Poll: General election voting round 4

[Cosimo]

France has other issues, such as a President who would rather run around after actresses on his scooter, instead of leading his country.

Can you imagine if Red Ed actually did something like that. It would certainly help with his Wallace and Gromit image.

 

[D.P.]

I really dislike UKIP, but it is a travesty that they may get 15% of the vote and only 1 seat out of 650. Our electoral system is completely broken but most people don't seem to realise it.

The big parties like FPTP because it benefits them massively.

Small parties can also do well, look at SNP for example.

The key to FPTP is simply to have the candidate who the most people will vote for. That does not give an advantage to any party, only those with the best candidates.

Where the system fails is the human factor modulated by media. People do stupid things like ignore policies, ignore history, vote for who they have always voted for, listen to daily mail headlines, and use anecdotal evidence to form their voting opinions.

If you removed the human factor and the best candidate in each constituency was objectively awarded to represent their constituency then there would be problem with FPTP. Changing voting system does a sole the flaws inherent in humans taking part in the election.

 

[Sankari]

Can you imagine if Red Ed actually did something like that..

Well, he would finally qualify as human...

 

[StriderX]

If we did move to a different system, preference voting (1st, 2nd, 3rd etc) perhaps for the interim, we would still need to deal with legacy issues that plague even the current system.

While i couldnt give a crap about the House of Lords, It clearly needs some tweaking.

By far though, councils need the power to do as they wish, no matter if ruins their area or not, at the least it would be obvious to certain...electorates that their council are dirtbags.

 

[D.P.]

Not exactly as intended, or at least not as people expect it to perform. It used to be that people would talk about FPTP being great as it leads to clear results/a strong government - that'd literally be the first positive people would list, in my experience! Others being stuff like easy to understand/a clear choice and having that MP/constituent link given how small constituencies are (as opposed to regional representation).

FPTP doesn't guarantee a strong government but that is often a side effect. You can see that in Scotland, the SNP will be extremely strong thanks to FPTP but a PR system would make things much more complicated.
FPTP is easy, who ever you think is the best person to represent your voice in government should get your vote. If you don't understand that then you shouldn't be voting. Of corpse there is indirect complexities,me.g. Do you tactically vote for your 2nd choice party to block some one else etc, but that happens with all voting systems. That effect is even stronger under AV where you have even more control to try to block your least desired party. Pr is no different really, e.g. as a Green Party supporter I would still under some circumstances tactically vote Labour or conservative to try to increase their power.

You can't claim a pro-immigration point is that the outcome for immigrants is better, when there's no positive and might be a negative for the 'natives'! You're presenting the stats in a coloured way, which puts you on the same level as the UKIP folk.

Where did I claim that pro-immigration point is education? That makes no sense what so ever. A pro-immigration point would be something like increasing GDP, increasing net tax contributions, reducing fiscal deficit, increasing British competitiveness and productivity.

You are the one present stats in a colored way by selectively quoting and ignoring the important context, e.g. No significant effect. I'm resenting the evidence exactly how it appears in peers-reviewed published articles.no more, no less.

And there's not zero proof. There's an indication there might be a small negative effect. But covering that up by saying, "BUT THE AVERAGE GOES UP", without pointing out that the average ONLY goes up because the immigrants do well, whereas the 'natives' flatline or possibly do marginally worse is disingenuous.

I'm not covering anything up. Your logic is really flawed, you don't make any sense at all right now which is shame because I normally value your input quite highly.

Someone claims there is a negative impact of migrants, I have simply provided evidence that there is no negative impact. I think you need to take a break, get a coffee and start all over.

 

[StriderX]

Surely the negative impact is obvious, far righters feel the justification is now there to act.

Hate will only rise with increased image of the country becoming a migrant haven.

 

[McPhee]

D.P. I'm not sure if you're being intentionally stupid or not. Under FPTP we are supposed to vote for the best candidate to represent our constituency, true enough. However, in practice, this just doesn't happen. The national debate, national issues, tend to overshadow local ones and heavily skew the vote. There are many places in the UK where you could field a monkey dressed in the correct colours and watch that monkey win. As a result, First Past The Post does not work as designed.

Reforming our electoral system would be a chance to give all views the opportunity to be represented in parliament, not just those with concentrated geographical support. It would allow us to create a parliament that truly represents the views of everyone in this country, not just the local majority. While I would like to see the link between MP and constituency maintained, we certainly should be looking at how we can do that while also giving voice to the many different views of the British people.

