Poll: New poll on who you will vote for?

Who?

  • Labour

    Votes: 76 10.0%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 286 37.6%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 324 42.6%

  • Other

    Votes: 75 9.9%
  • Total voters
    761
Status
Not open for further replies.
I told you ours was a safe seat. :(

In St Helens North, one person does not really have one vote, they have the equivalent of 0.018 votes.

The average UK voter has 14.29x more voting power than voters in St Helens North.
Click to expand...
What a crock. I did the vote for policies test and I came out a mix between UKIP (around 50%), the Green Party and Lib Dems. Doh. While Labour won our seat again (and again), the conservatives lost out to the Lib Dems by 2% here in the last general election, but our smarmy Labour MP 'fell' to a mere 14,000 majority in our town from over 20,000 the time before. Basically my vote will count for nothing. :o
 
cymatty said:
What I dont want is more expensive power so we can pay for shiny new inefficient wind turbines and such.
Click to expand...

Power is going to get more expensive anyhow. While I don't actually agree with the Lib Dem's policy on Nuclear Power - I do think nuclear should be part of the answer - the fact is that even if we take the nuclear option, nuclear is an expensive power source, and that's even without factoring in the costs of eventually dealing with the waste produced.

Increasing energy efficiency on the otherhand, pays for itself over time. And there's plenty of room for completely lifestyle neutral improvement in energy efficient, especially in public sector buildings like schools than the Lib Dems manifesto includes plans to target.
 
ChroniC said:
Please indulge me with your radical political genius on why voting for either of the 2 parties who have shown consistent failure is a good idea?
Click to expand...
It's easier to disprove than prove. I do not like Lib Dems for a few bad apple policies (£10k/Trident/Nucelar Power/Bank bonuses/Mansion tax etc.). Okay, a lot of bad apples. So that takes them out of the running for me. That leaves two. Labour - LOL, and Tory, who have only a few policies I disagree with.

Elimination is a much better way of filtering through policies. We may personally be more bothered by something very bad in one party that makes all their other policies moot.
 
Nzyme said:
It is very difficult to meet electricity demand through renewables because its not a constant demand, it varies dramatically. I agree that we need renewables but mainly from an energy security point-of-view, they will never be able to meet our energy demands on there own.

Nuclear power is the perfect solution for meeting base-demand. New generation reactors are safe, clean and the waste generated is minimal. Future reactor generation (hybrid-reactors) promise even less waste. Processes are in the pipe to recondition spent nuclear fuel into more nuclear fuel (although proliferation is a concern with the reconditioned fuel as its perfect for dirty bombs).

For the time being we have to rely on petroleum-derived fuels as well as coal while we develop a more diverse energy generation portfolio in the country.

Hopefully with enough investment fusion power will be viable in 50 years.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with you, i think it would be great to have safe nuclear reactors to generate our power. But then you just increase the probability of something going wrong, and when something nuclear goes wrong it goes spectacularly wrong.

I don't think we should pass it off altogether, but i'm just saying that i prefer the Lib Dem's policy regarding electricity generation to either of the other main parties.
 
Mr Jack said:
You'll note that the amnesty is only going to apply to people already in the country, and new measures are going to be brought in (such as exit controls) to prevent the problem occuring in future.
Click to expand...

I think when it comes to illegal immigration and measures to tighten it up, we have heard it all before.
 
meghatronic said:
It's easier to disprove than prove. I do not like Lib Dems for a few bad apple policies (£10k/Trident/Nucelar Power/Bank bonuses/Mansion tax etc.). Okay, a lot of bad apples. So that takes them out of the running for me. That leaves two. Labour - LOL, and Tory, who have only a few policies I disagree with.

Elimination is a much better way of filtering through policies. We may personally be more bothered by something very bad in one party that makes all their other policies moot.
Click to expand...

This, I vote for policies not a name, personality or a protest vote.
 
Mr Jack said:
Wow, you really have been learning from the Republican school of stupid political commentary, haven't you?
Click to expand...

So what was your amazing plan to reduce power consumption in a country with population growth?

If anything we should increase power consumption. Why? Because a nuclear powered electricty grid powering a network of electric mainline railways and local electric trams and trolleybus systems is the absolute best way to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil.

And reducing our dependancy on foriegn oil is 10 times more important than crap like CO2 and the environment, but has the happy byproduct that it will reduce CO2 emissions.
 
Superewza said:
I actually agree with you, i think it would be great to have safe nuclear reactors to generate our power. But then you just increase the probability of something going wrong, and when something nuclear goes wrong it goes spectacularly wrong.

I don't think we should pass it off altogether, but i'm just saying that i prefer the Lib Dem's policy regarding electricity generation to either of the other main parties.
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion but please if its safety thats putting you off don't let the accidents of the past put you off.

Nuclear power has come on so much since there would be very little chance of something going wrong and if something did we have procedures in place to deal with it.
 
meghatronic said:
It's easier to disprove than prove. I do not like Lib Dems for a few bad apple policies (£10k/Trident/Nucelar Power/Bank bonuses/Mansion tax etc.). Okay, a lot of bad apples. So that takes them out of the running for me. That leaves two. Labour - LOL, and Tory, who have only a few policies I disagree with.

Elimination is a much better way of filtering through policies. We may personally be more bothered by something very bad in one party that makes all their other policies moot.
Click to expand...

Ok, so a process of elimination on policies. Does that mean you change you vote from party to party based on what you think is a better option or are you a particular party voter.
Plus policies are as far as I can tell are mostly talk. There not guarantees that they will happen, and as such if they sound like a good idea, it doesn't to me mean it will actually occur, and as such I feel tricked when the country goes to pot.
Good policies, to me don't mean good politician, or a good party. I don't actually feel that I can trust my leaders.
Hence, why I and probably most others who have thought about voting Lib Dem after seeing Nick Clegg as a person. (by no means is this the only reason as I do have an IQ in the triple figures, but it is a contributing factor)
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;16388810 said:
So what was your amazing plan to reduce power consumption in a country with population growth?

If anything we should increase power consumption. Why? Because a nuclear powered electricty grid powering a network of electric mainline railways and local electric trams and trolleybus systems is the absolute best way to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil.

And reducing our dependancy on foriegn oil is 10 times more important than crap like CO2 and the environment, but has the happy byproduct that it will reduce CO2 emissions.
Click to expand...

Well said.

France generates about 70% of it's power via nuclear and seemingly without problems.
 
Tories = back to the us and them more for the rich, if it isn't hurting it isn't working -- well it's not going to hurt you mr multi millionaire is it?

Labour --- oops I forgot to keep an eye on me incomings and out goings, but never mind the over draft, look how much your house is worth now!!!

and then lib dems --- got to be worth a shot hasn't it. While she's still afloat (or at least some lifeboats are left)
 
meghatronic said:
It's easier to disprove than prove. I do not like Lib Dems for a few bad apple policies (£10k/Trident/Nucelar Power/Bank bonuses/Mansion tax etc.). Okay, a lot of bad apples. So that takes them out of the running for me. That leaves two. Labour - LOL, and Tory, who have only a few policies I disagree with.

Elimination is a much better way of filtering through policies. We may personally be more bothered by something very bad in one party that makes all their other policies moot.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with this. I tend to look for policies I disagree with, rather than policies I agree with (as it's so easy to promise good things). As it is, I find the Lib Dems the least objectionable, with just nuclear power and Trident (altho I'm wavering on Trident). Labour's ID card scheme, certain tax policies and some very ill-conceived laws have me worried. And there's even more I disagree with the Tories on (Europe being the top one). So it's yellow for me.
 
Mr Jack said:
Increasing energy efficiency on the otherhand, pays for itself over time. And there's plenty of room for completely lifestyle neutral improvement in energy efficient, especially in public sector buildings like schools than the Lib Dems manifesto includes plans to target.
Click to expand...

Energy efficiency and carbon reduction measures are in place for new builds and i think for buildings being refitted. These regulations are due to become more tighter over the next 5-10 years as we mvoe towards carbon neutral new builds.

You are correct in thinking energy efficiency is important particularly in buildings as this results in a significant proportion of your carbon emissions. Ideally we should first reduce what we need, then improve the efficiency at which we use it then we should produce it from green/renewable/sustainable/secure methods.

We do need new power plants (and a range of types - nuclear, petroelum-based, coal, renewables, biomass) to meet our needs (growing population & industry) and to ensure future energy security.
 
ChroniC said:
Hence, why I and probably most others who have thought about voting [any party] after seeing [any candidate].
Click to expand...
This here is exactly why democracy (or at least this General Election) is so unbelieveably ****** up.

You talk about 'trust', yet you are willing to put the entire future on a 90min (best case 3x90min) over-rehearsed 'debates' on television?

This isn't X-factor. Go have a stiff drink and think about it.

Slam62 said:
Tories = back to the us and them more for the rich, if it isn't hurting it isn't working -- well it's not going to hurt you mr multi millionaire is it?
Click to expand...
Yeah because the poor and middle classes have done so well under Labour.

bhavv said:
How come hardly anyone votes for the Green party? They are brilliant IMO, and I'll be voting for them.
Click to expand...
Troll post is trolltastic. If not, .....
 
bhavv said:
How come hardly anyone votes for the Green party? They are brilliant IMO, and I'll be voting for them.
Click to expand...

Most people who would vote for them don't because they think that there's no hope of them actually getting in, hence it would be a wasted vote. But if those people actually did vote for them then (i think at least) they would be serious contenders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom