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

[Mundu]

This would be my first ellection and at the moment I haven't been persauded to get up off my ass and vote for anyone.

 

[MuvverRussia]

tories here.

 

[mysticsniper]

I think they are all just as crap as each other, but being working class my vote will swing more for Labour

 

[Harley]

What I meant was I'd see them as equally bad and would never vote for one just because they were slightly less bad than the other if that makes sense.

The problem is, if there isn't anyone that you actually want to vote for, you're really left with two choices - you vote for the least bad, or you don't vote.

I'm not convinced by those that say if you don't vote, you shouldn't complain, because I didn't have any say in rigging the system the way it is, and if you vote, you effectively endorse the system. By not voting, or by spoiling the paper, it's about the only protest we can actually make and it shows in the apathy indicated by turnout levels.

But if you (the generic 'you', not you personally) aren't prepared to not vote at all, what real alternative is there but to vote for the least bad, when there isn't actually a party you want to endorse?

Voting for the 'least bad' is not a good strategy and about the only thing it has going for it is it's better than anything else I can think of.

I was probably writing too fast and lost track of what I was trying to say, sorry!

No problem. Been known to do that myself.

 

[iSam]

I cant vote yet, but I think that the Conservatives should be given a chance, I just think that Blair wont use his 3rd term in office very well.

 

[Admiral Huddy]

Torys for me.

My only worry for the torys is that they'll get the **** for what Labour leaves behind like last time.

 

[Haly]

The problem is, if there isn't anyone that you actually want to vote for, you're really left with two choices - you vote for the least bad, or you don't vote.

I'm not convinced by those that say if you don't vote, you shouldn't complain, because I didn't have any say in rigging the system the way it is, and if you vote, you effectively endorse the system. By not voting, or by spoiling the paper, it's about the only protest we can actually make and it shows in the apathy indicated by turnout levels.

But if you (the generic 'you', not you personally) aren't prepared to not vote at all, what real alternative is there but to vote for the least bad, when there isn't actually a party you want to endorse?

Voting for the 'least bad' is not a good strategy and about the only thing it has going for it is it's better than anything else I can think of.

No, I've gone for (and will be doing the same in the general election) voting for the third option, Liberal Democrat

 

[nero120]

The right to vote should not be based on any sort of contribution; it means there is no stop on those who do ‘contribute’ abusing those who are deemed not to. The vote being granted to all is how democracy works – limits, in this sense, create abuse. The vote is effectively your voice, if I take that away from you (for whatever reason), I can stamp on you and you can't even whimper.

Depends what side you approach from. The greeks believed that giving a vote to everyone was madness and mob rule, as such each democratic city state had strict rules on who was allowed to vote (examples are must be over 35, male, etc). I agree with that approach because it gives voting and political say worth. It says "if you work hard for our society then you shall be rewarded with a say on how it is run", whereas what we have now is complete political apithy from most voters. This is not because of politicians, but because none of the people either understand their commitment to democracy or really give a carp either way.

Also, part of a liberal democracy means the views of the majority cant oppress the views of the minority, so just because you don't get a say doesnt mean you are unprotected, it just means that you don't get a say on how the country is run. That seems pretty fair and logical to me.

 

[si_mats]

I really have no idea.

 

[Phoen1x]

Its quite funny - all of the arguments going around about "we need a change" and "change those at the top" are exaclt the same ones around when the Tories last lost power. Just shows that nothing changes, the goverment always eventually lose an election - and Labour are seen in exactly the same light as the Tories were...

 

[nero120]

Its quite funny - all of the arguments going around about "we need a change" and "change those at the top" are exaclt the same ones around when the Tories last lost power. Just shows that nothing changes, the goverment always eventually lose an election - and Labour are seen in exactly the same light as the Tories were...

Which is exactly how it needs to work! While a government is doing good it should stay in power, but in reality no government can keep doing positive things for more than 2 terms. Constant change is definitely what keeps the country sharp and competitive. Having a party in power longer than they are doing good is actually quite dangerous! Labour and Consertive are really two different sides to the same coin, but they create the balance and cannot exist without the other. To have too much of one is dangerous and the balance needs to be maintained by playing one of the other. I believe this is the only way our party-based democracy can properly function. The roles of the lesser parties are not important, but add to the scenery, it is the two main parties that define our government.

 

[Matthew-1985]

If I vote it will probably be Conservative.

 

[Visage]

A Tory government would be a disaster.

Britons are 1 TRILLION pounds in debt, at interest rates of 5% - we pay back 50 billion pounds a year in interest alone.

Under the tories last time, rates peaked at 15%.

Can the population really afford an extra bill of 100 billion pounds a year?

There would be a housing crash all over again, we'd be back to boom and bust and 3 million+ unemployed all over again....poll tax riots, jailed MPs, sleaze etc etc etc....

I can only imagine that the lead in the poll is down to the younger members of the site who dont remember what life was like in the early 90's....

 

[starscream]

I think thats a very good point. I'm 26 now so grew up with a conservative government. There may be a lot of problems now, but we better off now than in 1996. I'm not a labour supporter and won't be voting for them in the election (mainly because of blair/lies) but conservatives are not the answer.

 

[csmager]

What makes you so sure they'll do exactly the same thing again? As someone pointed out, the initial lot of problems were caused because of the utter mess Labour left them in in '79. Most of the reforms that were made during Thatchers Era were really needed (e.g. Trade Unions).

Interest rates aren't really very likely to rise to 15% the moment they get into power... The Tories have learnt from the ERM. Labour, it seems, haven't - Blair wants the Euro!

 

[Garp]

Well.. I must say I'm absolutely shocked at the pathetic levels the Lib Dems have stooped to again in this area. Surely they must think we're stupid or something? Regardless of policy issues, this kind of pamphlet is worse than mudslinging.

"Micheal Howards Conservative candidate". Not once is our Conservative MP referred to by name. Not once, whilst the Lib Dems candidates name is plastered througout.
The main graphic shows "how this area voted last time"... wrong. It shows how we voted in 2003, in our local council elections, not how we voted in the General Election. Our council is always a close fight between Tory and Lib Dem. Our General election is always strongly Tory, by a large percentage.

The funny thing is, these are exactly the same dirty underhanded tactics the local party got a large backlash for last time. They still haven't learnt...

 

[starscream]

Blair wants the Euro!

Good, the closer we get to Europe and the further away from USA the better IMO. I only wish we would make more of a commitment. This is one of the reasons I'm voting LibDem

 

[csmager]

Don't remember Black Wednesday then? The Euro is the Exchange Rate Mechanism with big 'NO EXIT' signs.

 

[Visage]

What makes you so sure they'll do exactly the same thing again? As someone pointed out, the initial lot of problems were caused because of the utter mess Labour left them in in '79. Most of the reforms that were made during Thatchers Era were really needed (e.g. Trade Unions).

So the Tory problems of the early 90's were caused by Labour in the 70's?

By the 1987 election, pretty much all traces of th unions were gone, allowing the Tories to embark on their privatisation strategy. They sold off all our assets and *STILL* ran up record deficits.

They also oversaw the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in history, and still ahve time to introduce one of the most divisive taxes of modern times - one that lead to riots on the streets of London.

Interest rates aren't really very likely to rise to 15% the moment they get into power... The Tories have learnt from the ERM. Labour, it seems, haven't - Blair wants the Euro!

Maybe not the minute they get into power, but they *will* rise. The Tories seem set on pumping more money into consumers pockets. WHile on the surface this may seem like a good idea, it will lead to inflation. Britain is already growing at 3% a year. Any more would lead to an inflationary scenario, followed by rising interest rates, and recession.

Boom and bust all over again.

 

[Visage]

Don't remember Black Wednesday then? The Euro is the Exchange Rate Mechanism with big 'NO EXIT' signs.

Its nothing of the sort. Black Wednesday was a result of the pound being eneterd into ERM at too high a rate against other currencies. With the euro there are no other currencies, so no rate manipulation is required. European interest rates are historically much lower than UK rates, so anyone with a mortgage would benefit.

Its a bit of a moot point though, as entry will not happen in the next parliament anyway.