1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

How would you vote in a General Election?

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Swamp Thing, Jun 2, 2019.


How would you vote in a General Election?

  1. A Brexit Party (Brexit, UKIP)

    22 vote(s)
  2. A Remain Party (Liberal Democrat, Green, SNP, Change UK, Plaid, Sinn Fein, SDLP, Alliance)

    123 vote(s)
  3. The Labour Party

    35 vote(s)
  4. The Conservative Party

    7 vote(s)
  5. Other (Raving Looney, DUP etc)

    2 vote(s)
  1. gassor

    gassor There may be more posts after this.

    Even as the difficulties of disentangling ourselves from the EU becoming more apparent and our political system is in meltdown trying to produce a workable solution, the momentum for Leave has not really fallen very much. Could it be that the central issue is not the membership of the EU but a rather deeper divide in the country that in fact has been going on for some time? The EU ref has brought this division to the surface and it cuts across party lines. Both Labour and Tory are split on the EU issue.

    I sense a growing resentment from those whose future prospects are not very bright. The country is broadly divided on the basis of opportunity, age, education levels, geography, wealth and location. In the past, some kind of common identity may have held the country loosely together, but not anymore. This may be down to the social media shells that people can retreat into where they find kindred spirits to embolden them in however distorted their outlook on the world is. I can only see social divisions here becoming more apparent in the future as our pantomime politician system and our handicapped businesses continue to fail to adapt to the Grave New World.

    PS I'm away to visit some industrial museums around the North of England to take my mind off Brexit :)
    Sue Pertwee-Tyr likes this.
  2. Tony L

    Tony L Administrator

    Tactical voting is the best way not to get Tories, i.e. one would have to be an utter moron to vote Labour in a close Tory/Lib marginal or in Scotland. Time for folk to drop the ideological tribalism IMHO.

    As someone with little time for either the Conservatives or Corbyn’s Labour I’d obviously vote for any non-Labour progressive who stands a chance, or in a crappy safe seat such as the one I live in vote to save a minor progressive’s deposit, but for those here who simply want to avert a Tory government tactical voting is the only logical answer. I guarantee that if Farage/Banks con-trick stand in a GE there will be a lot of seats that could easily flip to Lib Dem. Labour voters would be utter idiots to waste their votes in a dumb tribal manner in such seats. Vote against the hard/alt-right. It is all one can do in a flawed FPTP system.

    PS For clarity I’d vote Labour in a Tory(or Brexit)/Lab marginal, but that’s the only scenario for me. The rest I’d vote for a non-Lab progressive.
  3. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    In situations were the main parties are more moderate then I think FPTP is a better solution but PR does seem to have something going for it when they are more extremist - or where both parties are out of alignment with the electorate on a key issue such as the current one.

    My main issue though is that while PR is great in theory there are practical issues with it due to the main parties not wanting to work together i.e. in theory someone puts forward a proposal and folks would vote for it on merit, rather than on party lines. In practice though if one main party says "white" the other will go with "black" (or at best abstain) so as not to give their support. That also then means that parties with minority support (for example the LibDem's) can get government representation well above their actually vote share, as it's the only way that a government can't be formed when the main parties won't work together.

    Scotland has PR for our parliament although it was specifically designed (by Labour) to try and make sure that the SNP could never gain a majority (although it hasn't always worked) and it also can cause difficulties governing - certainly at the moment the SNP, despite having a level of support that would have given them a massive majority in an FPTP situation, have to rely on the Greens often. That means that the Greens, despite having a tiny percentage of the vote, actually have more say in the running of the country than the larger parties. So for me PR delivers just as many democratic issues as FPTP does.

    I suppose it relies on perspective e.g. if you support a minority party like the LibDem's then PR seems like a good idea as it's the only want for them to get a sniff of power (God help us!). If you support one of the main UK parties, or the SNP in Scotland, then FPTP seems more sensible and even more democratic.
  4. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    I'm pointing to the way that one particular, incomplete equivalence is being made to stand for everything: Brexit becomes the only issue that matters and all differences on the question of Brexit itself get erased. I'm 100% sincere in my conviction that this is what's happening for quite a sizeable constituency, and I'm also quite certain that the operation only works for people who are completely insulated from the effects of austerity.
  5. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    Yes, vote tactically to keep the Tories out, I have no problem with that.
  6. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    It's not a case of being insulated from austerity, it's a belief that the inevitable consequence, especially for those already affected by austerity, of any type of Brexit is going to be worse.
    Alex S likes this.
  7. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    It's slightly more sophisticated that that as there are two parts to it (which I admit can make it tricky):
    1) Vote tactically to keep the Tories out
    2) Vote tactically to ensure Labour don't get an absolute majority (not that they're likely to, given the situation in Scotland)

    Ultimately that means - if the only prospect to keep a Tory/Brexit party MP out is to vote Labour, then that's what I'd do. If there is a reasonable likelyhood of a Remain supporting party getting in - then that's the way I'd vote. In any case, and in any seat, I'd prefer a non-Tory and non-Labour MP if at all possible (to give more leverage to getting a democratic result i.e. a Remain option on any 2nd referendum) unless it was letting in a Brexit or UKIP candidate of course.
  8. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr pfm Member

    I think the people who are 'completely insulated from the effects of austerity' are not 'quite a sizeable constituency', so I'm not sure your premise holds too much water.

    But more broadly than that I don't think that, even for a large part of any putative 'sizeable constituency', Brexit is the only issue that matters. Again, that's a mischaracterisation of the position which is, rather, that the issues that really matter can't be as effectively addressed after Brexit.
  9. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    And that belief is immune to argument or evidence - at least partly because they don't understand austerity and what it's done. I would have more respect for the argument if it weren't usually accompanied by the completely fantastical claim that a no deal Brexit is basically the same as a soft Brexit.
  10. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    2) is reckless fantasy and it would only be ventured by someone who considers themselves insulated both from austerity and the effects of a no deal Brexit: that is someone who isn't dependent either on earned income or the state. This is just one of the way in which hard remainers mirror hard brexiters.
  11. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    There is simply no way anyone for whom issues like austerity are as significant as Brexit would consider voting Lib Dem, who remain austerians. Not a chance. It only works if you make Brexit the issue that counts. Saying "Aha, but Brexit would make austerity worse!" is one strategy for doing this.
  12. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr pfm Member

    I'm with Sean on this. That's risky.

    I think if you're going to pursue your option 2), then you have to do so having considered the 'fail-safe' position. In other words, if you vote for a Remain party, which then fails to get over the line, which party is likely to win the seat? If the answer is Tory or Brexit, then you need to think again.
    sean99 likes this.
  13. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    Reckless fantasy? It's probably the most likely outcome (as well as the most desirable) i.e. A Labour government tempered by more progressive and moderate parties.

    The reckless fantasy is that Labour are capable of gaining an overall majority as there is little chance of that as things stand. If nothing else they'd need to get most of the Scottish seats back and that'd be a hard shift from 5th place, with no coherent leadership in place. Far better to accept they'll need to work with other parties, in particular the SNP, if they want to take government away from the Tories.
  14. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr pfm Member

    Again, that's a mischaracterisation: Brexit will not make austerity better Brexit would make austerity worse (though a hard Brexit would surely do so).
  15. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    The SNP is one thing. The Lib Dems will absolutely work against every reform attempt by Labour: they are not a progressive party in the current context.
  16. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    While I do accept that a "soft" Brexit would be better that a hard Brexit the issue is that there doesn't appear to be sufficient appetite for a compromise, so the mostly likely Brexit is a hard one. Pissing about with fantasies about a soft Brexit will just end up delivering the worst case scenario.

    Anyway I say let the people decide i.e. if a comprise softer Brexit can be agreed then fine - put it on the card alongside "no-deal" and Remain. Given the previous vote didn't have any details on what Brexit meant (and the sort of shitbags would be aligned with it) then it's the only democratic option.
  17. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    Labour might be able to form a government just with support from the SNP, but it's more likely they'll need more - including the seats that the LibDems may take off Labour in areas where the support for Remain is strongest.
  18. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr pfm Member

    The current leadership under Cable, and under Clegg, might support that view, but I suspect a more left-leaning direction of travel under whoever replaces Cable.
  19. SteveG

    SteveG pfm Member

    Indeed - if it's going to be Tory/Brexit or Labour, then definitely vote Labour as the least worst option. Unlike what the Labour hard-liners on here spout though, voting Labour isn't always the only option and in very many cases it won't even be the best option, especially if you take the view that a Labour majority government is also bad news, just as would be a Tory/Brexit one.
  20. Seanm

    Seanm pfm Member

    No-one sensible is arguing that Brexit will make austerity better. Soft Brexit will not prevent Labour from bringing an end to austerity. Austerity is purely a political policy - I mean, 100% - and all that you have to do to stop it is to stop pursuing the policy. The hard remain strategy here is to deny that and insist that Brexit of whatever stripe will make austerity impossible to tackle. It's nonsense, but it's hard to maintain an anti-Labour stance and an anti-austerity stance simultaneously without it.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice