Poll: *** 2010 General Election Result & Discussion ***

Who did you vote for?

  • Labour

    Votes: 137 13.9%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 378 38.4%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 304 30.9%

  • UK Independence Party

    Votes: 27 2.7%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • Scottish National Party

    Votes: 10 1.0%

  • British National Party

    Votes: 20 2.0%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • DUP

    Votes: 4 0.4%

  • UUP

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • SDLP

    Votes: 3 0.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 16 1.6%

  • Abstain

    Votes: 80 8.1%
  • Total voters
    985
  • Poll closed .
platypus said:
Reforming our antiquated First Past The Post system to a Proportional Representation system that better reflects the way the country voted, not who got elected.
Click to expand...

Ah so percentage rather than seats.

Although it would spell the end of Labour in this election (who i voted for) i agree that's they way it should be.

But then how does the house of commons work? It would have more seats than it should (or could do) to a party not in power, would that matter?
 
Bar said:
Good to see you are mature enough to apologise for the very condescending attitude that you decided to take with me without knowing anything about me.

Did the OP state that money in savings did not include ISA? Did he also say that tracker rate mortgage only as opposed to other types of mortgages?

Did the Op state whether it was a Repayment Mortgage or an Interest only Mortgage?
Click to expand...

The OP just said 'savings'. Without further detail, it is perfectly reasonable to presume he didn't mean 'That I have stacked into ISAs year after year'

Indeed we were talking about tracker mortgages so 'yes by insinuation/presumption of the most obvious thing because it wasn't specified' is the answer to all your other questions.

I was just narked because you 1) Said you worked in a bank or 10 2) Said I was wrong 3) Said exactly what I knew and had been arguing! 4) Said 'therefore I was wrong' again!

Working in a bank you must know this is kindergarten stuff. I thought EVERYONE knew all this. What next? You going to start going on about the 'mortgage relief' in the 80s changing the dynamics etc etc? :) None of these variables were in the original discussion so why add them now?

If I'm right, don't say I'm wrong! :) /argument

ps. Sorry by the way. You see, I can apologise.
 
Last edited:
amigafan2003 said:
Lol how the OCUK poll barely reflects what actually happened in the polls - other than showing the Tories beating Labour.

This just confirms to me that this whole forum is mainly populated by:-

1: Right wing elitist "I'm all right jack" types who only care about money and possessions and are in it solely for themselves.

I guess that's what happens when you run a poll hosted on a consumerist base of high value goods.

Glad the BNP vote went the same way for real though :-)

Roll on Lab/LD alliance :-)

And grats to the Greens for getting thier first seat - I'd have voted for them if they were standing in my Constituency.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, I can't see the libs forming an alliance with the torys, will basically be like giving the finger to their own supporters.
 
platypus said:
Reforming our antiquated First Past The Post system to a Proportional Representation system that makes for weak governments, very rare majoritys, many coalitions all the time with associated dithering, and LOTS AND LOTS of hung parliaments (hence exactly why they introduced it to post-Hitler Germany).
Click to expand...

Fixed ..
 
Col_M said:
Why is there still so much support for Labour?

They failed to control immigration.
The country currently has massive national debt.
His Tonyness took the country into 2 questionable "wars".
Gordon sold all the gold reserves when the price was low.
There are too many people living on benefits.
Lots of silly "terror laws".
Yes we had a period of massive excess but why didn't the government squirrel away some of that money for a rainy day, the country could sorely do with something like that now.


The only good thing I can think to say is under Labour no massive asteroid wiped out the country but even then I can't really attribute that to them.
Click to expand...

Best of a bad bunch. I believe Brown and team will do a better job at taking us out of this global recession than Cameron's 'take the money out of the economy' system would.
 
The number of people who would vote for pedobear wearing a labour rosette is dramatically reduced here compared to the general population because people have an IQ greater than 5...
Click to expand...

I have an IQ in the top 1% of the population - I can assure you IQ has nothing to do with whether you vote for one party or another.

A more accuarte assessment would be how much wealth you have already attained dictates your vote more than any other factor and it's a well proven fact that high IQ does not equal greater wealth.

I love how you tar all Conservative voters with the "right wing elitist" brush. Have you considered that the a reason for a high Tory vote in these forms could actually be because it's, relative to the general population, reasonably well educated?
Click to expand...

Now that is probably a more accurate statement as people that have been through the University eductaional system are more likely to vote Conservative. Again, that all boils down to subsequent wealth and Graduates earn more, in general, than non graduates. Because those people earn more, they are more likely to end up on a forum such as this. Like IQ, intelligence does not equaly better education.

Going back to high IQ - a higher IQ does not necessarily mean you have had a higher standard of education.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
britboy4321 said:
The economy went on such a massive boom under early Labour. The biggest, longest, most successful economic boom in ALL RECORDED HISTORY, that everyone was minted, and house prices obviously flew up.

Nasty side-effect of such an incredibly successful economic period. Any other commodity, the free market would have produced much more of the commodity. But houses we can't - so the whole things screws up ..
Click to expand...

Bubble. Created out of massive unsustainable personal/national debt

it was the fallacy of wealth
 
Dolph said:
The number of people who would vote for pedobear wearing a labour rosette is dramatically reduced here compared to the general population because people have an IQ greater than 5...
Click to expand...

Amiga is right though, this forum is male 20-30 (rough average) age bracket, on a forum related to high end computer goods, and big car/sports forum.....of course this is going to be a "I'm all right jack" view.

This poll isn't surprising at the least, and even though Cons have taken the lead, it doesn't suggest the views here compared nationally.
 
platypus said:
Reforming our antiquated First Past The Post system to a Proportional Representation system that better reflects the way the country voted.
Click to expand...

The problems with PR is that you would have to accept that your local MP may not represent the majority of voters in that constituency. Ie perfectly possible to have a 80% labour voting area to end up with a Lib Dem MP. And that won't go down too well with voters as MP's are meant to represent your area, not just who you want as a Government otherwise you would just have the choice of parties on your ballot papers.

We would still have had a hung parliament:

Conservative: 235 seats
Labour: 190 seats
Lib Dem: 150 seats

But equally people would have to accept the BNP would have 13 seats.

That may not rest too well with some people.
 
Greebo said:
The problems with PR is that you would have to accept that your local MP may not represent the majority of voters in that constituency. Ie perfectly possible to have a 80% labour voting area to end up with a Lib Dem MP. And that won't go down too well with voters as MP's are meant to represent your area, not just who you want as a Government otherwise you would just have the choice of parties on your ballot papers.
Click to expand...

Not true. You can simply have more MPs who do not represent a constituency to top-up the parties until the proportions are correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom