The 2015 General Election

[Genie]

It's just such an uninspiring election

You have tories helping rich and shafting middleclass and poor

Labour with A very weak leader, who can't be trusted after 12 years of mess. In addition they will raise taxes and go to bed with the snp which is more frightening

Lib dems unelectable as a sole party after all the lies and uturns they have demonstrated in the coalition

Ukip crazy leader whose only policy is to exit the eu. So let's say we do leave the eu what else do you plan to do? Seems it's their only policy.

Greens complete nutters read "their manifesto" as their leader keeps telling us and you see what crap they have. Supporting terrorism for example. Madness

Seems you have to vote which one is less shit meh

Pretty much summed up my thoughts on this election. I'm thinking Tories are the least worst in a "better the devil you know" kind of way. Edited April 6, 2015 by Genie

[dont_do_it_doug.]

 

With respect I think that people who don't vote don't have a right to an opinion either. 

They have a right to do whatever they want, and have an opinion on anything too. It's just that, if they don't vote, nobody cares what they want, or what their opinion is.

 

 

What makes you think that? What makes you think that a political party is not just as interested in acquiring my vote as it is yours? I have not said that I will never vote, I have done so many times previous, only that not a single one of the current lot inspires me to do so. If there is ever a political party that is able to capture the minds of those currently apathetic and convert that into crosses on the paper then you have yourself a win.

 

I have political ideals and an opinion on how I would like to be ruled. That nobody is able to meet those very loose ideals (and they are loose enough) does not render my opinion invalid surely?  

[chrisp65]

On the subject of whether the main parties are interested in the votes of non-voters. To date in this election, my own little social experiment suggests not.

 

Three of the parties have been around here canvassing a couple of times with the Labour and tory lot doing a fair bit of doorstep chatting. I've told both that I'm not very likely to vote for them, but my wife is. As a result, my missus is now receiving a couple of mail drops a week from them both. I told Plaid I would probably vote for them but there was no way my wife would. Subsequently, I've been sent leaflets and been asked to put up a poster in the window (I haven't).

 

That looks to me like they are all lining up to rely on getting their low hanging fruit / core vote definitely mobilised and out to vote.

 

Once you say 'no thanks' there appears to be zero effort to persuade you over to their cause.

 

So being a non voter appears, so far around here in this election, a sure fire recipe to be ignored.

[snowychap]

Have you said to those respective candidates that either you or your wife won't vote full stop or just won't vote for them?

It appears like the latter which would suggest that the result of your experiment is that even those who do vote are ignored.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Perhaps on this occasion, in your constituency, that is the case. It would not surprise me as much as it is disappointing. However I am sure that you concede that does not make it a blanket fact. 

[chrisp65]

It's definitely not a blanket fact, it's what I suspected and I think it's what I proved - they are after the core vote and not 'the others'.

 

So yes, I'd concede I haven't told anyone that we weren't voting, so what they are doing is ignoring the opposition. But it's my experiment, so when I write up the paper, it'll say they ignore non-voters.

 

As yet, absolutely no sign of the UKIP or Lib candidates, not a poster or a leaflet. 

[dAVe80]

Other than knowing the name of my current MP, I've not seen mention of the names of any of the candidates running in my constituency. We're one month a way from voting, and I'm non the wiser of even the names of the people who want me to vote for them. The only leaflet I've had through the door, was a leaflet outlining the Green Party's plans in my area, but even that has no mention of the name of their candidate. I'm not voting for the party, or the leader, I'm voting for the person who will represent me at Westminster. Surely I should get to know their ******* name?! 

[blandy]

On the subject of whether the main parties are interested in the votes of non-voters. To date in this election, my own little social experiment suggests not...

.. looks to me like they are all lining up to rely on getting their low hanging fruit / core vote definitely mobilised and out to vote.

So being a non voter appears, so far around here in this election, a sure fire recipe to be ignored.

Aye, and not only are they not interested in non-voters, they're not interested in voters in non-marginal seats.

 

I think it's partly a problem of the system.

If you live in a safe Tory/Labour/SNP/etc. seat then the other prties know they're not going to get anywhere, so they don't bother. The incumbent doesn't need to bother, as they'll get back in. SO no one gives a damn, basically.

There are on or two exceptions, where the sitting MP has done something that's roundly miffed the people in his/her seat (Clegg, for example), but by and large the parties only care, or make any effort where they've something likely to lose or gain.

If there was some form of PR, then every vote would matter, and every non-voter would be worth making an effort to persuade, as they'd actually have a potential impact on the result.

[tonyh29]

So on this Europe lark are Labour right to deny the public a say on the basis they know better , or should the people be given a chance to have a voice ....democracy if you like

And has Blair coming out in support of Ed , cost him lots of votes now as a result

[Demitri_C]

to be fair to ed he is right there are more important issues than europe in this country

[Condimentalist]

So on this Europe lark are Labour right to deny the public a say on the basis they know better , or should the people be given a chance to have a voice ....democracy if you like

And has Blair coming out in support of Ed , cost him lots of votes now as a result

 

Well we don't have a referendum on everything do we? Where, for example, is our referendum of TTIP, which doesn't pool sovereignty as with the EU but seeks to negotiate it away to private interests?

