Starmer's vision quest

[winjim]

Because anything else is essentially a waste of your time under the current system. You can vote for the monster raving loonies, but it won't make a difference to anything. You have the power to choose the next government but with the current system that's only a choice between 2 candidates in almost all areas.

In my area it's a choice between Lib Dem or Tory. If you vote anything but Lib Dem you are essentially backing the Tory candidate. I don't like the system, but it's what we have. Very few areas have more than a 2 way split.

My perfect result at the moment would be a Labour Lib Dem coalition. Cross-party politics makes much better policies as it tempers the extreme ends of Politics.

So to obtain your desired outcome of a LibDem-Lab coalition I would vote Lib Dem. Or to express dissatisfaction with the current system and to encourage smaller parties and promote change I might vote Green as they've been gaining momentum. By giving them support it might show people that it could be worthwhile voting for smaller parties so they'll get out of the current mindset of feeling they have to vote Lib/Lab/Con as the only choices. That might shift things in their favour so they could get more MPs in subsequent elections and ultimately lead to electoral reform. I think I've always been clear that my number one electoral priority is to get the Tories out, but I have good reasons for voting the way I do and it is not always because I think the candidate I vote for will win on that particular occasion, nor that I think or want that their party should form the next government.

But this, according to Labour, is enabling the Tories.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

It works exceptionally well if the incumbent party is good, and exceptionally badly if it isn't.

What the f*ck does that mean?

 

[multitool]

What the f*ck does that mean?

What the fuçk do you think.

It's a broad comment on FPTP vs PR.

 

[AndyRM]

<aside>
I do like the use of a cedilla to get around the swear filter on the word f*ck, thus softening it to the vaguely amusing "fusk". Might try that one with my daughter who is discovering profanity.
</aside>

 

[bobzmyunkle]

It's a broad comment

So abroad it says absolutely nothing.

if the incumbent party is good

Wash their hands? Say their prayers?

 

[multitool]

So abroad it says absolutely nothing.

Wash their hands? Say their prayers?

Thankyou for your input, bottom-feeder.

We await your incisive commentary on the topic in hand.

 

[multitool]

<aside>
I do like the use of a cedilla to get around the swear filter on the word f*ck, thus softening it to the vaguely amusing "fusk". Might try that one with my daughter who is discovering profanity.
</aside>

Thankyou for noticing.

I had a wry smile as I added a bit of gallic sophistication to the word

 

[icowden]

So to obtain your desired outcome of a LibDem-Lab coalition I would vote Lib Dem. Or to express dissatisfaction with the current system and to encourage smaller parties and promote change I might vote Green as they've been gaining momentum.

But that only works if your area has a Lib Dem or Green candidate that stands a snowball in hells chance of winning. Otherwise it's a vote that isn't helping either candidate to win, which means that it is to the benefit of the candidate with the largest majority.

But this, according to Labour, is enabling the Tories.

Yes. You either want the Tories out - which means voting for the candidate that can win that is *not* a Tory, or in - which means voting for anyone else whether or not they are the Tory candidate (if you live in a constituency which is a Tory safe seat).

 

[winjim]

What the f*ck does that mean?

I think what he might be trying to suggest, in his own inimitable style, is that there is little incentive for the governing party to change the electoral system. Which is why it frustrates me when Starmer bangs on about HoL reform. While I would like there to be changes to the appointment process in the HoL, I think that reform of the electoral procedure to the HoC is a much greater priority.

 

[winjim]

But that only works if your area has a Lib Dem or Green candidate that stands a snowball in hells chance of winning. Otherwise it's a vote that isn't helping either candidate to win, which means that it is to the benefit of the candidate with the largest majority.


Yes. You either want them out - which means voting for the candidate that can win that is *not* a Tory, or in - which means voting for anyone else, if you are in a constituency which is a Tory safe seat.

Again, where is it you think I live?

As I pointed out, my reason for voting Green would not be because I think they have a chance of winning in this election, but to try to improve their chances of winning in future elections, (as well as to encourage green policies to be adopted by other parties if they start to perceive them as being of significance when it comes to electoral strategy).

 

[icowden]

Have you not considered that that is the reason why we have effectively a two party state? Why nothing changes? Its cowardly and lacks a certain self respect which the majority lack admittedly and who's will can be bent and sold cheaply for people they seldom believe in.

Yes. But our only prospect of changing it is to get a Government which is not Conservative. The only prospect of achieving that relies on everyone continuing to play the two party game (and even then it's unlikely).

If most think like you then that is what you deserve and will get... You don't like the system, but are playing the game anyway and are likely happy to blame others for the privilege.

There is no other option unless a third party appears that can galvanise massive support (see the SNP in Scotland).

Why? The last coalition led to Brexit and a collapse of the Lib Dem's and an austerity which will take generations to recover from to any certain degree. What was it that was tempered and what policies did you enjoy from the Cameron-Clegg era?

Unfortunately very little as the Conservatives played them like a Violin. They failed to stand up for themselves and abandoned their own key pledges on Tuition fees and VAT. I think they have probably learned from that. They did get some of their policies through - increasing the tax threshold to £12,500 for example, pushed for increases in state pension, investment in renewable energy, legislation for same sex marriage etc. They also supported some of the better ideas such as universal credit, the Green investment bank and the Northern Powerhouse and blocked an attempt for a referendum on Brexit as well as extensions to covert surveillance. But I get what you mean. They played with fire and got badly burned. Anything "good" was claimed as a Conservative policy win and anything "bad" as the Lib Dems interfering.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Again, where is it you think I live?

As I pointed out, my reason for voting Green would not be because I think they have a chance of winning in this election, but to try to improve their chances of winning in future elections, (as well as to encourage green policies to be adopted by other parties if they start to perceive them as being of significance when it comes to electoral strategy).

You will be dead and gone before the Greens get political power

 

[bobzmyunkle]

My perfect result at the moment would be a Labour Lib Dem coalition. Cross-party politics makes much better policies as it tempers the extreme ends of Politics.

As if the last coalition didn't make it absolutely obvious, to all who want to see, that the lib Dems aren't the cuddly bunnies they're often perceived as.

Socially liberal* - cuddly front.
Economically liberal - quite keen to get stuck in when Osborne proposed austerity.

* If you ignore the possible complications of Tim Farron

 

[icowden]

Again, where is it you think I live?

I don't. It doesn't matter. The vast majority of constituencies have a majority of more than 10%. There are 141 marginals out of 650 seats and only 37 of those were 3 way marginals in 2017. So if you live in any of the 613 seats that were not 3 way marginal you have only 3 choices - vote for candidate a, for candidate b, or chuck your vote away.

As I pointed out, my reason for voting Green would not be because I think they have a chance of winning in this election, but to try to improve their chances of winning in future elections, (as well as to encourage green policies to be adopted by other parties if they start to perceive them as being of significance when it comes to electoral strategy).

It won't work. It never has. The Green party has one safe(ish) seat in Brighton. Current predictions are that there are 3 more seats where they have a chance of winning.

 

[icowden]

So to obtain your desired outcome of a LibDem-Lab coalition I would vote Lib Dem.

also worth pointing out that it won't be needed as Labour are predicted to win by a major landslide.