It's not that FPTP doesn't work in principle or in theory; it's that it isn't working in practice. It encourages tactical voting, makes it difficult for smaller parties/candidates to get a foothold,f eeds voter apathy and is prime for exploitation by nationalists.

 

[robgmun]

This was a nice video showing that people don't need to resort to shouting and hate and tearing down posters (Like most of on the left) to debate each other. This is the type of civil conversation that the election should be more like

 

[arknor]

What the heck are you on about?i am really lost in your logic so I will repeat it what I said once more:


Immigrants have a significant positive effect on average educational performance without negatively effecting British children.


Anti-immigration posters are claiming without evidence that immigrants are negatively impacting the performance of schools in their area when there is absolute zero proof of that, in fact the average performance increases.

Come back when you understand that and have proof against it.

Class sizes are known to have an impact researchers have proved this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...2/24/class-size-matters-a-lot-research-shows/

Researchers generally agree that lower class sizes, at least in the earliest grades, are linked to positive educational benefits such as better test scores, fewer dropouts and higher graduation rates, especially for disadvantaged children.

Considering the body of research as a whole, the following policy recommendations emerge:

*Class size is an important determinant of student outcomes, and one that can be directly determined by policy. All else being equal, increasing class sizes will harm student outcomes.

* The evidence suggests that increasing class size will harm not only children’s test scores in the short run, but also their long-run human capital formation. Money saved today by increasing class sizes will result in more substantial social and educational costs in the future.

* The payoff from class-size reduction is greater for low-income and minority children, while any increases in class size will likely be most harmful to these populations.

now add a bunch of kids that don't speak english as a first language and need extra teacher help like my sons school

Austerity measures mean budget cuts making it even worse.

I don't care if migrants are adding to the GDP buy some small fraction.

the impact on the children's education at a city centre Newcastle school where there's not even meant to be a large population of migrants is not worth it for me.

But as always it's the poor who suffer the most middle class and wealthy people only get to see the benefits.

I wish I could get a racial breakdown of all the pupils attending his school because being white British he must be a minority now as I said only about 5 white kids in a class of 36 (I''ve posted on here a few times in the past few years saying they never do Christian plays any more, even at Christmas)

I'm supposed to somehow believe the massive influx of migrants changing the racial make up of the school and increasing class sizes +10 has no impact on the education children receive their?
Even if they all spoke perfect english there would still be an impact that's FACT

People can call it racist all they want our country can't handle these levels and under cameron it's worse than labour the full effects of mass immigration will be felt in poor deprived areas for many years to come even if they closed the borders now.

Housing shortage only going to get massively worse once these kids are adults in about 10 years time.

only the poor in deprived areas get the burden though so as long as the GDP is up a fraction for the middle and upper classes it's all good

BTW our government guideline is 30 pupils per class so the school is already failing to meet that
also
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...s-sizes-among-biggest-in-developed-world.html
Class sizes in the UK are bigger than those in most other developed nations

 

[delta0]

There was a big independence rally in Glasgow yesterday. This is the SNPs real agenda.

 

[joeyjojo]

I really dislike UKIP, but it is a travesty that they may get 15% of the vote and only 1 seat out of 650. Our electoral system is completely broken but most people don't seem to realise it.

The big parties like FPTP because it benefits them massively.

I'd love to know how many people said No in the AV referendum but would now like to vote for a smaller party, e.g. UKIP. So short sighted!

Evidence shows that the coalition's strategy of austerity held back economic growth.

Thanks for sharing. The more people that recognise that austerity was imposed for ideological, not economic reasons, the better.

Was reading this earlier and wondered where they got their numbers from of rents going up "by an average of £1200 since 2010". In my area a 1/2 bed flat is around £1100-£1300 a month - I'm paying around £50-100 more a month since 2010 prices. There must be some pretty large inflation going on elsewhere?

I assumed that meant £1200 a year, which is about the change you've seen.

 

[D.P.]

Surely the negative impact is obvious, far righters feel the justification is now there to act.

Hate will only rise with increased image of the country becoming a migrant haven.

That is just the thing, people think there is a negative impact but it isn't there, so there is no justification.

 

[D.P.]

Class sizes are known to have an impact researchers have proved this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...2/24/class-size-matters-a-lot-research-shows/



now add a bunch of kids that don't speak english as a first language and need extra teacher help like my sons school

Austerity measures mean budget cuts making it even worse.

I don't care if migrants are adding to the GDP buy some small fraction.

the impact on the children's education at a city centre Newcastle school where there's not even meant to be a large population of migrants is not worth it for me.

