mattx Posted May 7, 2010 Author Posted May 7, 2010 Joanne Cash chucked her dummy out the pram when she lost Westminster North - really funny to watch if you get the chance to see it. She got the right hump, never mind love, that's politics for you.
localzuk Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 clegg now choosing his words very carefully. this could well drag out for several days.... libdems did not do anywhere near aswell as expected. exit polls appear to be the correct indicators. in terms of voter share it's a big swing to the tories, but it's been a story of holds in the labour heartlands, poor showing from the libdems, and the tories doing well in their traditional holds. it's been a high turnout aswell..... That's the thing - the Lib Dems did well by share of the vote. Last I saw they had something like 22.8%, which is quite significant, but they get sod all seats. Which is why the FPTP system is useless and undemocratic. Also, on the cost of the coverage, I would say I'd prefer they spent it on the election than on yet another singing/dancing/acting/ironing/giraffe cleaning competition show...
mattx Posted May 7, 2010 Author Posted May 7, 2010 That's the thing - the Lib Dems did well by share of the vote. Last I saw they had something like 22.8%, which is quite significant, but they get sod all seats. Which is why the FPTP system is useless and undemocratic. Also, on the cost of the coverage, I would say I'd prefer they spent it on the election than on yet another singing/dancing/acting/ironing/giraffe cleaning competition show... Which Esther Rantzen will end up on........
SYNACK Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Which is why the FPTP system is useless and undemocratic. FPP has massive issues but MMP which we use also has blareing issues which turn the government into a singing/dancing/acting/ironing/giraffe cleaning competition show... most of the time, if you get the chance to move try for something inbetween.
AyatollahPies Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Done it before !! You're a secret Maggie admirer aren't you? Admit it. Sleeping is for wimps.
teejay Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 three hours sleep, you are going to be in dire need of coffee today. I'm on half an hours sleep, currently drinking a very strong heavily cafeinated coffee...
mattx Posted May 7, 2010 Author Posted May 7, 2010 You're a secret Maggie admirer aren't you? Admit it. Sleeping is for wimps. God no !! I'll be having a party when pops her clogs. ;-)
teejay Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Well, looks like we're stuck with Gordo then, propped up by Lib Dems and the Welsh/Scottish nationalists. Result of this will be some crappy PR voting system and Scotland and Welsh parliaments keeping their fulll budget plus more whilst England gets its arse kicked with all the cuts that are going to take place. The only good news was the couple of Portillo moments when Lembit Opik and Jacqui Smith lost their seats.
AyatollahPies Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Well, looks like we're stuck with Gordo then, propped up by Lib Dems and the Welsh/Scottish nationalists. Result of this will be some crappy PR voting system and Scotland and Welsh parliaments keeping their fulll budget plus more whilst England gets its arse kicked with all the cuts that are going to take place. The only good news was the couple of Portillo moments when Lembit Opik and Jacqui Smith lost their seats. The current voting system is crappy. I wasn't able to vote for the party I wanted to last night, as their was none standing in my ward. How is that fair? I was left with the usual 3, the greens and the fighting moron party. I don't want any of them in power, so ended up writing "None of the above" across my paper. Democratic my ****!
teejay Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 The current voting system is crappy. I wasn't able to vote for the party I wanted to last night, as their was none standing in my ward. How is that fair? I was left with the usual 3, the greens and the fighting moron party. I don't want any of them in power, so ended up writing "None of the above" across my paper. Democratic my ****! Then in the next election stand as a candidate for the party you wanted to vote for.
Gatt Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 ...so ended up writing "None of the above" across my paper. And people wonder why we ended up with a Hung Parliament.. Spoling ballot papers, is exactly the reason why buffoons like Gordon Brown get in in the first place... ithey arent counted, therefore reducing the vote count down, allowing parties to "win" due to low numbers.. if more people put an X in a box for another "lesser" party then this would send a clearer message than not being included at all.. I dont like Labour therefore I wont vote for them, I didnt like ANY party on my ballot paper, BUT I STILL VOTED.. I stil put an X in a box.. my vote was still counted..
jamesb Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 And people wonder why we ended up with a Hung Parliament.. Spoling ballot papers, is exactly the reason why buffoons like Gordon Brown get in in the first place... ithey arent counted, therefore reducing the vote count down, allowing parties to "win" due to low numbers.. if more people put an X in a box for another "lesser" party then this would send a clearer message than not being included at all.. I dont like Labour therefore I wont vote for them, I didnt like ANY party on my ballot paper, BUT I STILL VOTED.. I stil put an X in a box.. my vote was still counted.. And what if that lesser party gets in? Rejected ballots are counted. If there are enough of them to put the result in doubt, then it does put the result in doubt. Thus spoiling a ballot paper is sending a very clear message, more so than voting for a so-called 'protest' party. This is, of course, with the exception of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, who when they have won seats do tend to put in a good showing. Then in the next election stand as a candidate for the party you wanted to vote for. I'd love to, however there isn't any party I'd be happy standing for at the moment. I have considered standing as an independent but I do not have the money to spare for the deposit, nor the resources to campaign properly. I did actually vote, but it was pretty much guaranteed to be a wasted vote no matter which way I went. My constituency is too safe for it to be otherwise.
localzuk Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 And what if that lesser party gets in? Rejected ballots are counted. If there are enough of them to put the result in doubt, then it does put the result in doubt. Thus spoiling a ballot paper is sending a very clear message, more so than voting for a so-called 'protest' party. This is, of course, with the exception of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, who when they have won seats do tend to put in a good showing. Who gets to determine if there are 'enough' of them? At what percentage does the result get questioned? Does this mean nationally questioned or just locally questioned? If not nationally, then it is pointless to spoil ballots - it just won't have any effect. Whereas voting for an actual party will, as your vote may actually get them into power in that seat.
jamesb Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Who gets to determine if there are 'enough' of them? At what percentage does the result get questioned? Does this mean nationally questioned or just locally questioned? If not nationally, then it is pointless to spoil ballots - it just won't have any effect. Whereas voting for an actual party will, as your vote may actually get them into power in that seat. When the majority is in doubt the results get questioned. This matters in places where the vote is close. So, let's say 1000 people vote for Party A, 900 vote for Party B, and 200 ballot papers are rejected after recounts. The majority is then in doubt and can be challenged As for the whole question of it there are 'enough' votes, that's a matter for the Electoral College, who most likely have bigger fish to fry at the moment, having turned people away from polling stations.
localzuk Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 When the majority is in doubt the results get questioned. This matters in places where the vote is close. So, let's say 1000 people vote for Party A, 900 vote for Party B, and 200 ballot papers are rejected after recounts. The majority is then in doubt and can be challenged As for the whole question of it there are 'enough' votes, that's a matter for the Electoral College, who most likely have bigger fish to fry at the moment, having turned people away from polling stations. In a close vote though, the 'rejected' votes still wouldn't help though? They wouldn't help determine any form of majority for someone...
jamesb Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 In a close vote though, the 'rejected' votes still wouldn't help though? They wouldn't help determine any form of majority for someone... Nope, they wouldn't help determine a majority for anyone. Effective they're a vote against all standing candidates, meaning that the increase the error in the count, and so the number of votes that a successful candidate would require for the result to be considered a clear win. What there cannot be is a draw - in this situation the returning officer can draw lots of flip a coin. If there is no clear winner however, this is not a draw but calls the result into question and most likely results in it being recalled.
AyatollahPies Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 (edited) And people wonder why we ended up with a Hung Parliament.. Spoling ballot papers, is exactly the reason why buffoons like Gordon Brown get in in the first place... ithey arent counted, therefore reducing the vote count down, allowing parties to "win" due to low numbers.. if more people put an X in a box for another "lesser" party then this would send a clearer message than not being included at all.. I dont like Labour therefore I wont vote for them, I didnt like ANY party on my ballot paper, BUT I STILL VOTED.. I stil put an X in a box.. my vote was still counted.. There were no partys I wanted to vote for. What should I have done, flipped a coin? Ip Dip Doo? Just putting an X anywhere is ridiculous. Edited May 7, 2010 by AyatollahPies Spelling
AyatollahPies Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Then in the next election stand as a candidate for the party you wanted to vote for. Always a possibility.
Gatt Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Always a possibility. You sound like Spock - lol Another option is to form your own Party...
localzuk Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 There were no partys I wanted to vote for. What should I have done, flipped a coin? Ip Dip Doo? Just putting an X anywhere is ridiculous. Chosen one that was nearest to your own views?
jamesb Posted May 7, 2010 Posted May 7, 2010 Chosen one that was nearest to your own views? And if there is none, or you do not believe in any of the candidates standing? Choosing one closest to your own views is all well and good if there is a party or candidate who is close. If they are not close, or you disagree equally with all the candidates (or, say, believe them to be corrupt and not suitable candidates) then you should not select the one who is least worst, but indicate that you feel that none are suitable by casting a ballot which will be rejected. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now