Poll: Who will you be voting for on May 5th?

[nero120]

Right, it's Miller time!

We have a good cross section of political opinion here on the OCUK Forums and although there have been related topics raised (mainly in SC), none have really put a figure on how we will be voting on May 5th. I think many people believe this will be a close election, so it will be interesting to have a look at the figures for who will be voting for who and see if we think it will be close!

Dons, can I get a vote pleeeease?

Oh yeah, if you're not eligable to vote then hands off!

 

[nero120]

Wont be voting as far as im concerned, to me they are all the same. Make stupid promises but still do what they want to do at the end of the day. If i was forced then i would have to vote conservative even though ive never liked them but thats only if someone put a gun to my head. But nope i wont be wasting my time or effort to vote, i have much better things to do than to trudge off to the voting stations

I have similar views. I did not vote last time because of this, but I will this time for this reason - flux. The last few years of labours awful reign has really made it clear to me that a constant government is not what is good for this country (something that many people would agree with through the torys long reign). Constant flux in the government keeps parties fresh and eager to compete. When there is a huge majority and only one party is likely to win, it damages the democratic process because of the confidence of the ruling party. It is almost like having a temporary dictator. uring the first few years of term the party is fresh and eager to implement new policies, but after they begin to stagnate and become corrupted and complacent. Constant flux will allow that freshness to remain as long as possible. As such, I now believe that switching between labour and the torys would be ideal (possibly with a party staying for 2 terms at once if they have had an amazing first term), rather than having one party stay for too long and do too much damage. Thus, I will be voting for the conservatives to give the government and country a well needed swift kick up the butt. If they get in, I'll see how they do but will most likely vote for someone else in the next term.

All parties suck, that is exactly why we cant allow any one a monopoly on power. So please make an effort, get to the ballot box and get some flux into the democratic process!

Edit: think of it like this: not voting will do more damage to the country and everyone in it rather than voting for a party that may not be perfect (or even very good). Democracy requires citizen participation. Its not about voting for the perfect party (as I used to think) - it is simply about voting for the sake of constant change. That is what democracy is about IMO.

 

[nero120]

this needs to be a poll tbh.

Thats what I asked for! Where are the dons when you need 'em?!

 

[nero120]

IF I could vote, I would. But, because im 16, I cant.

I'd vote for conservatives if I could, they're scrapping University fees and I think that although some of their promises are purely on a vote-buying scenario some (like the civil servant cuts and lowering public spending ikncreases) can be attained.

I just feel that Tony Blair has proven himself to be a Liar over the Iraq war, they're quick enough to jump on the band wagon for votes but should actually be pro-active in the first case (prime example being the school dinners).

Only the tories are real opposition, and weak at that. It is looking set like he'll get his third term

The difference being that Michael Howard is actively telling people to hold him to account for the promises he makes. That is quite a bold statement and will effectively destroy his credibility if he got in and didnt implement his election promises. With all the mistrust in politics right now its just what is needed - some accountability.

 

[nero120]

If I'm in the country then I definitely will. I am not voting Labour, and I'm not sure about voting Conservative, so I think I will have to go with Lib Dem.

What categories do you want in the poll?

Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem, Green Party, UK Independence - anything else?

Also options for:

- Green
- Plaid Cymru
- SNP
- SSP
- Alliance Party
- DUP
- Sinn Fein
- SDLP
- UUP
- Not voting: don't agree with any party
- Not voting: Not eligable (so the others aren't left out )

 

[nero120]

How about:

Conservative
Labour
Lib Dem
Regional Party (Plaid Cymru, SNP, etc.)
Issues Party (Greens, UKIP)
Independent candidate
Not eligible
Eligible but not going to vote

I'll probably be voting for Labour to ensure the SNP don't get in, but I'd prefer to vote Lib Dem and would if there was PR involved.

Dammit - beaten to it!

 

[nero120]

There speaks the voice of innocence

By all means vote for the Conservatives if you are against Labour and their policies, but for goodness sakes, dont expect a politician to keep his promises.

Absolutely not, but there is a limit. I think the Torys will do the best (relatively speaking) out of all the parties IMO, but I also like Howards tough talking. Its all been done before I know, but voter apithy is at an all time low. If howard lies again it will push it even lower and I believe that that is something politicians DO NOT want. If that happens, real changes will need to be made to our political system and they don't want to mess up their power base do they?

 

[nero120]

Poll added

Thanks dude!

 

[nero120]

'Not eligible for voting'

Why shouldn't I be elligble to vote in the election though? I still have an opinion, and promises in parties manifestos will still affect me.

