Your vote for the 2015 General Election

[newbie]

Your view doesn't appear to offer many options for those unwilling to engage with, or wishing to protest about, the charade of representative democracy. So you seem to be suggesting that because the capitalist state/media choose to misinterpret the 'gestures' of spoiling or not voting, the only 'meaningful' option is to go along with the process and vote?

there are exactly as many options whether you vote, don't vote or spoil the paper.

You get a government whether you vote or not. What's made voting more meaningful over the years is that collectively the millions of people who've voted to keep the tories out have had some effect. I've never noticed those unwilling to engage make the slightest difference to anything, other than prompting handwringing from the commentariat.

 

[butchersapron]

Quite right - every victory ever won by anyone anywhere was won exclusively by voters.

 

[Citizen66]

there are exactly as many options whether you vote, don't vote or spoil the paper.

You get a government whether you vote or not. What's made voting more meaningful over the years is that collectively the millions of people who've voted to keep the tories out have had some effect. I've never noticed those unwilling to engage make the slightest difference to anything, other than prompting handwringing from the commentariat.

Not voting might not change the system. But it'll do more than giving the system a mandate will.

 

[newbie]

Quite right - every victory ever won by anyone anywhere was won exclusively by voters.

don't be daft. the only victories that are affected by marking an X are electoral ones. That sets part of the context in which other victories are gained, but whether an individual spends 10 minutes or so every few years marking an X has no bearing.

 

[newbie]

Not voting might not change the system. But it'll do more than giving the system a mandate will.

but it won't, will it? what effect has it ever had? only you care whether or not you give a mandate, nobody else.

 

[butchersapron]

don't be daft. the only victories that are affected by marking an X are electoral ones. That sets part of the context in which other victories are gained, but whether an individual spends 10 minutes or so every few years marking an X has no bearing.

But i thought those who don't vote (sorry, 'engage') had never been able to 'make the slightest difference to anything, other than prompting handwringing from the commentariat'.?

 

[Citizen66]

but it won't, will it? what effect has it ever had? only you care whether or not you give a mandate, nobody else.

Even if it has no effect, voting gives a mandate, which does have an effect.

 

[newbie]

in electoral terms they haven't. Outside the electoral process whether or not someone put an X is of no consequence at all.

 

[butchersapron]

in electoral terms they haven't. Outside the electoral process whether or not someone put an X is of no consequence at all.

Well then thanks for the circularity! I take it Yorkshire CCC have never won the FA cup either?

 

[ViolentPanda]

If the far right can come up with an alternative to the two party system which has the popular support of up to five million people, then why can't the left? Unfortunately it's because all the left ever do is argue among themselves and there just aren't anywhere near five million potential supporters for them anyway.

As for formally recognising abstentions, I couldn't agree more.

It's akin to Kristallnacht, I tells ye!

1) UKIP aren't "far right". Yes, they have members and supporters who are or have been members of far-right groupings, but so do the Tories. Policy-wise, Nigelo Farago (who controls the policy process, not some two-bob councillor who used to be BNP) hasn't put out anything to the right of 1970s Conservatism.
2) UKIP may well have "the popular support 5 million people", although I'd disagree with that figure, and say that while UKIP's ambitions are for such support, their projections are based on best-case scenarios that are currently pie-in-the-sky, and depend on the meltdown of the three mainstream parties.
3) While it's entirely possible that UKIP's standard will advance at the GE (maybe turning their two seats into a handful), their support is too geographically-diffuse for even the purported 5 million to mean that they'll achieve more than that this time round.

 

[tbtommyb]

Your view doesn't appear to offer many options for those unwilling to engage with, or wishing to protest about, the charade of representative democracy. So you seem to be suggesting that because the capitalist state/media choose to misinterpret the 'gestures' of spoiling or not voting, the only 'meaningful' option is to go along with the process and vote?

yeah, that's the point of the system, isn't it?

best option if you feel that way is to vote for a party like Class War that openly takes the piss out of the whole thing (in my opinion).

 

[Citizen66]

in electoral terms they haven't. Outside the electoral process whether or not someone put an X is of no consequence at all.

Tell me who I should be voting for then. If I was going to vote for anyone it'd prob be class war. But that's still giving parliamentary democracy my mandate despite them doing it for the lols.

 

[newbie]

Even if it has no effect, voting gives a mandate, which does have an effect.

the strength of that mandate is affected by those who vote, those who don't or spoil have no effect in that. The mandate is the number of seats, nothing else.

 

[newbie]

Tell me who I should be voting for then. If I was going to vote for anyone it'd prob be class war. But that's still giving parliamentary democracy my mandate despite them doing it for the lols.

why would you expect to vote for, how naive is that? vote against the worst option, usually the tory, labour in some places.

 

[Citizen66]

the strength of that mandate is affected by those who vote, those who don't or spoil have no effect in that. The mandate is the number of seats, nothing else.

So voter apathy means nothing to politicos? What if nobody voted at all?

 

[Citizen66]

why would you expect to vote for, how naive is that? vote against the worst option, usually the tory, labour in some places.

Making a vote for capitalism isn't a vote against it, is it?

 

[Citizen66]

Vote for the centre to get rid of the centre!

 

[newbie]

So voter apathy means nothing to politicos? What if nobody voted at all?

it means something to commentariat paid by the word, but to those 'in politics', nah nothing. Why would they care?

 

[newbie]

Making a vote for capitalism isn't a vote against it, is it?

only you care whether or not you vote. Most of us care about the outcome of the election.

 

[Citizen66]

only you care whether or not you vote. Most of us care about the outcome of the election.

So what's the choices? More conservatism. Further to the right nutjobism with spatterings of racism. war mongers. Tory collaborators or capitalism is fine as long as the trees are ok. Which are you backing?

 

[Pickman's model]

only you care whether or not you vote. Most of us care about the outcome of the election.

yeh will it be tweedledum or tweedledee

which one do you want, newbie?

 

[Pickman's model]

Vote for the centre to get rid of the centre!

things fall apart; the centre cannot hold

 

[editor]

I'd vote Plaid Cymru if I could.

 

[newbie]

So what's the choices? More conservatism. Further to the right nutjobism with spatterings of racism. war mongers. Tory collaborators or capitalism is fine as long as the trees are ok. Which are you backing?

the choices in front of you or for me aren't affected by whether or not each of us chooses to vote. The only thing millions of people casting votes changes is the outcome of the election. Those millions not casting a vote do not affect the outcome of the election. Nothing else changes, in particular, we do not get a choice of whether or not we get a government. You cannot opt out of that.

 

[newbie]

yeh will it be tweedledum or tweedledee

which one do you want, newbie?

I don't want any of them. Because to want something implies it's desirable, and none of them are. But I'll get a government whether or not I want it.

 

[Citizen66]

the choices in front of you or for me aren't affected by whether or not each of us chooses to vote. The only thing millions of people casting votes changes is the outcome of the election. Those millions not casting a vote do not affect the outcome of the election. Nothing else changes, in particular, we do not get a choice of whether or not we get a government. You cannot opt out of that.

I asked who you are voting for. My money is on it being the war mongers. And I'll remind you about it.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't want any of them. Because to want something implies it's desirable, and none of them are. But I'll get a government whether or not I want it.

so you don't care about the outcome of the election.

 

[Pickman's model]

I asked who you are voting for. My money is on it being the war mongers. And I'll remind you about it.

not only voting for but cheerleading no doubt

 

[Pickman's model]

I'd vote Plaid Cymru if I could.

write it in

 

[newbie]

I asked who you are voting for. My money is on it being the war mongers. And I'll remind you about it.

in that case I misunderstood the question. I live in a safe Labour seat, and while it stays like that I'll vote against Labour. If a tory showed any signs of taking it I'd vote against them.