Poll: General election voting intentions poll

[ubersonic]

The irony in that is delicious

Indeed, vote for a party whos entire manifesto is basically "LEAVE EU!!!" and your vote will basically count towards Labour getting in, who have flat out stated no referendum on their watch.

 

[ubersonic]

I'd wager a small amount that if there's a Tory coalition we'll get a referendum, with HoL reform in exchange for the Lib Dem support.

They tried to do that last year (may even be year before now) and Labour/Libs banded together to vote it down. The only choice for an EU referendum is a Tory majority.

 

[platypus]

Another reason to not want a Tory majority.

 

[scorza]

Very good.

 

[Judgeneo]

We're becoming more closely integrated all the time, and the closer we integrate, the larger the short term cost of withdrawal. Another 5 years and we might not be able to bear the pain of leaving. This means we must have the referendum now.

Unless of course the EU continues to recess and the Greek disaster isn't resolved, who knows what could happen to Europe then.

 

[ubersonic]

If the Tories get into power without UKIP then there's no hope of a referendum, funny you take David Cameron on his word when he already lied once about it.

Citation needed.

EDIT: To help you out, he didn't, what your thinking of is a pre-election promise to hold a referendum on signing a treaty that would transfer some powers to brussels, however once he made that promise Gordon Brown countered by whipping out a pen and signing it, nullifying Cameron's pledge.

He did however attempt to schedule a referendum the other year but Labour/Libdems banded together to veto it.

 

[D.P.]

He's poison now, also to add going for the Tories over the EU was stupid as most people now want out.

Actually not, most people want in but feel free to believe in whatever fantasy you want, like uKio winning double digit seats.

 

[robgmun]

Citation needed.

Really??? It was a public announcement in his conference before the 2010 election! Should be all over Youtube! Most people here have already seen it!

 

[ubersonic]

Really??? It was a public announcement in his conference before the 2010 election! Should be all over Youtube! Most people here have already seen it!

Ahh I was right then, you were confused:

EDIT: To help you out, he didn't, what your thinking of is a pre-election promise to hold a referendum on signing a treaty that would transfer some powers to brussels, however once he made that promise Gordon Brown countered by whipping out a pen and signing it, nullifying Cameron's pledge.

He did however attempt to schedule a referendum the other year but Labour/Libdems banded together to veto it.

 

[leaskovski]

Extremists should be kept in check, Otherwise more young people will be radicalized and then go to the middle-east to die

Survival of the smartest.

 

[Mr Jack]

He did however attempt to schedule a referendum the other year but Labour/Libdems banded together to veto it.

Actually that was a private member's bill from a Tory backbencher not a government bill. It didn't come from Cameron and I don't think he was very happy about it.

 

[eatcustard]

I'd wager a small amount that if there's a Tory coalition we'll get a referendum, with HoL reform in exchange for the Lib Dem support.

But LibDems want 16-17 year olds included on the vote, that would not be acceptable as far as I am concerned, they are far to young.

 

[platypus]

I think the precedence has been set with the independence referendum.

 

[estebanrey]

But LibDems want 16-17 year olds included on the vote, that would not be acceptable as far as I am concerned, they are far to young.

You could equally argue people in the 80s shouldn't vote either as they grew up in completely different times culturally and are far more prone to 'losing their marbles'.

When people with Dementia, who don't know what day of the week it is and think Harold Macmillan is still Prime Minister, can vote I don't see why 16-17 year olds shouldn't?

 

[elmarko]

I'll be voting Tory. I'm a big fan of paying less taxes. And, in general, their other policies. Historically, Labour mess the country up, and Conservatives come in and clean up the mess. This goes back generations.

It's also completely unsupported by evidence.

 

[Destination]

If you can contribute to tax, should you not have some say how that tax is utilised?

But then I'd make citizenship and the voting rights that go with it a privilege ( and thus a responsibility) not a right one is born with

 

[Mr Jack]

But LibDems want 16-17 year olds included on the vote, that would not be acceptable as far as I am concerned, they are far to young.

I agree. But I think it's fairly inevitable now that the vote will be extended to younger ages, since the Scottish referendum allowed it the gate has been opened and the voting age will fall.

 

[Tunney]

But LibDems want 16-17 year olds included on the vote, that would not be acceptable as far as I am concerned, they are far to young.

If they're old enough to pay tax, they're old enough to vote in my opinion.

 

[Judgeneo]

Thinking back to that age, I and many friends were mature enough to have a decent think about who to vote for, but many others were not. However, years later I'm not sure whether these people have matured enough to cast an intelligent vote.

So on that basis, you may as well let them.

 

[elmarko]

The debate around allowing/denying certain groups a vote usually is bias by people wanting/not wanting young people to vote (who will vote against/for there own political preference).

As there are no standards within adult voters for being able to vote (just look at these forums for evidence), so expected ignorance is not really a valid justification to deny them the right.

If somebody can give me a reason as to why they should be denied the vote (which doesn't also apply to half the population of the UK who can) I'd be willing to consider it, but at this stage it just seems like an arbitrary line.