Election Year or Fear!

[swaledale]

Not pedantic, I was just expecting a different ‘method’.

For my part, to start, I’ve considered, but NOT majored on, recent performance/behaviour for which they get a D+ / 16th in the league table so not a good start.

However I’m a) a forgiving fellah and b) forward looking, so from there I’ve looked at what each party is offering (not regional parties) via their manifestos (by studying their summaries, I’m not sad enough to look at the whole tomes) and by then reviewing the INDEPENDANT reports made regarding each, all parties are basically liars they can’t help it. That’s already knocked out Reform and the greens as their numbers are
Over optimistic by a factor of God knows. That leaves the three biggies and I considered whether each would improve a) my life (and the lives of my loved ones) and be b) the life of the country, again using INDEPENDANT analysis to help. And that’s as far as you’ll get in knowing my voting intentions, apart from me confirming I won’t have never and would never tactically vote, I find it distasteful in The Weakest Link never mind an election, just a personal view. But now you know my ‘method’ as a non partisan forward looking semi-selfish partly altruistic person who’s described himself here a few times as a capitalist with a social conscience

So tactical voting, whereby one votes for the party most likely to unseat the incumbent MP, whose views and politics one disapproves of is distasteful? How? One of the weaknesses of the current FPTP system is that thousands if not millions of votes count for nothing, there may be a change due to the circumstances of this election whereby even "safe" Tory seats are at risk.

Surely given politics is a compromise at the best of times there is nothing wrong at all with voting for a party on the basis that they have the best chance of winning and are a less worse choice than the incumbent MP? One of the reasons the Conservatives have been in government so often is that centre left or left leaning parties tend to split the vote. Certainly in my constituency the best chance of getting the Tory out is to vote Labour and for those that would have voted Green or Lib Dem to "lend" their votes to Labour on this occasion. Otherwise the result will be the Tory remains in power, with less than 45% of the vote.

This time around with reform and Independents standing, there is a few thousand votes needed to topple the Tory - any sensible person will therefore vote for the next best thing, otherwise they are wasting their vote.

[Andy_Faber]

So tactical voting, whereby one votes for the party most likely to unseat the incumbent MP, whose views and politics one disapproves of is distasteful? How? One of the weaknesses of the current FPTP system is that thousands if not millions of votes count for nothing, there may be a change due to the circumstances of this election whereby even "safe" Tory seats are at risk.

Surely given politics is a compromise at the best of times there is nothing wrong at all with voting for a party on the basis that they have the best chance of winning and are a less worse choice than the incumbent MP? One of the reasons the Conservatives have been in government so often is that centre left or left leaning parties tend to split the vote. Certainly in my constituency the best chance of getting the Tory out is to vote Labour and for those that would have voted Green or Lib Dem to "lend" their votes to Labour on this occasion. Otherwise the result will be the Tory remains in power, with less than 45% of the vote.

This time around with reform and Independents standing, there is a few thousand votes needed to topple the Tory - any sensible person will therefore vote for the next best thing, otherwise they are wasting their vote.

Not everyone’s as desperate as yourself Swale, I’ll stick to my principles which I recall sent you into a spin when I explained them in 2019

[Andy_Faber]

Not really…I think you’re being a bit pedantic there. Criteria may be defined as a standard by which something is judged.
If, by the time of the next election, those things I’ve mentioned, together with policing, our rivers/general water and sewage management and transport infrastructure haven’t improved, then Labour, if elected in July, will be judged accordingly. I don’t doubt that there are other more complex economic matters which I don’t fully understand…but then neither do the vast majority and I’ll guarantee that I’ve given it more thought than most.

So I take it from your comments that you will only vote for a party that guarantees to INCREASE you personal tax burden?

[MadAmster]

So I take it from your comments that you will only vote for a party that guarantees to INCREASE you personal tax burden?

I offer good rates for comprehension lessons. That is, most decidedly, NOT what he posted.

What he said was that IF taxes went up a little to fund better services, he'd be OK with that.

That's a stance I'd fully agree with. Where would my tick go? As I put in a previous post, I decided not to use my returning right to vote after 25 years of not being allowed to. That on the basis of "I don't pay into the system so I really shouldn't influence who mucks it up".

I'd like to think that, had I been (God forbid) a Blue Tory voter in the past, the level of lies, sleaze, scandal and rules don't apply to us over recent years would see me abstain at best and probably vote for someone else.

Red Tory? A much better name than Labour for them these days as they are no longer the party of the working man, IMO. I think that Starmer has gone a step or two in the right direction with his policy of going after non-Doms and reducing Tax evasion etc. There is something he could announce that, I believe, would guarantee a landslide victory. Namely, announce that they would go after the "Covid Billions". Get back all monies paid to those who failed to deliver any PPE. Idem ditto those who delivered sub standard PPE. Investigate the getting on for £40Bn that went into the failed Test and Trace system and claw back as much of that as is possible. Then there's the £4Bn write off from Covid contracts, chase that up. The opinion polls already point to a probable win, promising the recovery of as much of the "Covid Billions" as possible would guarantee it, IMO.

A little aside... AF, have you ever appeared on "Home under the hammer"? If they wanted to cover one of your revamps, would you do it? Off topic, I know, but this is the thread where I became aware of your being a landlord and thought a new thread might be OTT.

[ramAnag]

I offer good rates for comprehension lessons. That is, most decidedly, NOT what he posted.

What he said was that IF taxes went up a little to fund better services, he'd be OK with that.

That's a stance I'd fully agree with. Where would my tick go? As I put in a previous post, I decided not to use my returning right to vote after 25 years of not being allowed to. That on the basis of "I don't pay into the system so I really shouldn't influence who mucks it up".

I'd like to think that, had I been (God forbid) a Blue Tory voter in the past, the level of lies, sleaze, scandal and rules don't apply to us over recent years would see me abstain at best and probably vote for someone else.

Red Tory? A much better name than Labour for them these days as they are no longer the party of the working man, IMO. I think that Starmer has gone a step or two in the right direction with his policy of going after non-Doms and reducing Tax evasion etc. There is something he could announce that, I believe, would guarantee a landslide victory. Namely, announce that they would go after the "Covid Billions". Get back all monies paid to those who failed to deliver any PPE. Idem ditto those who delivered sub standard PPE. Investigate the getting on for £40Bn that went into the failed Test and Trace system and claw back as much of that as is possible. Then there's the £4Bn write off from Covid contracts, chase that up. The opinion polls already point to a probable win, promising the recovery of as much of the "Covid Billions" as possible would guarantee it, IMO.

A little aside... AF, have you ever appeared on "Home under the hammer"? If they wanted to cover one of your revamps, would you do it? Off topic, I know, but this is the thread where I became aware of your being a landlord and thought a new thread might be OTT.

Thanks MA. Always helpful when someone is willing to distinguish between what has actually been written and how others might, conveniently, choose to interpret what has been said.

Agree with the rest of the post too. Beggars belief to me that, after the behaviour which has typified the last five or so years, even someone with Conservative sympathies would vote for this incompetent and dishonest rabble again and I’d love to see us go after the ‘Covid Billions’ and racketeers. Perhaps, looking at how costly and time consuming other inquiries have been, it’s a question of whether we can afford the time and the expense. I hope so.

[MadAmster]

Thanks MA. Always helpful when someone is willing to distinguish between what has actually been written and how others might, conveniently, choose to interpret what has been said.

Agree with the rest of the post too. Beggars belief to me that, after the behaviour which has typified the last five or so years, even someone with Conservative sympathies would vote for this incompetent and dishonest rabble again and I’d love to see us go after the ‘Covid Billions’ and racketeers. Perhaps, looking at how costly and time consuming other inquiries have been, it’s a question of whether we can afford the time and the expense. I hope so.

