Election Year or Fear!

[Ramshank72]

I'll be hoping for a labour government come the next election. I don't think the Tories are incompetent (a couple of noticeable exceptions granted), but it's time for a change which will hopefully bring a little boost.
I'd hate to have a voting decision in the US!

[SithHappens]

Can you imagine if Blairs new labour had been up against this Tory government. It would make 97 look like a photo finish in comparison.

[Andy_Faber]

Can you imagine if Blairs new labour had been up against this Tory government. It would make 97 look like a photo finish in comparison.

You have more faith in the British electorate than I do, as non-partisan I’m more interested in voter habits than what colour the next five years of ****ups will be, and right leaning folk have a habit of not showing their hand

[Geoff Parkstone]

A few random jottings on the matter of elections:

As an imminent retiree I shall be voting for those offering the best deal for pensioners. So that'll be me not voting then, as I don't see anyone unbundling the triple lock or upsetting the, predominantly longer lived female, powerful mass grey vote.

Of course the above demonstrates what's wrong with any democracy. People vote for the party that offers them the best deal, as opposed to for the collective good. Or they vote for a party that promises to make life worse for a group they dislike. Smash the unions, destroy the bosses, repatriate the immigrants, freedom for the scotch etc. At least Brexit won't be on the platform (unless rA is standing), but no doubt the libdems will float brentry.

Wouldn't it be nice if parties were legally restricted to campaign only on what they would do, rather than slagging of the incumbents have done or floating fears about what "the others" would bring.if elected.

It'd be even nicer if politics and vested interests were separated. Tories from capitalists etc, labour from unions etc, libdems from, well noone really. Abolish all political donations and fundraising - provide limited equal campaign funds from the state purse. Have candidates win voters over with opinion and policy, not by pouring cash in.

Ban the use of social media in electioneering. OK it's impossible, but "influencers" eg in fashion etc, should have no part in the process. This would cause wailing amongst the Gen Z entitled cohort, but hey that's another benefit 😄

Bring in proportional representation. This ought to naturally force more centrist (hence more stable and equitable) policy making.

So overall I don't care who wins, they're all self interested showers of ****, one way or the other. Except Nigel Farage. He's not so much a shower as a thunderstorm.

[ramAnag]

A few random jottings on the matter of elections:

As an imminent retiree I shall be voting for those offering the best deal for pensioners. So that'll be me not voting then, as I don't see anyone unbundling the triple lock or upsetting the, predominantly longer lived female, powerful mass grey vote.

Of course the above demonstrates what's wrong with any democracy. People vote for the party that offers them the best deal, as opposed to for the collective good. Or they vote for a party that promises to make life worse for a group they dislike. Smash the unions, destroy the bosses, repatriate the immigrants, freedom for the scotch etc. At least Brexit won't be on the platform (unless rA is standing), but no doubt the libdems will float brentry.

Wouldn't it be nice if parties were legally restricted to campaign only on what they would do, rather than slagging of the incumbents have done or floating fears about what "the others" would bring.if elected.

It'd be even nicer if politics and vested interests were separated. Tories from capitalists etc, labour from unions etc, libdems from, well noone really. Abolish all political donations and fundraising - provide limited equal campaign funds from the state purse. Have candidates win voters over with opinion and policy, not by pouring cash in.

Ban the use of social media in electioneering. OK it's impossible, but "influencers" eg in fashion etc, should have no part in the process. This would cause wailing amongst the Gen Z entitled cohort, but hey that's another benefit ��

Bring in proportional representation. This ought to naturally force more centrist (hence more stable and equitable) policy making.

So overall I don't care who wins, they're all self interested showers of ****, one way or the other. Except Nigel Farage. He's not so much a shower as a thunderstorm.

You’re a bit of a contradiction GP…first post says you have no thoughts on the subject only for you then to produce the thread’s longest post. That begins by suggesting you’ll vote for whoever gives the best deal for those in your position and then condemns democracy as an exercise in political selfishness. As I say…quite some contradictions there.

Think it’s untypically naive to suggest that Brexit - however boring - won’t feature and that criticising (‘slagging off’) the incumbent’s record is unhelpful…but the rest - apart from not caring who wins - I think I agree with.

