The Afterword

Musings on the byways of popular culture

Menu

Navigation

You are here: Home / Forum / And I Ain’t Voting Anymore

And I Ain’t Voting Anymore

by 77 Comments

And its not due to that competent stand up comic who has morphed into a spoilt Victoria child cum Dickensian rent boy with O-Levels, yes, Russell Brand.

My constituency is as safe as mansions. Not only due to the fact that Home Secretary, Theresa May, is the MP but that it has been Tory True Blue since the days of William Pitt. The nearest party to them at the 2010 election was the Lib Dems who just about made half the votes that May took to increase her majority. Labour are down with the nutters and racists – sadly the BNP got more votes than UKIP did. I’m guessing this year UKIP will fare better and the Lib Dems will be decimated. The turnout here is pretty high, better than average so it’s not for trying that the opposition to Mrs May face defeat.

So come, May 7th (although I may be away for work anyway) why should I bother? My vote will make bugger all difference. I’d love to be in a marginal seat where there is a real chance that you can shape the future of your community but we never see any candidates knocking doors round here, barely a smiling mug on poster that isn’t Theresa’s. On the TV the hustings are being husted, the issues being debated yet none of it is worth the effort here it seems.

The PR system was rejected by the electorate after a pitiful debate which basically boiled down to “It’s too complicated for you, Joe Public, let us carry on” with Labour\Conservatives not wanting to be turkeys voting for Christmas and the “Yes to AV” mob accused of wanting to let the BNP into power. Admittedly an AV system would let Farage & his toadies get more seats but I can’t be the only one who feels utterly powerless under the current one?

Men and women over the years have fought and died to enable me to vote in a free democratic country so why does it all seem so pathetically nebulous. Billy Connolly once said “Don’t vote , it only encourages the bastards!” – a nice quip that Brand has turned into the hollowest of student debating society guff. Why make the effort when you can feel the pointlessness of your opinion slipping into the void of the ballotbox

None of the above seems to be the only answer. If only it was an option

1

Comments

  1. I thought Salwarpe made a very good point in another thread when he said: “I came to the conclusion some time ago that I’d rather vote for a party rather than against the worst alternative, playing the long game that those working to bring about the policies I agree with are strengthened by any votes they get.” That last part really struck a chord with me. If I lived in the UK I’d vote Green for that reason.

    • I’m with sal.

      All votes count, even if they only reduce a large majority by a fraction of a percentage point. Not everything we do in life has to create some sort of tipping point which radically and directly changes things.

      I honestly couldn’t care less if my vote is in a marginal or in a safe seat. It’s my vote: I spend it on who I want, and in doing so render my own tiny contribution to the greater whole which is our democracy.

      It’s a bit (just a little bit, mind) like the Afterword 100 greatest albums poll which comes round every now and then. Each and every time I proudly chip in my selection of I Get Wet, knowing full well it has no chance at all of making the top 100 because the rest of you lot are such a bunch of tin-eared taste vacuums. Such is my cross, and I bear it willingly, warmed by the knowledge that change – true change – takes time, and that today’s vote for Andrew W.K. is tomorrow’s blog-wide damascene conversion, and group slam-dance to Party Til You Puke.

      Our time will come, comrades. Oh yes.

      • Thanks for the compliment, @gary and @bingo-little. I recognise the impotence of being stranded in a constituency with a cast iron majority for a party you wouldn’t vote for. But democracy is not just about putting a mark on a piece of paper once every 5 years, is it? In some way, being one of millions voting for one of a few parties with a fixed raft of policies, not all of which they will want/be able to implement if they get into government is the last important way of effecting change. Conversations like those that happen on this site, with people you respect, are where you convince of or are convinced of good ideas. Change is a wave – many people in many different places coming to awareness and the confidence that that awareness is shared. I do believe that the truth will out.

        Oh, and on the subject of awareness – can I make a techy plea that more Afterworders use the @ symbol when name checking? I’m not sure if it works, but I think that’s currently the only way others get alerted to the fact that they’re being talked about. And we all know there’s only one thing worse than being talked about.
        I happened to stumble on this thread and the rather pleasant ego stroking, but it could so easily have passed me by.

  2. [URL=http://s21.photobucket.com/user/Sunburst369/media/CB-MASCWYAA5Ttb.jpg-large_zpsgsitib4f.jpeg.html][IMG]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b268/Sunburst369/CB-MASCWYAA5Ttb.jpg-large_zpsgsitib4f.jpeg[/IMG][/URL]

  4. We disenfranchise ourselves, us comfortable socialists. We marched and chanted at college and stood in solidarity with our less-well-off comrades; and we never changed our views, but we worked hard for 25 years and felt we deserved a nicer house, on a nice quiet, leafy street where there’s no crime and the bins get collected on time. And we wanted the best for our kids, so we moved nearer to good schools, and we liked being able to keep our slightly-better car off the street, because that kept the insurance down. And we liked having good independent shops and cafes and theatres on the High Street, and a decent commute into London, and neighbours who didn’t play music all night. And then, one day every five years, we realise that we’ve surrounded ourselves with Tory voters and our own vote is useless.

    But then we’ve got a Green MP in the next door constituency to mine because people got out and voted. When I was a kid in Eastbourne, our MP was killed by the IRA, but his 26,000 majority was overturned in the by-election because the Tories got complacent. The only wasted vote is the one you don’t cast.

  5. The only effect of electoral apathy will be to allow lunatic fringe parties like UKIP to gain a foothold. That old cliche ‘that’s how Nazi Germany started’ is a cliche for a reason.

    • UKIP feed off people who feel powerless and the Nazi rise to power had absolutely nothing to do with voter apathy rather than a particular blend of economic conditions, fresh political tactics achieved through technology and propaganda and appealing to the basest desires of the populous. Which I admit is a bit like UKIP

  6. A huge irony also being that the PR referendum was partly lost due to the fear of letting in coalition governments. Whereas Westminster’s FPTP system is giving us just that on 7 May, whereas Scotland’s PR system returned a majority SNP government. Regardless of what you think of the parties involved, if everyone’s vote is truly equal then PR has to count for something.

    The trouble is that, under FPTP, litereally millions of votes are worth less than others: I’m sorry Chiz but for far too many people the maths means precisely that their vote is wasted.

    • Exactly. We have an imperfect electoral system (PR would be much better), but not voting is not an option. Vote for what you believe in, for the laws you would want to live under.

      To not vote is to basically say that everyone who struggled for universal suffrage wasted their time. To not vote is to allow nutters like UKIP a toehold on power. To not vote is to give in to apathy. To not vote is to give up your right to complain, because you didn’t protest using your ballot paper.

      So vote. It’s more important this time than ever.

  8. I am 47 and have only once voted for a general election candidate who got into parliament. That’s not likely to change in this safe Conservative seat this time but it won’t stop me voting come May. If I don’t vote the decision is made for me by others, the largest number of whom will vote for someone I never would.

  9. I live in either the same or the neighbouring constituency to DFB. I suppose if you look at it in terms of strategic voting, it’s a wasted vote, and I certainly would prefer a better and more representative system. But it’s the only real voice I’ve got and I’m going to use it because the party I’m voting for is the closest to representing what I think, and that’s all you can do. And if enough people who think like I do do it, there might be an upset. But the thing is, I chose to live here. I knew what I was getting into. I know there won’t be an upset, but I can still express my opinion and I refuse to just give up.

  10. Also the absolute totals in terms of the popular vote have some significance when there’s no overall majority in seats as a way of conferring legitimacy. And if the one you voted for doesn’t get in you have full licence to bleat about it on social media for the next five years. Bargain!

  11. I’ve spent my entire voting life messing about. I’ve lived in areas with huge majorities, usually for Labour. I’ve voted for almost everybody; Raving Loonies, Greens, Tories, even. I’ve spoiled my ballot paper in as many ways I can think of (I was most proud of a six candidate choice when I put an ‘X’ against one and a tick against another – sort that one out, Returning Officer!).

    Now, for the first time, I’m in a marginal (in Labour’s top ten hit list). I’m inundated with people desperate for my vote. I’m beside myself! Sometimes, I feel overwhelmed by the responsibility. I am fifty-six years old.

    • Y’see – this is where I don’t get the logic of some votes being more valuable than others.

      I live in an area with a 10,000+ Tory majority. You live in a marginal. Your vote is, in theory, more important and precious. It will certainly be campaigned harder for.

      But the stark reality is that neither of our votes will actually decide the respective contest. Even if your chosen candidate is elected with a tiny majority of, say, 20 – they would still have been elected even if you’d stayed at home and refused to participate. It is almost unprecedented for an individual to actually decide an electoral outcome, which seems to be what some folk require in order for the process to be worth participating in.

      What you are actually doing is helping to decide not the outcome of the local battle, but the size of the majority. Which is exactly the same thing I’ll be doing with my Tory safe seat. So what’s the theoretical difference?

      We need to move the focus away from outcomes. If you want your vote to determine an electoral outcome then you should avoid participating in any democratic process involving more than a dozen or so people, because the odds are massively stacked against you. The whole point of democracy is to disperse power, not to consolidate it in individuals.

      • Very rational & reasonable, as always Bingo.

        But, emotionally, I feel that if I rustle up some family and friends we could swing the seat. Previously, me and my mates had no chance of doing so. Plus, Nicky Campbell is coming to visit. The whole business is more exciting and bristling with possiblities. Prior to this time, voting was dull & boring.

        Are there figures on trun-out in marginals as opposed to huge majorities? My bet is that the turn-out is higher in marginals

        • I’d guess turn out is way higher in marginals.

          But that’s just the point: I think what people are looking for is the illusion of great involvement and importance, an emotional sense that they’re right at the heart of things.

          If I may speculate wildly…. we live in a “me” culture now, where the cult of the individual is at an all time high and people want to be made to feel like they’re unique and important. Personally, I think it’s a cultural reaction to globalisation: the awareness that we’re a single ant in a nest of 7 billion is more far glaring that it was before, and the average person probably interacts across their lifetime with a hundred times more people than their ancestors would have a couple of hundred years ago, and across multiple continents to boot.

          People don’t want to be one of the pack any more. They want to distinguish themselves and they want attention and gratification. It’s what reality TV feeds on, it accounts for a good proportion of the appeal of social media, etc. I’m not saying everyone is consciously operating in this way, but that it’s a rising tide across our society, and that I suspect it’s impacting how a lot of people feel about our elections: why the hell would anyone want to participate in a process during which they are largely anonymous and as an output of which their lack of individual consequence is driven home to them? It’s against the trend of nearly all modern life.

          I honestly believe it’s a major part of what generates this reticence to engage (to be clear, I’m not pointing a finger at DFB here, I’m talking at a much more macro level) – there’s no endorphin rush to voting, no totting up of “likes” against your name, no hyper-individualised position to be taken to distinguish yourself from the pack. It’s a collective action in a culture that no longer values the collective.

          I thought it was telling that the 2008 US Presidential election saw a record turn-out, an energized youth vote and scads of interviews to camera in which voters proclaimed their desire to be “part of history”. It genuinely scares me that large numbers would vote for a politician for that reason, as seems to have been the case with Obama. It’s undoubtedly wonderful progress to have an African-American in the White House, but “being part of history” is a daft, self-serving rationale for granting someone your vote, and it speaks volumes as to what people really want from their election experience.

          Could all be total bollocks, but it’s a thought that rattles round my head every few months. I think our current political class are of relatively poor quality, but then they’re subject to a much more intrusive media than ever before, and it’s pretty hard to be statesmanlike when people are going out of their way to take photos of you in mid-blink while eating. I think there’s something more here going on than just poor quality politicians: I think that the electorate are also a little lazier, a little more complacent and a little more demanding of entertainment and self-affirmation than once they were.

          Like I say: wild speculation and I’m sure it’ll have holes picked in it, but I’ll put it out there nonetheless. Personally, I say engage with the whole thing, read the manifestos, pick the party whose views most closely resemble your own, cast your vote and don’t expect a warm glow and a pat on the back for having done so.

          OOAA

          • The truth is we have had a right of centre government for over thirty-five years. John Major was probably more to the left than Blair/Brown! The nation is naturally conservative. Our governments operate in a capitalist system that subsidises big companies. They soon get persuaded to behave in a corporate no matter how left-leaning they start. As a result, politics is boring, selfish and corrupt. At least, that’s the impression I get and I have a feeling I’m not the only one. No wonder the electorate, as a whole, is dispirited, even more so in areas of huge majorities.

            You, Bingo, are exceptional. You care about all this stuff. All my life, I’ve felt my vote is pointless, that no party represented my views and that all politicians are creative with the truth. Margaret Thatcher won the first election I was able to vote in and the differences between each government since have been barely perceptible to me. And, I don’t think I’m the only one feeling this way.

            Living in a marginal, I am now beside myself because my vote still matters barely a jot. The next lot will be much the same as the last. Tory, Labour, both much the same.

            May well spoil my ballot paper again.

            *Sigh*

            • That’s very kind, tigger, but I’m not sure I agree about all recent governments being right of centre or the nation being naturally conservative.

              I’m an unashamed Blairite. I favour public sector spending, a recognition that large businesses are not (always) the enemy and an internationalist approach to foreign policy. Most of all, I believe in political pragmatism – I don’t want my leaders to be ideological. Ideally, I would also like them to genuinely embrace the future, rather than pander to this country’s native tendency to wish we could all retreat to the safety and security of the 1950s.

              The above doesn’t mean that I agree with everything that the last Labour government did, it’s just the checklist of what I look for.

              Blair, for me, was fractionally left of centre (and certainly to the right of Major), which is probably where I myself fall on the political spectrum. That said, it’s next to impossible to have a sensible discussion re: Blair on the internet, so god knows what the consensus is on his place in the political landscape.

              When I look at the major parties now they don’t look remotely the same to me. Ed Miliband will never be a great leader, but what he’s peddling is markedly to the left of Cameron and Osborne. I also try to give policiticans they’re due – they’re not all feckless, very few of them are outright evil and I think they’re too often all tarred with the same brush because it’s far easier to express disenfranchisement with politics than it is to get off our backsides and engage.

              I’ll be voting Labour this time. They don’t check all my boxes but they’re the ones who I think care the most about the disaffected while also facing the prospect of having to make good on the odd campaign promise. Furthermore, I look at the rough treatment Miliband is being given by the right wing press and I conclude he must be doing something right to attract that level of aggression.

              He’s far from an ideal candidate, but he’ll have to do.

              • I see a few gestures that place them left or right but won’t touch that many people nor have an real financial benefit (inheritance tax, nom-doms). I see almost equal austerity (in the scheme of things). I see both imposing stupid targets on the NHS (mid-wives, 48 hours to see a GP, seven day working, same day appointments for over 75s). I see both promising uncosted spending. I see both chasing down tax avoidance (the coalition has done better in this respect than any previous government).

                The major differences are that Labour will reorganise the NHS again and Conservatives will hold an EU referendum.

                Interestingly, I think Miliband is growing in confidence. He looks more in charge than Cameron.

      • Thanks @bingo-little – this chimes with a philosphical question I’ve pondered for a while: if you bought a single which got to No 1 that week (we’re going back in time 35 years, of course) then have you actually played a part in getting it to No 1? Surely the other sales were enough on their own to get it to that place, whether or not you bothered to buy it?

        The answer is that you have indeed “helped” it to get to No 1, even if your purchase on its own didnlt make the difference between No 1 and No 2 (fnaar etc).

        Another analogy might be if your mate’s car needed a push start: you and 3 pals give it a push and get it going. If you hadn’t bothered, and just left your 3 pals to push start it, they’d probably still have succeeded. Your effort didn;t make the difference, but you did help start it if you joined in.

        I think @dogfacedboy situation is akin to starting to push start a car where the handbrake is left on: no matter how many of you try, you’ll fail. So in what sense have you “helped”? There’s maybe a broader social experience, but you’re right, it can’t all be about outcomes. Because the system is currently geared up to lock too many of us out of affecting the outcome.

        • @douglas
          One way to look at it using your analogies is you bought the single because you liked it and you wanted to have it to listen again, and weren’t that concerned with it getting to #1
          Or you helped your mate push his car because it was the right thing to do.

          You vote because you want to vote for the candidate you like (regardless of whether they win), and it means something to you (regardless of the end result).

          I know that last sentence doesn’t mean the same to everyone, but thats my view, as simplistic as it probably appears.

          I live in the US so I have lost my vote in the UK, and I am not a US citizen….so choose to ignore me if you wish.

          • If the 80s singles chart was like the Westminster First Past the Post system… (Glissando…) record shops would only sell Cliff and Billy Bragg singles. The only songs on Top of the Pops or Radio One would be by Cliff or Billy Bragg. If you wanted something else (e.g. Shaky) you can buy that, of course! It’s a free country!

            But if you don’t live in the right area, your Shaky purchase won’t count towards the singles chart. Also, when you get home and look in your carrier bag, hoping to slap “This ole house” on the turntable – it might well be a Cliff or Billy Bragg single (depending on the policy of the record store).

            But it’s not fair is it? How will Shaky ever get to number one? Well…there’s no use whining! Move to a Shaky-friendly area and if enough of you buy the single – well, who knows?

            What do you mean you don’t want to buy singles any more?

            • Wait – you live in an area where your vote literally isn’t counted at all?

              Or do you mean that Shaky just has very little chance of reaching number one, regardless of your purchase?

              We have this simile on the rack, may as well torture it properly.

              • Well worth torturing to within an inch of its life, so…

                My Shaky purchase is counted…but it doesn’t matter. Even if 1000 friends came in and bought Shaky’s single – because I live in Clifftown, populated by 10,000 loyal Cliff fans.

                If moved to another town, my Shaky purchase *might* make a difference. But because I live in Clifftown, only the Cliff purchases actually affect the chart position.

                Same with Barking and Billy Bragg. 10,000 Billy Bragg fans will always buy his latest. Me and my 1,000 Shaky lovin’ fans will buy Shaky – but the Billy Bragg single will be the only one that counts when they tot up the charts.

                So two towns together – 10% of the singles bought are by Shaky. Surely this means he should feature in the hit parade in some way? No. Because Shaky didn’t “win” in Clifftown or Barking.

                Someone will count up that Shaky sold 2,000 singles – but it doesn’t get him in the charts or Top of the Pops because Gallup only notes who was No 1 in those towns. Any other artist who doesn’t sell as much as Cliff in Clifftown or Billy Bragg in Barking is also discarded.

                Cliff and Billy Bragg take turns at Number 1 for decades. The population, a bit bored, decides not to buy singles any more. Cliff and Billy are not prepared to talk about changing the system because they love being on Top of the Pops.

        • If my mate’s car is broken down and everyone else is pushing it to try and get it going, you’d better believe I’d be chipping in, particularly if the alternative is to stand on the side of the road loudly predicting that the others are wasting their time and will never get it going.

          I’d probably start by releasing the handbrake though.

          You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only etc etc etc.

  12. The theme of the disenfranchised voter marooned in a safe seat seems to be “it’s not perfect, but it’s all we’ve got…” – is that good enough? If I had stayed in England in all likelihood I would have had a lifetime of wasted votes.

    If the majority is 20,000 or 10,000 – it doesn’t matter. The sitting MP says “cool!” and carries on. The MP is not bothered about the size of his/her mandate until the run up to the next General Election.

  13. My constituency is also a safe Tory seat, although curiously it became Labour for a couple of years because the MP crossed the floor and didn’t call a by-election. Whatever you might think of Shaun Woodward (and I don’t suppose he has many admirers), he’s not stupid enough to believe he would have won even if it was the only honourable thing to do, so he buggered off to St Helens and they replaced him with David Cameron.

    I’ll be away for the election so will have to get a postal vote, which is annoying because I particularly like going to the polling station to do my bit. But I shall vote anyway, pissing in the wind though it may be. The one slightly more entertaining part of having the PM for your MP is that you get a dozen or so of the more colourful candidates.

  14. I live in a constituency that is safe Tory as well. If I didn’t vote, I’d feel like I have agreed with them. So I’m going to vote. I’m not a huge fan of Ed but I think he is the best of the choices available. Mind you, Yateley is (or was) the home of the Monster Raving Loony Party and we have a candidate standing….

    • My very thoughts. I live in the same const. as DFB and would agree that She Of The Shoes ain’t goin’ nowhere.

      However my cross will reflect my flat-capped, woodbine and rickets working class roots.

  15. I have lived in an ultra-safe Conservative constituency for most of my adult life and have had moments of serious doubt in the past over whether or not my vote is wasted. However I have always voted because as others have said it adds to the overall vote against and lends support to those with whose views you are in most accord.
    Interestingly, in my village at the moment the only posters and boards that have been put up are for the Labour party. I suspect the outcome will be the same as usual but it does give me hope of a closer vote here than in recent times. Exercise your franchise comrades!

  16. As someone who has never fully supported any main party and who has total disregard for the current politics of the global free market agenda, all variant shades of the same, I will say this. I will be voting Labour. To not vote in this election, or to have a long term conscience pleasing vote for a fringe party is all very well, but could result in a recurrence of the most blatantly ideologically vicious and inhumane government we have ever seen, and if this happens again it will set a precedent. If you care about the elderly, the disabled, the NHS etc then the Tories must be vanquished. I am in no way saying that Labour’s hands are clean, or will go anyway far enough with their agenda for my liking, but the alternative is unthinkable. I will not have that on my conscience. The choice is stark and simple and not voting/fringe party voting is a luxury that we cannot afford in three weeks time. Not with what’s at stake.

    • Well said Rob. Couldn’t agree more. Except.. down where you are the Lib Dems have tiny majorities (Somerton 2k, Wells 800, Mid Dorset 200). The despicable Laws has 13,000 but even that could go blue (Labour in your constituency got 5% of the vote in 2010). So if ever there was a case for tactical voting to ‘vanquish the Tories’ this is probably it. Much as I hate the idea of propping up the treacherous Lib Dems and the expenses-cheat incumbent.

  17. The South West is full of Lib Dem fiefdoms. Stole them from under the arrogant lazy noses of the Tories. Problem is, I just can’t bring myself to vote for them. If I really wanted to be ultra cynical the only way to give the Lib Dems a karmic kick in the bollox would be Ukip, and that’s not an option. Either are the Greens here, and besides, too much fluffy brained nonsense from an otherwise pretty decent party morality wise. Preserve the environment and open the borders! Juvenile rubbish.

  18. A couple of themes have emerged on this thread that I don’t really agree with (or perhaps just don’t understand).

    1. Why is that, if you don’t vote, you are more likely to allow nutters and fringe parties to get representation? Surely, the more people who don’t vote, the more likely it is that the status quo will prevail? Labour and Conservative have huge numbers of core voters, who would vote for them even if Beelzebub was their sitting candidate. For real political change to happen, that huge core vote has to be overcome. More ‘undecided’ folk, therefore, have to vote, which means that it is in the interests of the alternative parties to engage with previously apathetic voters to ensure a high turnout. The more people who turn up and vote, the more likely it is that these alternative parties will get representation. The ‘get out and vote to stop the nutters’ line appears to be premised on the assumption that previously apathetic and antipathetic voters will automatically default to one of the ‘respectable’ parties. How can you be sure that that 30% of the electorate that doesn’t normally vote doesn’t, in fact, represent a vast community of nutters?

    2. Surely not voting is as valid an option as voting? If none of the parties represent your political views, why must you give your consent to one or other of the available choices? It is ridiculous to suggest, as some do, that you can’t complain if you don’t vote. It is just as easy to argue that the exact opposite is the case: if, despite all of the available evidence, you choose to vote for one or other of the big parties, it is you who can’t complain when they mess up, because you helped put them there. It is quite delusional to imagine that you can somehow ‘change’ either Labour or Conservative by putting them in power.

    • I think the assumption in the first point is that nutters are more active as a subset. So there will be a high percentage of nutters that will vote. Not sure I agree or disagree but I think that’s the logic.

  19. I cannot imagine what it would be like living in a safe Tory seat. In Scotland the last one of them that we had fell to Jim Murphy in 1997. And now his jacket is on a shoogly nail. As is our only Tory MP.
    The notion of a safe Tory seat baffles me. There’s more of us than there is of them so why can’t we out-vote them?

  20. I’m in the peculiar position of being a lifelong Labour voter in one of the safest Conservative constituencies in the country where I actually admire the Tory MP, who works hard for his constituents and has helped me with the risible LibDem council with a problem on a few occasions (the lead singer of Echo and the Bunnymen didn’t return my correspondence). I’ve told him I could never vote Conservative in a million years and whilst I know again that my vote on May 7th will be wasted in 9,000 Tory majority, not voting, for me, simply isn’t an option.

  21. According to Jorrox, “The notion of a safe Tory seat baffles me. There’s more of us than there is of them so why can’t we out-vote them?”

    At their lowest ebb, the Tories polled 30.7% in 1997. Labour’s lowest point was in 1983, when it polled nationally at 27.6%.
    And Labour’s 1997 high point of 43.2% is well short of Thatcher’s 43.9% of the popular vote in 1979.

    • Indeed. The working class (define that for yourself) should be a lot bigger than any other combination. So where’s the voice of the working man and woman?
      I see Cameron today trying to position his party as the being for the worker. What utter bollocks.

  22. Don’t worry, after doing a Maggie re. social housing, they now have a plan for every stage of your life.

    Nice to see Labour on course now in the latest poll, with a little help from Nicola.

  23. I’ve wasted way too much time on here http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

    I had assumed I was in one of the top 10 Tory safe seats but it seems it’s only 124th. But with a 95% chance of not changing and it’s been Tory since 1922. The local Tory party have been able to decide who will represent me at Westminster as the current incumbent retired and they selected his replacement. The actual electoral ballot is just a formality. It seems @beezer and @dogfacedboy are in safe seat number 2.

    Some of the previous debate on here prompted me to set aside the fact I didn’t vote for him and engage on local issues, such as the threats to our local hospital, and the whitewashing of the Leveson inquiry. I got polite replies, most of which were transcripts of his speeches in the House, or in the case of Leveson, told I flat out didn’t understand. Overall, my faith in democracy, particularly when supported by first past the post, hasn’t been buoyed much.

    I’ve got a postal vote – I will be away on the day, and I will vote but it does feel like an utterly futile gesture.

  24. In Australia the PR electoral system means your vote is not wasted if you live in a ‘safe’ seat. But it’s an incredibly complicated system where you can end up having to rank twenty parties by number. Some of them are REALLY weird, and the system of ‘preferencing’ occasionally results in some of the odd ones getting elected by accident. This time, among others, we got The Motoring Enthusiasts party (I kid you not, the Down Under equivalent of the Clarkson Fan Club). The candidate – who works in a mill – was as surprised as the electorate. And since the independent MPs hold the balance of power he found himself being buttered up by the PM. Unfortunately we also got a swag of right-wing, gun-loving Islamophobic MPs and an egocentric millionaire mine baron who named the party after himself. Be careful what you wish for.

  26. Anyone who does not vote, but is able to vote, should be fined.

    To avoid spoiled ballots, there should be an option to mark a box entitled “no vote cast”. These non-votes should be allocated proportionately across the parties. So if 40% of electorate voted Tory then 40% of non-votes should go to Tories and so on.

    To make voting easier in this digital age we should examine the possibility of voting via Social Media, Smartphone or TV remote.

    • Sorry, can’t agree with that @Fin59 – I’ve heard this a lot from people who think that non-voters are somehow more suspect than eejits who would vote for a hatstand if it had the right clour rosette on it.

      At least non-voters don’t change the result by their choice; unthinking voters are largely to blame for pretty much any woeful government you can mention.

      • @douglas

        Which is why the “no vote cast” option is a good one as they will know it may benefit a party with which they fundamentally disagree with – and so may encourage them to vote positively for a party they choose.

  27. I find the argument “people died for our right to vote”- quite pompous and it makes my toes curl – largely because I used to think that way too. It is an argument used by the major parties to support the current system.

    We jokingly talk about “civilians” not knowing who Bob Dylan is, but there are large numbers who have no idea about politics. They do not see the point in voting. Last time it was 35% of the voting population.

    As Scotland proved, if they thought it was important – they would vote.

    Nobody died for this system of Government. They died so that we didn’t become fascists.

    • @black-celebration

      Between the 13th and 19th Century only perhaps 10% of the UK adult population has the right to vote.

      From the Bill of Rights in 1689 to the various reform acts of the 19th Century to the coming of universal suffrage in the 20th century, the struggle for the right to vote did indeed cost lives. Many lives as well as livelihoods, health and well being

      I find that history noble and humbling.

      I undersand the argument that a right to vote should have a counterbalancing right not to vote.

      I just don’t accept it.

    • If we accept that losing WW2 would have resulted in us becoming fascists, then I think we also have to accept that it would have resulted in our losing the right to vote, FPTP or otherwise.

      German democracy was effectively suspended in 1933 after the Reichstag fire, and they sure as hell weren’t holding elections in the occupied territories.

      It’s debatable whether “people died for our right to vote”, but a fairly clear direct consequence of their sacrifice is the continuation of our democracy.

  28. I wonder if Tories ever say I can’t be arsed to vote. Everyone I know (including myself) who says I’m not bothering or similar, when asked who they’d vote for if it were compulsory tends to say ‘Labour’.
    Decisions are made by them what turns up.

  29. New Zealand runs an MMP system whereby there are the constituencies that we know and love – but there are also “list” MPs who are elected by a % of the popular vote.

    So there’s 121 seats in all (I know! adorable!) – and 70 of them are constituency/electorate seats. The rest are allocated seats based on the % of the popular vote that the public gives.

    You have 2 votes – a party vote and the one for your local electorate.

    If your party gets 5% or more of the party vote – you get 5% or more of the seats in parliament. If you win an electorate seat – your party gets whatever % of the party vote they achieved, with no 5% threshold.

    It has its problems, but every vote counts. One year, the Greens only got their 6 MPs in because their party vote was a mere whisker above 5% – I think it was down to about 70 votes.

    And sure, if there is a nutter single-issue party, they might get MPs in the house. However, they need to win an electorate seat or get 5% of the party vote – which is quite a challenge.

    • I liked that moment in the New Zealand Parliament a couple of years ago when they passed the same-sex marriage bill, and everyone in the balcony broke into a Maori love song. Good stuff. I’m sure everyone on this board has already seen the YouTube clip in question, but if anyone hasn’t, here it is:

  30. I know I’m saying nothing new here but do feel compelled to ask that people vote in what they believe in ( well best available option) regardless of whether there is an incumbent majority . We will never escape the current set up if we dont exercise our rights. I think good businesses work when there is diverse range of voices round the table – we need the same in Westminster. So lets start here.

  33. Seems Farage is now playing footsie with Hamhead and Mr Towels. A Tory UKIP coalition ? The stuff of nightmares. I f you think it could get any worse…..

    Go Labour/SNP.

Leave a Reply