Thieves, and that is basically what they are although some might prefer the term "fraudster", shouldn't prosper. Should we ever find ourselves in a similar position, I would hope that action taken against the CV19 profiteers would dissuade others from trying similar. That deterrent would make any costs, IMO, worthwhile.

[Andy_Faber]

A little aside... AF, have you ever appeared on "Home under the hammer"? If they wanted to cover one of your revamps, would you do it? Off topic, I know, but this is the thread where I became aware of your being a landlord and thought a new thread might be OTT.

Yes I’ve been asked a number of times and the answer has always been no, and always will be. Main reason is, apart from when I’m fronting a band, I don’t really like the limelight, we don’t do it for the glory. Also, I wouldn’t want to be one of those souls who makes no progress when the cameras return, and, on a couple of occasions (because we’ve ‘parked’ purchases to do something else) we would have been. I wouldn’t want the pressure of s TV schedule buggering up our process

thanks for asking

[ramAnag]

With respect, AF, you don’t half let yourself down sometimes. We’re having an intelligent and respectful debate, for once, and then you put up two ludicrous and provocative posts like the last two.

What’s ‘desperate’ about Swale’s post? He’s just explained his logic behind tactical voting. You clearly disagree but you can’t fault the reasoning.

As for I’ll ‘only vote for a party that guarantees to INCREASE my personal tax burden’. Of course not…I’m just adult enough to recognise that decent services - which are the bedrock of society - have to be paid for. Even you’ve recognised that in this debate.
‘Properly targeted taxes’ I’ve consistently said…if my possibly increased taxes go up to fund better hospitals, surgeries, care homes and schools etc I’ll support it. If my taxes go up to pay for Farage’s EU pension and give a lifetime six figure salary to a lying PM who disgraced the country and another who wrecked the economy…not so keen!

[Andy_Faber]

With respect, AF, you don’t half let yourself down sometimes. We’re having an intelligent and respectful debate, for once, and then you put up two ludicrous and provocative posts like the last two.

What’s ‘desperate’ about Swale’s post? He’s just explained his logic behind tactical voting. You clearly disagree but you can’t fault the reasoning.

As for I’ll ‘only vote for a party that guarantees to INCREASE my personal tax burden’. Of course not…I’m just adult enough to recognise that decent services - which are the bedrock of society - have to be paid for. Even you’ve recognised that in this debate.
‘Properly targeted taxes’ I’ve consistently said…if my possibly increased taxes go up to fund better hospitals, surgeries, care homes and schools etc I’ll support it. If my taxes go up to pay for Farage’s EU pension and give a lifetime six figure salary to a lying PM who disgraced the country and another who wrecked the economy…not so keen!

I don’t need lecturing on my posts thanks rA, my question to you was a serious one, because at present I don’t see you have a sensible choice as they all seem keen to reduce tax.

And Swale IS clearly desperate to remove the conservatives whereas I have a different approach

And (my memory doesn’t fail me on this) Swale was incredulous in 2019 that I used broadly the same approach to deciding where my tick went

- and NB you seem to have your rear gun out again

[ramAnag]

I don’t need lecturing on my posts thanks rA, my question to you was a serious one, because at present I don’t see you have a sensible choice as they all seem keen to reduce tax.

And Swale IS clearly desperate to remove the conservatives whereas I have a different approach

And (my memory doesn’t fail me on this) Swale was incredulous in 2019 that I used broadly the same approach to deciding where my tick went

- and NB you seem to have your rear gun out again

‘Rear gun?’ Really? It’s a forum.
The two regular contributors I invariably agree with on here are MA and mac and yet strangely no one ever makes the same accusation.
Sometimes I agree with Swale - often even where politics is concerned - sometimes I agree with you…end of.
Blimey…there’s been times when I’ve agreed with GP and I think I might even have agreed with TTR a couple of times.
Get over yourself. It’s not a loyalty contest, it’s a discussion…don’t take things so personally.