As for PR? Clearly it isn’t going to have any relevance this time round, but there’s a serious debate to be had there. Will it produce, as you suggest, more ‘centrist, stable and equitable policy making’ - a good thing imo - or is it a way for populists such as Farage to creep into power?

[swaledale]

I'll be hoping for a labour government come the next election. I don't think the Tories are incompetent (a couple of noticeable exceptions granted), but it's time for a change which will hopefully bring a little boost.
I'd hate to have a voting decision in the US!

So their failure over the past 14 years is down to deliberate actions if not incompetence?

Surely anyone irrespective of their political persuasion cannot think Johnson, Truss, Sunak, Mordaunt, Dorries, Leadsom, Shapps or whatever he calls himself, Braverman, Patel, Cleverly, Hunt, Trott (Chief Sec Treasury who can't do simple maths!!), Rees-Mogg, Keegan, Harper, McVey, Badenoch, Anderson, Gullis et al are anything other than total incompetents, who pale besides former Tory Mp's and ministers who at the very least looked as if they knew what they were talking about?

[swaledale]

A few random jottings on the matter of elections:

As an imminent retiree I shall be voting for those offering the best deal for pensioners. So that'll be me not voting then, as I don't see anyone unbundling the triple lock or upsetting the, predominantly longer lived female, powerful mass grey vote.

Of course the above demonstrates what's wrong with any democracy. People vote for the party that offers them the best deal, as opposed to for the collective good. Or they vote for a party that promises to make life worse for a group they dislike. Smash the unions, destroy the bosses, repatriate the immigrants, freedom for the scotch etc. At least Brexit won't be on the platform (unless rA is standing), but no doubt the libdems will float brentry.

Wouldn't it be nice if parties were legally restricted to campaign only on what they would do, rather than slagging of the incumbents have done or floating fears about what "the others" would bring.if elected.

It'd be even nicer if politics and vested interests were separated. Tories from capitalists etc, labour from unions etc, libdems from, well noone really. Abolish all political donations and fundraising - provide limited equal campaign funds from the state purse. Have candidates win voters over with opinion and policy, not by pouring cash in.

Ban the use of social media in electioneering. OK it's impossible, but "influencers" eg in fashion etc, should have no part in the process. This would cause wailing amongst the Gen Z entitled cohort, but hey that's another benefit ��

Bring in proportional representation. This ought to naturally force more centrist (hence more stable and equitable) policy making.

So overall I don't care who wins, they're all self interested showers of ****, one way or the other. Except Nigel Farage. He's not so much a shower as a thunderstorm.

I'm assuming you have private health care, think you won't need social care, will always drive so public transport isn't an issue (although no doubt the state of the roads and congestion might limit that), don't have children or grandchildren so don't give a toss about the environment. Have a private arsenal so not worried about crime and disorder affecting you and assume your property won't need energy or repairs so don't care if heating and lighting becomes so expensive you can't afford it, or there are no skilled tradesman to fix it, are untroubled by the impact of war, assume you will still be able to access affordable and healthy food, think your pension will be unaffected if the economy is completely trashed or at the very least rampant inflation will reduce its value to you?

Mm me thinks you have a very simplistic view of what affects you and your family and friends. Though doubt you have many friends with such a narrow view point.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Well that's true to form 😀 ignore what's said, launch a personal attack instead - much more fun. I may only have one friend but I'd wager that's one more than you.

I suspected there was no point engaging on this thread, now I'm sure of it.

[ramAnag]

Well that's true to form �� ignore what's said, launch a personal attack instead - much more fun. I may only have one friend but I'd wager that's one more than you.

I suspected there was no point engaging on this thread, now I'm sure of it.

Take your point GP…personal attacks seldom help…but ignore them and stick with it…it might be interesting to see if we can reach a consensus on what forum members regard as the priorities for any new government.
At the moment it seems pretty much everything is ‘broken’…the NHS, the education system and the housing and transport situations all appear to have been wrecked over the last decade and a half compared with where we were at the turn of the century.
For me they are four huge priorities…as are sensible, rather than populist, foreign, immigration and climate change policies. To be honest I no longer really care who delivers them, Labour or some sort of coalition. I just can’t help feeling that the vast majority of those who’ve played a leading part in government and national decision making since 2016 (and certainly 2019) should be avoided at all cost.