But as always it's the poor who suffer the most middle class and wealthy people only get to see the benefits.

I wish I could get a racial breakdown of all the pupils attending his school because being white British he must be a minority now as I said only about 5 white kids in a class of 36 (I''ve posted on here a few times in the past few years saying they never do Christian plays any more, even at Christmas)

I'm supposed to somehow believe the massive influx of migrants changing the racial make up of the school and increasing class sizes +10 has no impact on the education children receive their?
Even if they all spoke perfect english there would still be an impact that's FACT

People can call it racist all they want our country can't handle these levels and under cameron it's worse than labour the full effects of mass immigration will be felt in poor deprived areas for many years to come even if they closed the borders now.

Housing shortage only going to get massively worse once these kids are adults in about 10 years time.

only the poor in deprived areas get the burden though so as long as the GDP is up a fraction for the middle and upper classes it's all good

BTW our government guideline is 30 pupils per class so the school is already failing to meet that
also
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...s-sizes-among-biggest-in-developed-world.html
Class sizes in the UK are bigger than those in most other developed nations

Class size has little to do with immigration but number of teachers. Increasing the number of teachers is made possible by the possible contributions of immigration.
Can you please show evidence that class sizes have increased due to immigration? I think you are falling foul of the common myth that there is a fixed capacity in the system.
Which is exactly there is no evidence of a negative impact on the education performance of British born children. Class sizes may well be increasing, in part due to immigration and impart due to increased British births, but that isn't having an effect on educational outcomes. The solution is not to reduce immigrants but to to use the tax money that immigrants provide to increase the number of teachers and school capacity.

As for languages, there is plenty of evidence that exposure to multiple languages increases linguistic and general cognitive ability.
You are also ignoring the fact that just because an imigrant can speak another language doesn't mean they can't speak English, which is a common misconception of the far right.

 

[D.P.]

D.P. I'm not sure if you're being intentionally stupid or not. Under FPTP we are supposed to vote for the best candidate to represent our constituency, true enough. However, in practice, this just doesn't happen. The national debate, national issues, tend to overshadow local ones and heavily skew the vote. There are many places in the UK where you could field a monkey dressed in the correct colours and watch that monkey win. As a result, First Past The Post does not work as designed.

Reforming our electoral system would be a chance to give all views the opportunity to be represented in parliament, not just those with concentrated geographical support. It would allow us to create a parliament that truly represents the views of everyone in this country, not just the local majority. While I would like to see the link between MP and constituency maintained, we certainly should be looking at how we can do that while also giving voice to the many different views of the British people.

It's not that FPTP doesn't work in principle or in theory; it's that it isn't working in practice. It encourages tactical voting, makes it difficult for smaller parties/candidates to get a foothold,f eeds voter apathy and is prime for exploitation by nationalists.

The problem is not the voting system but the electorate, you can change the former to whatever you want but you change the latter to do what is right. As you point up, in many places a monkey would win time after time, things like AV won't change that.

People being stupid will always exist.
The ability to ore tactically will always exist, I fact things like AV give even more room to vote tactically and control outcomes in complex ways.

It is mathematically proven there is no fair voting system and even if there was you can't stop the fact that humans are voting based on subjective unfounded bias.

 

[StriderX]

That is just the thing, people think there is a negative impact but it isn't there, so there is no justification.

Thinking there is a problem, makes it a problem physically.

Thought is unfortunately a powerful weapon, in fact it is probably the biggest killer in history.

An example that i believe will occur, is that some far-right rabble will start murdering immigrants and the EU then has to act, we are in dangerous territory here.

 

[Lartyconshayo]

There was a big independence rally in Glasgow yesterday. This is the SNPs real agenda.

Gosh was there? Funny how there's not much coverage of it on the BBC. It appears to have been organised by a group called Hope Over Fear and they are headed by Tommy Sheridan.

It is hilarious to watch the quotes from all party leaders and the likes of Boris whom now that democracy is in play are stating how they 'won't do a deal with the SNP'

I think it will be good for the political spectrum in the UK to move away from the centre right neo-liberal new normal. I don't particularly support the SNP policies all told. I think they could be more progressive but seeing how the lib/lab/con are basically all different sides of the same coin and ukip are hoovering up the ex BNP vote along with the disaffected but perhaps I'll informed lab/cons I would much rather see what a SNP coalition has to offer. If Plaid and the greens combine to form an anti Tory bloc so much better. Ed is foolish to make all this bluff and bluster. If he understood which way the political wind is blowing in Scotland he would be more open to dialogue. As it is he has henchman Jim Murphy who outright lies to the British public and has to be publicly pulled up by Ed for the outright lies. The SNP are not perfect but they're a damn sight better at being actual politicians and reaching out to and connecting with the common folk.