If you contribute nothing to the country, why should you get a say on how it's run?

 

[nero120]

It's nothing to do with if he "contributes". It's if he is under eighteen, in jail or is the Queen

mleh said:

Why shouldn't I be elligble to vote in the election though? I still have an opinion, and promises in parties manifestos will still affect me.

which sounded to me more of a question of the philosophy of voting, rather than the practicality of being of voting age, not a criminal nor a queen. His question also seemed to suggest that he believed he should be able to vote because:

a.) he has an opinion
and b.) promises in parties manifestos will still affect him

which I do not think is a very wise system on deciding who votes, so I offered a question in return as an answer.

How can you make sweeping generalisations like that?

How do you know I don't contribute anythign to the country? besides, for 4 years of my life i'll be paying taxes without a say in how they're spent.

What are you talking about, I made no generalisation - I simply answered the question you asked. If you were lacking in offering more information on your circumstances how was I to know? Your post suggested you should be able to vote because you have an opinion and decisions affect you, so I answered simply what you offered.

And besides, during every 4 years EVERYONE pays taxes without a say in how their spent. The only say they get is ONCE at the end of every 4 years, not continuously during the 4 years. Therefore it is a non argument - you have lost nothing.

 

[nero120]

My thoughts exactly. And if this is the case, surely they wouldn't know what they'd be letting themselves in for.

Labour for me. Or maybe LCA as a protest vote.

Well considering we've just experienced 8 years of labour hell, I don't think you can blame people if they want a change without having to listen to people harkening back 8-18 years ago. Besides, labour did far more damage than the tories during their 74-79 stint, are you seriously suggesting that people look to past performance as a judge on who to vote for?

 

[nero120]

I do have good reason, but at the end of the day, its an anonymous vote, and I do not wish to share how I vote with anyone else. I've been bought up and been told its rude to ask for who you vote for.

Then leave this thread.

 

[nero120]

Yes, at least recent past performance, the alternative involves actually believing MPs

MB

I agree that politicians cannot be taken at their word, but it is better to vote for change than let this current bunch of monkeys abuse their power and totally screw this country up. Our economic good fortune will not last forever.

 

[nero120]

In all honesty I believe that the Labour party have done an OK job in the last few years. Yes, Iraq was a huge **** up and Blair is a sicaphantic twonk but they have taken taxes and turned them into a better economy and improved the health service and education marginally. However the ethical and political stance of the LDs appeal to me more and hence get my vote

MB

I doubt anyone would say our economy is better than what labour inherited at the end of the tories reign. Lets not forget Brown has blown 5 billion of pension fund, and you cant keep raising taxes forever (much to the disagreement of labour ministers).

 

[nero120]

Spongers on the dole get to vote, so your argument is fundementally flawed

I REPEAT: it was a philosophical question - not practical. Labour wanted to let 16 year olds vote, which I think is absurd. Not only do most (if not all) 16 year olds understand NOTHING about the way the country is run, but most are still in education and not self sufficient. Yet really, since even prisoners are being considered to allow a vote then what the hell! Lets give everyone the vote who is past fetal development!

 

[nero120]

This implies that any change is good change a very dangerous concept

MB

It does and it is, but what is the alternative? Truthfully, we do not have choice in this 'democracy'. All parties lie and most are as incompetant and corrupted as each other. However, those are our choices and we can take it or leave it.

 

[nero120]

I was simply making a statment about what I feel, in reference to voting and following up and answering someone elses question. Whats wrong about that? Theres no need to be quite so blunt!

Of course, but coming into this thread and saying its rude to ask is pretty pointless. If you don't like it then there is no need to be posting here is there?

 

[nero120]

Not really, Its a discussion about who we'll be voting for, I pointed out that I will be voting, but I'm not saying for who!

Can I suggest if you wish to continue this, you E-Mail me, I'm sure the tread starter doesn't want his thread trashed!

I AM THE THREAD STARTER!!!!! MWWAAA HAAA HAAA HAAAA!!

No worries

 

[nero120]

You are joking, right? I don't see the mah00sive interest rates, the huge unemployment and the large number of properties being repossessed like they were when the Tories were in power.

K.

The large unemployment? Hmm. I doubt there are many more people actually working, but there are certainly a lot more people in education arent there?

 

[nero120]

D'OH!!!

/me dips head in shame!

Just pointing out really that not everyone wants to reveal who they vote for!

Thats fine, but I don't think it rude to ask!