they are at it again

FutileBreadMachine · 18 Oct 2012 at 20:27

majnu said:
One thing I hate more than the expenses scandal is vague thread titles.

Same. Thought he was talking about his mum and dad...

Mr-White · 18 Oct 2012 at 22:02

minister said:
if you dont you you partly to blame.

If there's no one worth voting for how do you expect me to choose a candidate ? What would you have me do, flip a coin ?

MW

Xordium · 18 Oct 2012 at 22:06

LordSplodge said:
If you don't vote you're part of the problem. Yes the system needs fixing but simply refusing to vote achieves nothing.

Mass refusal would probably get a response of some sort. If the public voted for complete no confidence in any government then surely the Queen would have to do something. Actually on second thoughts maybe we should vote for someone ... count yourself look where I live Andrew Mitchell gets in no matter what a **** he is!

Danthus · 19 Oct 2012 at 08:38

I would imagine today the name Linda Riordan MP may mentioned.

Terrier_Jimlad · 19 Oct 2012 at 08:42

Spektor said:
Politicians, bankers, tabloid journalism, paedophiles, xfactor contestants, gingers... I'll go warm up the death camps.

Add the actors from "The only was is Essex" and "Made in Chelsea" to that list and omg I would let you rule the UK, right now!

LordSplodge · 19 Oct 2012 at 10:54

Energize said:
Put away the clichés.

Not a cliché. Now if people did what is suggested below... However a few people not turning out achieves nothing and can often lead to situations like we have at the moment. A limp coalition because not enough turned up to vote. Personally I think it should be compulsory.

Xordium said:
Mass refusal would probably get a response of some sort. If the public voted for complete no confidence in any government then surely the Queen would have to do something.

Something like that would work, but there's a snowballs chance in hell you could organise enough people to do it. Shame.

Tefal · 19 Oct 2012 at 10:57

Energize said:
Put away the clichés.

with something like 40% of eligible people not voting if they all turned up with an agenda they'd be the largest voting group and would guarantee a majority for anyone.

Add in "non of the above" with a clause saying that anyone who ran when that was decided cannot run again that election (for an independent not so bad for a career political, fatal) and make voting mandatory.,

would be an interesting shake up.

Showboat · 19 Oct 2012 at 11:04

I want to know if politician x is renting to politician y. I don't care about the address, but i do care if he is renting it for a fair market value.
If a house on the open market would attract £1000/month rent i don't want to see politicain y paying / expensing £2,000......

Energize · 19 Oct 2012 at 17:52

Tefal said:
with something like 40% of eligible people not voting if they all turned up with an agenda they'd be the largest voting group and would guarantee a majority for anyone.

Terrible first past the post system and uneven constituencies screws voters anyway, even if 40% voted for one party, they still might not win the election under our system.