Poll: General election voting intentions poll

Voting intentions in the General Election - only use the poll if you intend to vote

  • Alliance Party of Northern Ireland

    Votes: 2 0.3%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 287 42.0%

  • Democratic Unionist Party

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 67 9.8%

  • Labour

    Votes: 108 15.8%

  • Liberal Democrat

    Votes: 25 3.7%

  • Other party (not named)

    Votes: 15 2.2%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 2 0.3%

  • Respect Party

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Scottish National Party

    Votes: 36 5.3%

  • Social Democratic and Labour Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 4 0.6%

  • UKIP

    Votes: 137 20.0%
  • Total voters
    684
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
robgmun said:
Clearly it is :confused::confused: I'm not sure how this is even up for debate!?

Elections needed to be conducted on a level playing field, for a lack of better description it's unfair and not in the spirit of democracy, but then Socialists are famous for being undemocratic
Click to expand...

Because it's freedom of speech, not freedom of being listened to. It's not the state cracking down on UKIP supporters, it's people who disagree with them shouting louder either because there are more of them or because they are just putting more effort in. To paint it as an attack on free speech is utterly absurd.
 
Caged said:
Because it's freedom of speech, not freedom of being listened to.
Click to expand...

If you are preventing someone from talking what is it then? :confused:

It's not the state cracking down on UKIP supporters,
Click to expand...

debatable *cough* BBC *cough* Media *cough*

it's people who disagree with them shouting louder either because there are more of them or because they are just putting more effort in.
Click to expand...

And this is ok in your book? Apart from the fact it makes the shouters look like complete cranks, how can you think this is even ok?

To paint it as an attack on free speech is utterly absurd.
Click to expand...

That precisely what it is
 
Ok mate, carry on being the oppressed underdog.

Hint: Nobody is preventing people from talking, they are preventing them from being heard, there's a difference. As I have tried to explain. Whether I think that is OK or not is an entirely separate issue to whether it's an assault on freedom of speech.

You are claiming that one group of people shouldn't be allowed to protest at another groups protest, and somehow completely missing the point of what freedom of speech is about.
 
Last edited:
Caged said:
Ok mate, carry on being the oppressed underdog.

Hint: Nobody is preventing people from talking, they are preventing them from being heard, there's a difference. As I have tried to explain. Whether I think that is OK or not is an entirely separate issue to whether it's an assault on freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

Er, UAF would have certain organisations and individuals banned from speaking in this country.
 
I don't see how that is relevant to the original claim that people protesting UKIP is infringing on rights to freedom of speech. Who cares what UAF would do regarding silencing other groups, they can't, because of the laws we have.
 
Where do you draw the line then? If a group of people feel more strongly about an issue than another then who has to listen to who? It's not a TV debate.

If a group of people want to disrupt a peaceful protest by breaking the law then they've broken the law and can be dealt with. If some of their members are only there to cause trouble then again, there are laws to deal with that. Trying to equate being outnumbered and therefore drowned out by people who disagree with you as being equivalent to freedom of speech being eroded comes across as being butthurt that your opinion isn't the same held by the majority (of people who could be bothered to turn out to a protest).
 
If you are asking me then anyone should be free to say whatever they want regardless of who or what they believe in.

If they break the law then it can be dealt with.
 
OldCoals said:
The idea that mass immigration has not had a detrimental effect on employment and wages seems to completely fly in the face of basic supply and demand.
Click to expand...

Only if the market was already balanced with supply and demand based on available skill and will. If I have a population of 100 with 95 employed and 5 people unable to sell their labour due to poor training or poor work ethic, I can introduce another 10 skilled people and likely end up with 105 employed and the same 5 still out of work.

Employment and wages aren't just based on availability of labour, the quality matters as well.
 
Caged said:
Because it's freedom of speech, not freedom of being listened to. It's not the state cracking down on UKIP supporters, it's people who disagree with them shouting louder either because there are more of them or because they are just putting more effort in. To paint it as an attack on free speech is utterly absurd.
Click to expand...

This is also the position taken by xkcd ;)

50ipoh.png
 
robgmun said:
Theoretical:

The BNP/EDL are shouting through megaphones drowning out everything that's said every time a Green or Labour candidate steps out in public, not allowing them to speak.

That's cool too?
Click to expand...

At what point does it say it's cool? If someone does that, they're still a ****; they're just exercising their right to be one.
 
squerble said:
At what point does it say it's cool? If someone does that, they're still a ****; they're just exercising their right to be one.
Click to expand...

A handful here are totally fine with repressing points of views, so it needs to work both ways, and not one of them have said it wasn't cool either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom