Vote for policies, not personalities!

[pooley]

whats the point of voting? They ALL promise the world, then when they get into power they never deliver, and they don't incur any penalties for non-delivery.

 

They're a bit like teachers, never lived and not living in the real world.

[tmcd35]

I personally go for option 2 there - a vote for a lesser party with good policies won't get that party elected, but it will show the growing level of support for policies such as theirs, especially applicable if you're a tree-hugger, as a growing Green vote shows Lab and Cons that environmental matters are important, so hopefully they might adjust their own policies slightly to reflect this.

 

I'm finding the green party - in'tree'ging (). I used to think of them as tree huggers. But they actually have a lot of well rounded social/liberal policies in other areas - Economy, Europe, Crime, etc. I came out at around 50% Green and I think that was all on non environement related policies. With a better, fairer, voting system parties like Green (and for others UKIP, BNP, etc) might actually be worth voting for.

[localzuk]

75% Green Party and 25% Lib Dem - however, the 25% part is the one area I see as most important, so would confirm my existing choice to vote Lib Dem.

 

This makes me think that the system someone described to me a while back should be implemented - namely 'Fluid Democracy'. Where we nominate someone on a list of issues, and then they nominate people on a list of issues, until it gets to a point where one person has a majority of the votes in a particular area. Sure, this is logistically difficult, but there's no reason why it couldn't be implemented somehow. It'd mean people who know about the issues get into power.

[pooley]

It maybe that i'm in a bad mood this morning but ive scored 33.33% BNP

UKIP maybe better lol

[gibbo_ap]

all that reading and error arrg

[teejay]

Well I went with all the categories, ended up UKIP 44%, Conservative 22%, LibDems/Green/BNP all 11%

Quite surprised by that mix, but not surprised that I didn't choose any of the policies of the current administration.

[webman]

I'm finding the green party - in'tree'ging (). I used to think of them as tree huggers. But they actually have a lot of well rounded social/liberal policies in other areas - Economy, Europe, Crime, etc.

 

I agree - they're not a one-policy party as some people perceive them. But I don't agree with their green policies (ironically) - from things I read, the sustainable sources they propose (wind, solar) just won't provide adequately for demand; which is where I believe nuclear is the direction we should be looking.

 

But the Green Party was one of the 17.5% parts of my survey result - so I must agree with them on something (I can't remember which policy).

[enjay]

I'm finding the green party - in'tree'ging (). I used to think of them as tree huggers. But they actually have a lot of well rounded social/liberal policies in other areas - Economy, Europe, Crime, etc.

 

Agreed - they are now in a position to actually look like a real political party, whereas in the past they simply didn't have enough suitable ministerial people.

 

the sustainable sources they propose (wind, solar) just won't provide adequately for demand; which is where I believe nuclear is the direction we should be looking.

 

What do you propose we do with the spent fuel rods though? Find an answer to that question, and nuclear becomes viable, but until then....

[enjay]

So what would happen, how would the country be run without an elected government? say if everyone voted for 'none of the above'?

 

How about proportional representation instead of our current system?

[tmcd35]

How about proportional representation instead of our current system?

 

Hey, read back through my posts I'm all for proportional representation. The Single Transferable Vote. I believe that 2-party politics is what is wrong with government at the moment and until some of the 'fringe' parties get a voice politics in this country will always appear corrupt and will not engage the masses.

 

That's why I'm voting LD this time. We need a hung parliment and we need the LD's to have a strong voice in a hung parliment. Then true political reform, like STV and a new House of Lords, stand a chance of actually happening.

 

(I might get of my soap box in a minute )

[enjay]

A hung parliament would give LD a good strong voice, but history has often found them to be ineffective at making radical change - not sure that's what we need just now...

 

One big problem I see is just how many of the voting public think we already have PR. The number of times you hear people talk about voting for the Prime Minister, or voting Conservative because they want a Con government. I live in an area where Lab are huge and LD are the second party, therefore to get a Con govt, you actually want to vote LD. I'd welcome a scheme whereby the system is explained to people, although I have no idea how this would actually work in practice!

[torledo]

Agreed - they are now in a position to actually look like a real political party, whereas in the past they simply didn't have enough suitable ministerial people.

....

 

so how many seats are they forecast to win ?

[enjay]

so how many seats are they forecast to win ?

 

Not many, sadly. What I meant was that they now have policies for things other than the environment, and people "in the know" on these areas, so if they were to randomly spirit up 50 or so seats they would be in a position to be a "real" party.

[TechMonkey]

Yeah I'm surprised by the Greens. Never really considered them as their green policies often seemed a bit loony but I ended up with 50% them, 25% each for Labour & LD.

[browolf]

Not sure who to vote for at the election? Sick and tired of the schoolboy bickering between the political leaders? Cut to the chase and concentrate on the policies

 

 

 

Vote for Policies - Vote for policies, not personalities!

 

i spent 20mins on that and then it had an error and cant tell me the result