uplyme.com Forum Index uplyme.com
The Uplyme Debate
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Anyone voting in the General Election ?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    uplyme.com Forum Index -> Community
View previous topic :: View next topic  

2010 GENERAL ELECTION VOTING INTENTION
CONSERVATIVE
20%
 20%  [ 3 ]
LABOUR
6%
 6%  [ 1 ]
LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
13%
 13%  [ 2 ]
UKIP
6%
 6%  [ 1 ]
GREEN
6%
 6%  [ 1 ]
OTHER
6%
 6%  [ 1 ]
NOT VOTING
40%
 40%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 15

Author Message
bear



Joined: 15 Apr 2010

Posts: 16
Location: Whalley Lane, Uplyme

PostPosted: 19/04/10, 10:07    Post subject: Three bald men fighting over a comb ?? Reply with quote

Rev wrote:
Sweeping statements that all politicians are corrupt, etc. are not helpful. I have known some fantastic people in local government - people who give to the poor, people who volunteer time to help kids - people who want to make a difference in their communities. Why not get to know your local candidates as best you can, challenge them, and hold them to account?

I agree with Rhodie - use your vote. If you think they are all a bad bunch then surely the best of a bad bunch is still better than the worst of a bad bunch.... isn't it?

I will be voting to do my best to ensure that some parties with immoral policies do not get an inch of power, such as UKIP, who openly state that the promotion of multiculturalism threatens social cohesion. Er...no, no, and no.


No reason why you should not vote, Rev--but consider the consequences.

First Past the Post is not fair as we saw in the results after the 2005 election.
The MP's in Westminster in no way represented proportionately the wishes of the electorate.
I believe that 39% of voters in 2005 did not bother to vote and probably nearer to 50% this time round will not bother to vote, as the common belief is " There is no real choice, and they do not represent us!"
I will not be voting for several reasons namely..
Its not secret
Its not proportionate
They fiddle with constituency boundaries all the time--for what REAL reason??
I voted once for a candidate as I agreed with his stance on a particular point. It came up for debate, but he voted the opposite to what he had told us at a meeting in Lyme. I asked him why later, and he apologised (??) and told me it was because his Party Whip had enforced a 3 line Whip and he was forcd to vote the way HE was told.
So why don't I get to vote for the Party Whip then I asked??
His reply was " That would give the people some say in what went on in the House, and that might just disturb some important folk!"
I couldn't believe it. He took me for an old duffer, not knowing I had been decorated in the Falklands and fought in Dhofar, and had actually been a personal Defence Driver for a Minister in Northern Ireland at the height of the Troubles. He took me for an idiot. I am not.
But I do know he is one, and the system he espouses is rotten and the sooner we clear the whole thing out and start again the better.
Did you know that MP's cannot even organise their own House of Commons right.
Not enough seats for all the elected MP's if they all turn up on the same day.
Not enough office space for them to work at Westmnster.
That just shows how little faith the Establishment have in the Mother of Parliaments.
They use it as a sop to make us think we are represented fully when in fact we are anything but.

Guy Fawkes was the only man to enter Westminster withe the right intentions.

Old duffers like me know many interesting ways to alter things at Westminster--I am surprised some of us haven't done so. MOD taught us many interesting painful ways how to overthrow foreign despots, and while we still live, we still know how.

Just how long before the lid boils over on the matter of public acceptance of Westminster micro-managing our lives .
Hopefully within my lifetime I will see sparks fly?? Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geoff



Joined: 17 Sep 2005

Posts: 704
Location: Lyme Rd, Uplyme

PostPosted: 19/04/10, 10:45    Post subject: Re: Voting is not secret ! Reply with quote

Rhodie wrote:

Someone might vote for you, once I can determine your name Cool


Laughing
_________________
it's never too late
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
bear



Joined: 15 Apr 2010

Posts: 16
Location: Whalley Lane, Uplyme

PostPosted: 19/04/10, 13:46    Post subject: Re: Voting is not secret ! Reply with quote

geoff wrote:
Rhodie wrote:

Someone might vote for you, once I can determine your name Cool


Laughing


Now then geoff--theres many a one who has wanted to know my name, and thankfully they have never found out!!
When you've lived as full a life as I have you know better than to broadcast your past successes and failures.!!
I might be an old--ish duffer hereabouts, but I have had some cracking moments, chasing the enemies of the Sultan up and down the Dhofar, and the followers of Gerry Adams round the farmyards of South Armagh.
Then there was the time I spent hidden behind a fireplace in the Governors residence in Stanley when the Argies took over and they never found me or my name either.Thank Heavens.

No I prefer to keep my memories very private and my identity more so!!

But if you want to change Parliament I have a failsafe recipe for Napalm--taught to me by the MOD, but they forgot to teach me to forget the recipe! Very Happy Silly b******es
I haven't forgotten!Tried it on a patch of bramble on a moor in Yorkshire last Autumn--Eeehh By Gum--that made the rabbits run!! Laughing Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rev



Joined: 06 Jan 2010

Posts: 186

PostPosted: 19/04/10, 20:48    Post subject: Reply with quote

The consequences of voting outweigh the consequences of not voting. Smile

P.S. It is a lame argument to not vote because a large proportion of the country are not voting. Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me... Wink

P.P.S. I will be voting and lobbying for a fairer system. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bear



Joined: 15 Apr 2010

Posts: 16
Location: Whalley Lane, Uplyme

PostPosted: 21/04/10, 09:34    Post subject: What is the point of not voting? I'll tell yer! Reply with quote

Rev wrote:
The consequences of voting outweigh the consequences of not voting. Smile

P.S. It is a lame argument to not vote because a large proportion of the country are not voting. Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me... Wink

P.P.S. I will be voting and lobbying for a fairer system. Cool


Lobbying for a fairer system is all well and good.
You have, frankly, zero chance!!

Why?
You will be hit by the same ESTABLISHMENT hammer that used the 3 Line Party Whip to ensure that what the Good Old Boys wanted ( no doubt in order to preserve the right to fix their moats and keep themselves in Twix, Gin & Whores at tax-payers expense!) would persist.
This despite the overwhelming will of the populace expressed in the only way they know how--ie--Voting evey 4 years!!
The only other method we as citizens have is to publicly demonstrate our displeasure in a Very British Way, like the fuel protests when Blair was 10 minutes from calling the Army in "to quell riots and civil unrest".
The other way would be as the French do--with a short sharp burst of unrest in many separate geographical locations, and the blanket blocking of pivotal motorway junctions and rolling convoys .
That ALWAYS gets results.
The Britis in general are too damn nice, and would not stoop so low as to imitate Froggy behaviour as it would be "UnBritish"!
So we have become a nation of passive sheep --which someone said begets a Government of Wolves.
Until enough of us Brits are totally dissatisfied with the status quo then we will continue to get micro-management of our lives by low lifes like Brown, and chaps who look and sound like junior conveyancing solicitors from Bristol in Cameron.
Clegg is simply a voodoo doll for the populace to attach to this week as a symbol of their utter disquiet, and dissatisfaction with the past 60 years of what he called " Pass the Parcel" type of Government.
We either go down the route of rectifying the very poor record we have in the UK as regards political assassinations--and change things that way--which I in no way applaud.
Or we withdraw our votes from all and in so doing show that we have an administration voted in by something like 18% of the eligible electorate--which makes it a laughing stock, without credibility--and so the disassembly of the system starts from within, as opposed to attacking it from outside, which is doomed to failure.
I spent many years in the Forces in umpteen roles and we learned and put into practice the art of "disassembling from within", and "hiding in plain view"--and no organisation , no matter how organised can defeat erosion and decay from within.
Houses built on sand , friend.

Take away the one thing an enemy craves. In this case take votes from politicians--[u]not just votes from parties, [/u]and you will reduce the swine to tears and the Dole queue.
That way we can get a Proportional Representation system in place which is FAIR--kills the Party System which is Nepotism to the point of Incest--and perhaphs bring about a Government which voters support in thousands as opposed to ignoring in millions as they do now.

Eeehh! I do go on when I get wound up!! But my heart is in the right place--not like them b******s in Westminster.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
voluntaryist.uk



Joined: 23 Mar 2010

Posts: 74
Location: Uplyme

PostPosted: 23/04/10, 09:20    Post subject: the anomaly that is voting laid bare to scientific reasoning Reply with quote

The real anomaly of voting is that no matter how many people vote (or not) most people will not be represented by anyone. the reason? the "Condorcet-Paradox"

Named after the Marquis de Condorcet (an 18th-century French nobleman who, “had more fun with voting systems than most politicians”), the simplest Condorcet paradox occurs when there are three voters and three political parties A, B and C:

Voter 1 prefers A to B, but would rather have B than C
Voter 2 prefers B to C, but would rather have C than A
Voter 3 prefers C to A, but would rather have A than B

In these circumstances, no matter who is declared the winner, two-thirds of the electorate will have preferred someone else. There is no “Condorcet winner” – no party which, when compared to all others, is preferred by more people.

Now, please refute this simple yet truthful equation on whether one should vote or not bother.

go on I dare you...

Peace & Freedom
Voluntaryist-UK

Don't vote it only encourages a false sense of legitimate mandate...

go to: http://declaration-independence-british-freemen-women.webs.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bear



Joined: 15 Apr 2010

Posts: 16
Location: Whalley Lane, Uplyme

PostPosted: 23/04/10, 12:18    Post subject: Thought provoking.. Reply with quote

I need several pints and several pipe-fulls to work that one out.

Initially I am thinking my idea of not voting at all has the best chance of sending any kind of message.

Trouble is, I am broadcasting but is anyone listening in Whitehall??

Yeah....rrright!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rev



Joined: 06 Jan 2010

Posts: 186

PostPosted: 23/04/10, 19:25    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that my refusal to vote will be ineffectual. I will be "broadcasting but no-one will be listening". I don't think that abstinence will send much of a message. How do they know I am not just apathetic rather than trying to make a point about electoral reform? It's not that I'm disinterested in politics - far from it - or I wouldn't be discussing it at length.

However, I am apathetic to a certain extent as I haven't lobbied my MP or written letters, and unfortunately, I won't be able to go along to the hustings tomorrow to voice my disatisfaction with the current system.

I do know that if I remove myself from the system I won't ever help to change that system. I have to be actively engaged in it. Perhaps there are politicians who also think like me? I am going to try and find out and back them. This whole 'them and us' thing just isn't true or helpful. There are not two species of people, politicians and us. There is just us... If I wait for the perfect party or system to emerge, I may have a long, long wait.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Rhodie



Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Posts: 425
Location: Rhode Hill, Uplyme

PostPosted: 25/04/10, 10:10    Post subject: Re: Three bald men fighting over a comb ?? Reply with quote

bear wrote:
First Past the Post is not fair as we saw in the results after the 2005 election.
The MP's in Westminster in no way represented proportionately the wishes of the electorate.
By not voting you will be maintaining this system. Vote for a party that supports PR
bear wrote:
I believe that 39% of voters in 2005 did not bother to vote and probably nearer to 50% this time round will not bother to vote, as the common belief is " There is no real choice, and they do not represent us!"
It is difficult to believe that there is a single person in the country who is 100% in accord with all the policies of any particular party. How many party members disagreed with the Labour party’s decision to go to war in Iraq? But they remain Labour supporters. Until we can vote at home on the internet on every policy that comes before parliament, back in the realm of Geoff’s flying pigs, then voting for any individual party is a compromise to a variable degree.
Rev wrote:
If I wait for the perfect party or system to emerge, I may have a long, long wait.

bear wrote:
I will not be voting for several reasons namely..
Its not secret
Are you ashamed of who you vote for or fear the 4 am knock on the door?
bear wrote:
They fiddle with constituency boundaries all the time--for what REAL reason??
Because we as a population move around so much. Changing the boundaries is an effort to balance populations in the constituencies in order of fairness. It appears that you yourself have moved across not just a constituency boundary but a County one for
bear wrote:
I voted once for a candidate as I agreed with his stance on a particular point. It came up for debate, but he voted the opposite to what he had told us at a meeting in Lyme.
If he was speaking at a Lyme meeting then he was a candidate for a constituency in Dorset it therefore follows that as you in voting for a Lyme candidate you were obviously living within that constituency.
bear wrote:
They fiddle with constituency boundaries
in order to catch up with our restlessness but are always lagging behind by about 10 years.
bear wrote:
Not enough seats for all the elected MP's if they all turn up on the same day
How many days in a year do you think it is a full house? Randomly look at the Parliament TV channel to see what an average turn out is.

bear wrote:
Not enough office space for them to work at Westmnster.
That just shows how little faith the Establishment have in the Mother of Parliaments.
They use it as a sop to make us think we are represented fully when in fact we are anything but.

You my friend by not voting are not represented at all.
_________________
It's later than you think


Last edited by Rhodie on 28/04/10, 06:25; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
geoff



Joined: 17 Sep 2005

Posts: 704
Location: Lyme Rd, Uplyme

PostPosted: 26/04/10, 11:36    Post subject: Re: Three bald men fighting over a comb ?? Reply with quote

Rhodie wrote:
(Boundary changes) ...in order to catch up with our restlessness but are always lagging behind by about 10 years.


But that doesn't explain why roughly a third share of the popular vote would result in the Libdems just about getting a seventh of the seats (ie. about 90/650) ? It's a rigged voting system and it is utterly undemocratic.

It is against this injustice that we non-voters are protesting. I agree there is no way of knowing the difference between protest non-voters and 'couldn't be bothereds', but until they provide a 'None of the above'' box, how can one protest in a way that will make them listen ?

In their report ‘Election 2005: turnout”, the Electoral Commission said…

…non-voting is the product of a broader political disengagement and that a section of the electorate are sceptical about the efficacy of voting at any election.

G.
_________________
it's never too late


Last edited by geoff on 27/04/10, 07:24; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rhodie



Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Posts: 425
Location: Rhode Hill, Uplyme

PostPosted: 26/04/10, 23:53    Post subject: Re: Three bald men fighting over a comb ?? Reply with quote

geoff wrote:
But that doesn't explain why roughly a third share of the popular vote would result in the Libdems just about getting a seventh of the seats (ie. about 90/650) ? It's a rigged voting system and it is utterly undemocratic.
It is not a rigged system.

The reason that LibDems will not get their fair share of the vote and it also applies to the Tories to a lesser extent is because the supporters of each party are not equally distributed in the constituencies across the country. Labour support is strong in the north of England, Tory in the south and Libdems in the West Country. What gives the Labour party such an unfair advantage is that in many Tory or LibDem seats the Labour vote is miniscule. Their support is not wasted in the seats of the other parties where they get well and truly beaten . Instead their numbers are spread across more constituencies and often in seats that have smaller majorities. On the other hand the Tories waste their votes by smothering the opposition. This is even more so with the LibDems because their supporters are more concentrated in fewer constituencies.
geoff wrote:
It is against these injustices that we non-voters are protesting.
The only injustice is the fact that we don’t have a proportional voting system and withholding your vote will not speed us towards one. There has never been a better time when a proportional voting system is well within our reach. By not voting you are throwing this chance away. You have seen that the Tories are completely against such a system. Vote LibDem for a fairer voting system. You won’t get a LibDem government but you could get one where they have a major say in policies.
_________________
It's later than you think
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
geoff



Joined: 17 Sep 2005

Posts: 704
Location: Lyme Rd, Uplyme

PostPosted: 27/04/10, 07:01    Post subject: Re: Three bald men fighting over a comb ?? Reply with quote

Rhodie wrote:
It is not a rigged system.
The reason that LibDems will not get their fair share of the vote and it also applies to the Tories to a lesser extent is because the supporters of each party are not equally distributed in the constituencies across the country.


But Rhodie, someone drew up the constituency boundaries to make it that way - thereby rigging it such that there will almost always be a majority Labour or Tory parliament.