[swaledale]

Well that's true to form �� ignore what's said, launch a personal attack instead - much more fun. I may only have one friend but I'd wager that's one more than you.

I suspected there was no point engaging on this thread, now I'm sure of it.

I didn't ignore what's said, I pointed out the flaws in your argument that you put forward as what motivates you to vote. With respect to the other points you raised, I considered to be so simplistic and naïve as to be not worth addressing so didn't.

By the way you'd lose your wager.

[MadAmster]

PR has seen the extremes kept irrelevant here in the Netherlands. Our most recent election of some 80 days ago has yet to see a coalition formed. The 1st round of talks broke down mid-week. What has happened is that the aims of Wilders and his PVV (I say his as he is the one and only member of the party and no-one else is allowed to be a member) have been drastically changed since the election. He has always been a sort of don Quixote figure. Brilliant at telling people what he thinks is wrong but, so far, has singularly failed to come up with a solution. So far he has dropped a few far right policies that have been the core of his "party" from the off. He'd dropped banning Islam, dropped banning the Koran, dropped closing Islamic schools, dropped banning the burka (he's yet to answer the question of whether such a ban would include Sikh turbans), dropped forced repatriation of Muslims...

These are the majority of his vote winning policies yet his popularity (or maybe rather the lack thereof of the other parties) has seen the polls predicting that his current crop of 37 of the 150 seats would hit 50 if we had fresh elections today. The only policy that has stood up is his one to reduce immigration. Easy one to keep as 23 of the 25 parties taking part in the election wanted the same thing so any measures will easily get through both houses.

Loving GP's wish for free whisky, I'd vote for that

Agree with his take on financing elections, give each candidate an equal amount, from the public purse, for advertising etc. I'd also stop the right wing press being so openly pro Tory. Force them to give equal coverage to all parties, only printing what a party's stance is on a certain policy area without any added comments reflecting the political view of the owner/editor. No criticism of another party's policy, merely outline what YOU would do and why and then let the electorate make its own mind up. Make all political reporting 100% factual. Time to stop politicians lying to the electorate.

[MadAmster]

Here's a viewpoint I put in a previous political thread and will repeat it here. We all have far more of our lives behind us than in front. The future is our children and our grandchildren. Vote for their future. Vote for the party THEY believe has most regard for the problems THEY face. I have friends over here who did exactly that, asked their adult kids which party they were voting for and why. They then voted the same as their kids. We did similar with our 2 and ended up with a choice that didn't include the parties our kids were totally against. We still had a choice and, in true Dutch fashion came to a "compromise", ignoring parties that we don't agree with and choosing from those that the kids aren't against.

[ramAnag]

I'd hate to have a voting decision in the US!

Hopefully Trump’s most recent comments about Europe/NATO will have cleared a few minds. It’s a poor choice between narcissistic insanity and age related confusion, but I’d take the latter.

[macstheman]

I will vote as I always have but with little hope that the successful incumbents will do no more than fudge, fudge, fudge in the hope that things go well and another 5 years beckon. As MA says we should vote with future generations in mind but with the world teetering imo on the brink of another mass extinction event, which will be man made through abuse of the planets natural resources and the inevitable use one day of weapons of mass destruction, their future looks somewhat bleak!

[Ramshank72]

So their failure over the past 14 years is down to deliberate actions if not incompetence?

Surely anyone irrespective of their political persuasion cannot think Johnson, Truss, Sunak, Mordaunt, Dorries, Leadsom, Shapps or whatever he calls himself, Braverman, Patel, Cleverly, Hunt, Trott (Chief Sec Treasury who can't do simple maths!!), Rees-Mogg, Keegan, Harper, McVey, Badenoch, Anderson, Gullis et al are anything other than total incompetents, who pale besides former Tory Mp's and ministers who at the very least looked as if they knew what they were talking about?

Just words and opinion mate, the same will be said of the next government, as it was the previous.