 

[arknor]

Class size has little to do with immigration but number of teachers. Increasing the number of teachers is made possible by the possible contributions of immigration.
Can you please show evidence that class sizes have increased due to immigration? I think you are falling foul of the common myth that there is a fixed capacity in the system.
Which is exactly there is no evidence of a negative impact on the education performance of British born children. Class sizes may well be increasing, in part due to immigration and impart due to increased British births, but that isn't having an effect on educational outcomes. The solution is not to reduce immigrants but to to use the tax money that immigrants provide to increase the number of teachers and school capacity.

As for languages, there is plenty of evidence that exposure to multiple languages increases linguistic and general cognitive ability.
You are also ignoring the fact that just because an imigrant can speak another language doesn't mean they can't speak English, which is a common misconception of the far right.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...fsted-chief-inspector-of-schools-9827455.html

Sir Michael Wilshaw said a lack of capacity and resources within schools to cope with large numbers of migrant children is “a big issue for the Government”.

Speaking on LBC Radio, Sir Michael said: “Schools need the resources to deal with that.

“When they’re faced with an influx of children from other countries, they need the resources and capacity to deal with it and if those resources aren’t there, that’s a big issue for Government.

“That’s the first thing and we’ll be producing reports on this quite soon.”

Class sizes overall probably haven't changed a great deal due to immigration but then immigrants aren't spread out across the whole country equally so it will be localized areas that see the effect it has.

How am I supposed to find statistical data? schools don't just hound out an ethnicity graph.

looking at the ofsted report

The proportion of pupils from minority ethnic groups is well above average, as is those whose first language is not English. There are more than 25 different languages spoken by pupils in the school.

Improve achievement and increase the amount of teaching that is outstanding by: making sure that in, Key Stage 1, the work and resource materials support well the development of pupils’ skills, especially those who are learning English as an additional language

When children enter the school they have skills which are well below those typically expected for their age. The majority of children enter nursery without being able to speak English fluently.
Despite this, pupils across the school who speak English as an additional language and those from minority ethnic groups often achieve better than other pupils in the school by the time they reach Key Stage 2.

Probably because of all the extra time the teacher spends with them whilst neglecting everyone else and they're not really a minority

Tablet computers are used across the school to enhance learning. Some pupils, in particular at Key Stage 1, lack some extra visual resources, especially those who are learning English as an additional language, to aid their understanding, such as picture cards of key words.

Is it normal for an ofsted report to mention people learning english as an additional language so many times? or is there just a hell of a lot of kids at this school from other countries

 

[spudbynight]

I am really enjoying the comic majesty of D.P.

Tis a complete hoot!

 

[robgmun]

I am really enjoying the comic majesty of D.P.

It's hilarious that he thinks he's such an expert half a world away. Thinking that numbers trumps direct personal experience of the people of this country.

 

[HangTime]

Don't get this, why the big support for the Tories? All other forums I frequent the Tories are hated with a vengeance. Also I would guess this forum has a quite youthful clientele so would assume that would make it even more anti Tory.

OcUK is not a particularly youthful forum; a good spot check is to look at the birthdays on the main page, for today all of those with published ages are 28 or older (assuming DOB is vaguely accurate). It is around 15 years old so many of the longtime members will be in their 30s or above.

The former owner of the forums was also seemingly an very firm supporter of the Conservatives, my memory is a big flaky but I think the forums were suspended in memory of Lady Thatcher around the time she died/funeral(?) Moderation has often been viewed as quite conservative in nature over the years.

Finally performance computer hardware is traditionally the realm of people with at least moderate wealth so a majority of people frequenting this forum would traditionally have been those from vaguely middle-class backgrounds i.e typical Tory demographic. Less so in recent years but certainly in the early noughties I think the majority of the forum were not from a massively impoverished background.
edit: I'm not suggesting that 'poor' people would never vote Tory or vice-versa, just talking in stereotypes.

In these type of polls/debates on here the thing that usually surprises me the most is the support for UKIP, it always seems disproportionately high relative to the national average (the above reasons mean I might expect a right-wing slant, but not to the extent that I'd expect to see them ahead of Labour on occasions).