The Tories still say they prefer the current system and are not interested in any reform. Of course, like Labour, they are not familiar with having to work with people from another party who don't share their own dogma.
To his credit, Gordon Brown has invited the opinions of non-political advisers in the past, but I'm not sure how much their opinions swayed an eventual outcome.

G.
_________________
it's never too late
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
voluntaryist.uk



Joined: 23 Mar 2010

Posts: 74
Location: Uplyme

PostPosted: 27/04/10, 08:35    Post subject: re: voting etc.... Reply with quote

Voting only serves to shackle us the people, to a small minority government, it would not even matter it everybody that is "entitled" to vote did, the result would still be government by less than 1/3 of the will of the people. the problem is not with voting it is with government. government's do not make decisions based on what is "best" but rather on what is most likely to win them approval / influence. Ask yourself this question:

"would I be able to buy better, more cost effective, cheaper, public services from the private sector?"

the answer if you are truthful is yes, why? because the public sector is a bloated self serving institution who has no interest in being cost effective or good value for money. Why? because it is not their money! they did not have to make it, or raise it, it was simply handed to them on a plate. beggars make lousy bosses.

what has this to do with voting? everything, you are still asking for more of the same. the whole system needs changing, the politicos are never, I'll say that again, never! going to do the change. Remember the ZaNuLab 1997 election manifesto? electoral reform was top of the agenda, what happened? zero, that's what. not really in their interest was it?

so what is my main thrust? don't vote it won't change things, it only gives them a false sense of mandate & a thin veil of legitimacy, which btw we all pay for!

This is not a cop out, this is the alternative, the more that do not vote the less they can claim that they ""speak for the country"

At which point things will have to change either by us, or by "them"

so once again:
"DO NOT VOTE IT ONLY ENCOURAGES THEM!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
voluntaryist.uk



Joined: 23 Mar 2010

Posts: 74
Location: Uplyme

PostPosted: 27/04/10, 15:30    Post subject: Re: voting intentions etc.. Reply with quote

HI All,
I have just noticed that out of a total of 15 (so far) declared intentions on voting:
CONSERVATIVE on 20% with 3
LABOUR on 6% with 1
LIBERAL DEMOCRATS on 13% with 2
UKIP on 6% with 1
GREEN on 6% with 1
OTHER on 6% with 1
NOT VOTING on 40% with 6

so far the out right winners are those that do not want any government ! hurrah! we won, I wish!

See how unfair voting is? how a minority truly run the country for their own ends. Do you not see we would be better off without them at all!

If this is repeated at the general election I intend to go to the high court & throw the "elected" government our on it's ear for "failing to represent the people"

Peace & Freedom

Voluntaryist-UK
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rhodie



Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Posts: 425
Location: Rhode Hill, Uplyme

PostPosted: 28/04/10, 06:29    Post subject: Re: Three bald men fighting over a comb ?? Reply with quote

geoff wrote:
But Rhodie, someone drew up the constituency boundaries to make it that way - thereby rigging it such that there will almost always be a majority Labour or Tory parliament.

Who do you suggest rigged up the constituencies to benefit either the Labour or Tory parties?

Whoever you think it was could I suggest that when they re-rigged the Tiverton and Honiton constituency boundary they slipped up. For the constituency has now become a possible LibDem win. Or do you suggest that “they” did this to take LibDem voters out of an already neighbouring LibDem seat. If so please explain.

The only reason for boundary changes is to attempt to equalize population numbers in each constituency. This is not to say that the voting system has not been rigged to give complete dominance by one of the two major parties. It has and the Tories even before the election have no intention of changing things unlike the Labour party who always give their support to proportional representation only to forget it once elected.

If you sincerely believe that the whole thing is set up to produce a Labour or Tory majority then why don’t you vote for the LibDems. Withholding a LibDem vote will help to perpetuate the dominance by the two parties. We are so close, and will probably never be in this position again, to breaking this duopoly.
_________________
It's later than you think
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    uplyme.com Forum Index -> Community All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group