 

An EU referendum will be pretty disruptive but for what it's worth I think the public will vote to stay in and at least we can put the issue to bed for a while. Hopefully not until a Tory opposition has torn itself to shreds in the campaigning phase though 

[Demitri_C]

and like tony said why ed would authorise bliar is a death sentence

[meregreen]

 

 

With respect I think that people who don't vote don't have a right to an opinion either. 

They have a right to do whatever they want, and have an opinion on anything too. It's just that, if they don't vote, nobody cares what they want, or what their opinion is.

 

 

What makes you think that? What makes you think that a political party is not just as interested in acquiring my vote as it is yours? I have not said that I will never vote, I have done so many times previous, only that not a single one of the current lot inspires me to do so. If there is ever a political party that is able to capture the minds of those currently apathetic and convert that into crosses on the paper then you have yourself a win.

 

I have political ideals and an opinion on how I would like to be ruled. That nobody is able to meet those very loose ideals (and they are loose enough) does not render my opinion invalid surely?  

 

I wasn't specifically referring to you personally.As I said in my post, people have the right to have any opinion they choose to hold. Sadly, if they choose not to exercise their vote , then,sadly, to a politician, their opinions are invalid.You'll only influence the political process if you take part in it. Our vote is all we have.For good or bad, it should be used.Even if no party perfectly mirrors your hopes and wishes, vote for the one that is closest, even if only marginally. Voting may make a difference. not voting, almost certainly,will change nothing.. 

Edited April 7, 2015 by meregreen

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

The people almost certainly don't know better when it comes to being in Europe. A referendum would be an absolute farce with plenty of decisions based on little more than little Englander bollocks or a general dislike of the French.

 

No, I'm happy to leave that decision to people who've spent the best part of their lives understanding the pros and cons of EU membership.

 

Which, admittedly, is probably a handful of academics.

[smetrov]

 

So on this Europe lark are Labour right to deny the public a say on the basis they know better , or should the people be given a chance to have a voice ....democracy if you like

And has Blair coming out in support of Ed , cost him lots of votes now as a result

 

Well we don't have a referendum on everything do we? Where, for example, is our referendum of TTIP, which doesn't pool sovereignty as with the EU but seeks to negotiate it away to private interests?

 

An EU referendum will be pretty disruptive but for what it's worth I think the public will vote to stay in and at least we can put the issue to bed for a while. Hopefully not until a Tory opposition has torn itself to shreds in the campaigning phase though 

 

 

In a true democracy you would have a referendum on everything. But that would be terribly cumbersome and probably unworkable. I really don't see the need for a referendum on EU membership - Its pretty easy to work out where each party stands on europe - and vote accordingly.. 

[blandy]

The Europe referendum thing that the tories have said they'll do in 2 years if they get in, is basically because there's a significant rump of the tory party that wants to leave Europe, and it's the only way the less mad part of that party could hold them all together, just about, and stop them all effing off to the UKIP nutters and so ruining their chances of getting to be Gov't again - it's just self preservation of their jobs.

 

There is of course also a fair part of the population that would like to leave yurp, or if asked would say they do. But as to how many people think it's that big a deal either way, it's not so much of a big thing for most people. Those that it is a big deal for tend to be almost rabid about it, and it tends to be the more elderly (though not exclusively) - people who remember the world war 2.

 

It seems to me it's sort of replaced hanging as the thing a bunch of people absolutely insist is sooo important. The rest might have a view one way or the other, but they're not really bothered.

 

Europe and leaving will go the way of the hanging thing too. No longer an issue. Or like Fox huntering it'll be a niche thing, but again the majority, by far, will have moved on with it, accepted and realised it's from the past and really isn't something that's of any matter.

 

Even the UKIPs have sort of moved on a bit, and are now as much (they say) about foreigners and other stuff that they can use to attract whatever group of disparate malcontents with single issues. Incoherent crap, basically.

[AshVilla]

Some of the PR stuff from the likes of Cameron and Milliband really has been cringe worthy these past couple of days

 

I know it's all part of getting elected but do they really need to be so cheesy

[sharkyvilla]

Just a hypothetical question, if the EU didn't exist and you were in charge of starting a new union up with the 28 states currently in it, would you choose to have complete freedom of movement?

My only gripe with the EU is that they didn't amend the rules when they added so many new countries so that they could have some sort of control of the numbers coming in.

[snowychap]

Just a hypothetical question, if the EU didn't exist and you were in charge of starting a new union up with the 28 states currently in it, would you choose to have complete freedom of movement?

Yes. Absolutely, yes.

[chrisp65]

I guess the people should be allowed to move at least as freely as the money and the tax address.

 

Anyway, if everyone has to go back to their home country, where are we going to put the 5.5 MILLION  Brits that live abroad (google the newspaper of your choice for the figure, 2 million in europe. 3 million further afield - even the Heil agrees the figures)?