UK Politics

[Nobody Interesting]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

I think he was suggesting more likely get something progressive with a small majority labour government rather than a hung parliament (and hung parliaments often don't last).

 

Firstly please provide tour evidence for 'hung parliaments often don't last' as I am sure you would want me to prove it (and something from the 1970's is not relevant in 2024.
Same question to you that I posed to them - how do I go about getting that small Labour majority with my vote without me and others who do whatever it is you suggest ending up giving Labour a huge majority and thus wasting my vote.

[steviewevie]

39 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Firstly please provide tour evidence for 'hung parliaments often don't last' as I am sure you would want me to prove it (and something from the 1970's is not relevant in 2024.
Same question to you that I posed to them - how do I go about getting that small Labour majority with my vote without me and others who do whatever it is you suggest ending up giving Labour a huge majority and thus wasting my vote.

 

Haven't been many hung parliaments since 70s has there? Only 2010 and 2017.

I'm not suggesting you do anything, couldn't give a flying f**k. But pink triangle was just saying a small majority labour govt could be more progressive than a hung parliament, because left wing labour MPs.

[lazyred]

45 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Firstly please provide tour evidence for 'hung parliaments often don't last' as I am sure you would want me to prove it (and something from the 1970's is not relevant in 2024.
Same question to you that I posed to them - how do I go about getting that small Labour majority with my vote without me and others who do whatever it is you suggest ending up giving Labour a huge majority and thus wasting my vote.

I also want a large labour majority but to answer your question. Voting for a small Labour majority is the same as voting for a coalition. You can't predict which you will get. There is not much danger if the main Labour alternative is not Tory.

By the way the 1970s is evidence coalitions can survive. The Lib-Lab pact kept Callaghan in Govt for a couple of years.

 

Edited May 6 by lazyred
typo

[Nobody Interesting]

21 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

Haven't been many hung parliaments since 70s has there? Only 2010 and 2017.

 

 

So one that lasted the full 5 year term and another that only collapsed because because members of the main party (ie Johnson and friends) bought it down from within because of Brexit.

So no real evidence that hung parliaments do not last long.

[Nobody Interesting]

21 minutes ago, lazyred said:

I also want a large labour majority but to answer your question. Voting for a small Labour majority is the same as voting for a coalition. You can't predict which you will get. There is not much danger if the main Labour alternative is not Tory.

By the way the 1970s is evidence coalitions can survive. The Lib-Lab pact kept Callaghan in Govt for a couple of years.

 

If I vote for what I believe in and many others do then even without MP's or just a couple that party and it's policies can influence whoever the government is - UKIP in 2014-2016 shows this does happen.

If I vote for any of the main three parties I am voting for many policies I very much do not agree with and if my views are aligned to any one of the three closer it might just be the Lib Dems (but that is by a small fraction over Labour and the Tories fall a distant last with the only policy I like being the smoking one.).

There are simply too many policies that I do not agree with from all 3 and so, for me, and lots of others I know voting for who comes closest to our views is the right vote as even if it is 'wasted' then so too is a vote for things I simply do not support.

Hopefully that all makes sense............................

PS If/when Labour win I sincerely hope they crack on and sort out the mess the UK is in, I would just prefer it to be with help from the other parties who tend to be more 'radical' than Labour.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Ok then - how does one go about voting in such a way to give Labour a small moinority?

Rhetorical question of course as there is no way I can do that - so I shall vote for the party whose policies are closest to my values and beliefs knowing they will not win but in the hope that the combined votes of all who do the same might, like with UKIP and Brexit, sway whoever is the government to change policy to try and gain those votes for themselves.

It depends what constituency you live. In some constituencies you can vote vote for who you choose knowing it won’t impact on the vote. If you are in a lab/con marginal a vote for a party like greens is effectively a vote for the torys.

[steviewevie]

I think I'll vote Green because I want bigger boobs.

[steviewevie]

 

[lazyred]

19 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

If I vote for what I believe in and many others do then even without MP's or just a couple that party and it's policies can influence whoever the government is - UKIP in 2014-2016 shows this does happen.
 

I'd say the Greens went through this phase in the late 90's/early 2000s. All mainstream parties accept man made climate change and moving to net zero. The Greens have evolved into a broader party that has to promote policies for Govt and they will be scrutinised for them.  

 

30 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

There are simply too many policies that I do not agree with from all 3 and so, for me, and lots of others I know voting for who comes closest to our views is the right vote as even if it is 'wasted' then so too is a vote for things I simply do not support.
 

 

I don't accept there are wasted votes just unintended consequences.  If you think Labour are as bad as the Tories then there is no reason to vote for them. I think you end up with nothing rather than something.

 

 

 

 

 

[stuie]

4 hours ago, steviewevie said:

 

another non issue that the majority of people don’t give a f**k about, despite the constant scaremongering! 

[pink_triangle]

24 minutes ago, lazyred said:

I'd say the Greens went through this phase in the late 90's/early 2000s. All mainstream parties accept man made climate change and moving to net zero. The Greens have evolved into a broader party that has to promote policies for Govt and they will be scrutinised for them.  

 

 

I don't accept there are wasted votes just unintended consequences.  If you think Labour are as bad as the Tories then there is no reason to vote for them. I think you end up with nothing rather than something.

 

 

 

 

 

I would argue greens can put forward policies that have little scrutiny with no plans to implement. That’s easy politics but not a route labour can take.

[Nobody Interesting]

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

It depends what constituency you live. In some constituencies you can vote vote for who you choose knowing it won’t impact on the vote. If you are in a lab/con marginal a vote for a party like greens is effectively a vote for the torys.

 

A vote for any party is a vote for that party and the 'if you vote for..... it is a vote for.....' argument to me is and always has been a bit ridiculous. If people cannot vote for who they want to for fear of getting someone they don't want so instead have to vote for someone else they don't want they get someone they don't want. I can't see you agreeing with that though.

I tried tactical voting i n the past. It made no difference.

I will vote for the party whose policies match my views at around 80-85% success rate rather than voting for a party whose policies match my views  around 10-20% (cos there is some overlap).

Imagine if all the people who wanted Brexit voted Tory rather than UKIP just in case Labour won - then those who wanted Brexit would likely have not got Brexit.

[Nobody Interesting]

34 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I would argue greens can put forward policies that have little scrutiny with no plans to implement. That’s easy politics but not a route labour can take.

 

The Green policies are some of the most exact costed there are out of all parties and have been for a long time.

[steviewevie]

Greens could definitely have an influence going forward...especially if Labour disappoint on the net zero stuff which is highly likely...but then again there is an anti net zero populist movement sweeping across EU which will likely come here too.

[fraybentos1]

Labour will likely get a sizeable majority. And good. Give them 5 years to show what they’re about and see if Starmer and  reeves can actually improve things. There should be no excuses if they have a big majority. I just hope they don’t waste too much time with playing it safe. The time to do radical things is when you’re newly elected and have some grace period. 
 

How things go at the 2029(?) election will largely depend on the economy and if the tories elect a total loony as leader (very possible). 

[steviewevie]

Despite polling and common sense I don't believe Tories will get kicked out until I see it actually happen, been burnt by this too many times in the past, so I will do the tactical vote thing. My area is super safe Labour so tactical vote website might say do what you like...but I will probably still vote Labour...this time...and see how they get on.

[steviewevie]

Reform surge

 

[Nobody Interesting]

2 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Greens could definitely have an influence going forward...especially if Labour disappoint on the net zero stuff which is highly likely...but then again there is an anti net zero populist movement sweeping across EU which will likely come here too.

 

I think you will find it is already here and called Reform and/or the ERG

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

I think you will find it is already here and called Reform and/or the ERG

 

and Galloway's lot. But expectations there will be a whole load of it in EU elections soon which could steer EU policies away from net zero stuff...and then there's potential Trump election in November. Hate to be a bore, but we really are f**ked.

[Neil]

5 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

evidence for 'hung parliaments often don't last'

have you noticed the snp liking for collapsing coalitions.

[Neil]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

and Galloway's lot.

who add a bit of anti- trans and homophobia, to their faux leftism. i expect owen jones to sign up imminently as he loves a bit of faux leftism, and no thinking.

Edited May 6 by Neil

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

A vote for any party is a vote for that party and the 'if you vote for..... it is a vote for.....' argument to me is and always has been a bit ridiculous. If people cannot vote for who they want to for fear of getting someone they don't want so instead have to vote for someone else they don't want they get someone they don't want. I can't see you agreeing with that though.

I tried tactical voting i n the past. It made no difference.

I will vote for the party whose policies match my views at around 80-85% success rate rather than voting for a party whose policies match my views  around 10-20% (cos there is some overlap).

Imagine if all the people who wanted Brexit voted Tory rather than UKIP just in case Labour won - then those who wanted Brexit would likely have not got Brexit.

I vote in the system that exists, not the system that I would like it to be. There are only 2 parties that can gain the most seats in the next election and in the competitive seats there are normally only 2 parties that can win.

 

Nobody would say tactical voting works all the time but when you look

at recent by-elections there would be more Tory MPs without it. I currently live in a constituency that only labour or Torys can win and on that basis I will vote labour, if I voted in a Lib Dem /tory marginal I would happily vote for Lib Dem’s

[Nobody Interesting]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

and Galloway's lot. But expectations there will be a whole load of it in EU elections soon which could steer EU policies away from net zero stuff...and then there's potential Trump election in November. Hate to be a bore, but we really are f**ked.

 

Not a bore at all - and I absolutely agree, we are f**ked unless science helps us out cos nobody seems to want to do what is needed to ensure we all have a place to live and most have no idea that immigration today is a mere dribble compared to what will come in future unless we do something fast.

[Nobody Interesting]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

I vote in the system that exists, not the system that I would like it to be. There are only 2 parties that can gain the most seats in the next election and in the competitive seats there are normally only 2 parties that can win.

 

Nobody would say tactical voting works all the time but when you look

at recent by-elections there would be more Tory MPs without it. I currently live in a constituency that only labour or Torys can win and on that basis I will vote labour, if I voted in a Lib Dem /tory marginal I would happily vote for Lib Dem’s

 

Which is great - but as I said I will not vote for parties who have policies that are totally against things I believe in. Sorry but that is just how my morals are.

So I vote where my morals and beliefs are supported which none of the main three do on those that are most important to me personally.

Anyway, I hope Labour win, but I hope they have to work with others too.

[zahidf]

36 minutes ago, Neil said:

who add a bit of anti- trans and homophobia, to their faux leftism. i expect owen jones to sign up imminently as he loves a bit of faux leftism, and no thinking.

Tbf to him, Owen Jones has attacked Galloway loads this week