 

[DelToro]

If you are in a Conservative/Labour/LibDem stronghold your votes are wasted, the only votes that count under the FPTP system are in the marginal seats.

That generally holds true but this time round it won't work for Labour vs SNP and it might not work where UKIP get stuck into a large Tory majority.

 

[Lucky13]

Good news for the working tax payers , Tory 4 point lead.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017129/Conservatives-strongest-position-five-years-Exclusive-Mail-poll-reveals-party-s-four-point-lead-Labour-wake-week-s-TV-interviews.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... views.html</a>

Why is it good news for the "working" tax payer? so their taxes can continue to top up the wages of the workers that dont earn enough to survive?

Working people are better off and will continue to be better off with another 5yrs of Tory Government.