Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ckn

2015 General Election predictions

68 posts in this topic

My prediction is that whichever party 'wins' the next election, they will achieve less than 40% of the actual votes cast on a turnout of about 65%, which won't give them much of a genuine mandate to do anything at all. Not that this will stop them claiming a mandate to do anything they choose.

I disagree with that, if you choose not to vote then you accept and give mandate to the government that results.  If you feel particularly strongly that one party shouldn't be in power then vote, if you're defeated then you've at least done your bit for the democratic process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CKN  there is only one problem, if you live in the area where the local MP is the speaker of the house, no other major party will put anybody up against him . This is because of an agreement between the political parties not to put a candidate up against him and being the speaker he has no voice in the house .Nigel Farage stood against him in the last election but being a rank Tory area he didn't get that many votes. Is there any point in voting in that situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with that, if you choose not to vote then you accept and give mandate to the government that results.  If you feel particularly strongly that one party shouldn't be in power then vote, if you're defeated then you've at least done your bit for the democratic process.

 

I always vote, but growing numbers don't, and that's a problem that needs addressing. It won't be addressed as long as 'mandates' continue to be endorsed when they represent ever-dwindling fractions of the electorate. How low is too low a share of the vote for the 'winner' to claim a genuine mandate, in an age when the drift of votes away from the two major parties looks set to continue indefinitely? 35%? 30% 25%. Lower than that? At what point do we admit 'this whole process is a sham' and begin to demand it be changed to something more representative?

 

Many people actively choose not to vote. That doesn't necessarily signal a disinterest in politics, more a general disgust at the process and the paucity of choice on offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CKN  there is only one problem, if you live in the area where the local MP is the speaker of the house, no other major party will put anybody up against him . This is because of an agreement between the political parties not to put a candidate up against him and being the speaker he has no voice in the house .Nigel Farage stood against him in the last election but being a rank Tory area he didn't get that many votes. Is there any point in voting in that situation?

Yes.  The reason the situation exists is that the convention has been allowed to stand by an apathetic electorate.  A concerted effort by a few local people to overcome the ridiculous situation and tap into those who don't want the horrible little man back in the seat could even get the Monster Raving Loony Party's first MP, turnouts are so low in these constituencies that it's not that difficult a view to take.

 

I think Farage is an odious little man just shy of Nick Griffin (my very personal opinion) but I'd rather vote for him than have my vote wasted due to a "convention" that essentially disenfranchises an entire constituency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always vote, but growing numbers don't, and that's a problem that needs addressing. It won't be addressed as long as 'mandates' continue to be endorsed when they represent ever-dwindling fractions of the electorate. How low is too low a share of the vote for the 'winner' to claim a genuine mandate, in an age when the drift of votes away from the two major parties looks set to continue indefinitely? 35%? 30% 25%. Lower than that? At what point do we admit 'this whole process is a sham' and begin to demand it be changed to something more representative?

 

Many people actively choose not to vote. That doesn't necessarily signal a disinterest in politics, more a general disgust at the process and the paucity of choice on offer.

I think the current Labour party are a disgrace in many aspects.  Ed Miliband is a weasel and is just a less popular version of Cameron in his attitudes towards doing anything that his focus groups say.  The rest of the Shadow Cabinet with their promises to out-do the Tories on cracking down on benefits claimants (not benefits fraud but claimants) and other nonsense policies are probably the weakest Shadow Cabinet since the early 1980s.  I'll still vote for them though because they're the best of a really bad bunch, it's either that or go sulk and tacitly approve the next government with my inaction.

 

Even if we get 10% of the electorate voting, that's still a democratic mandate if the other 90% are not voting because of apathy.  It's their choice not to vote.  They could choose to turn up and vote for a local independent, they could vote for anyone they choose on the ballot paper, they could even spoil the paper by writing some obscenities that only a vote counter will see for a fraction of a second.

 

edit:  That picture of Miliband eating a bacon roll like a bit of a nerd was probably a focus group suggesting that people would vote for him if he publicly ate bacon.  He'd be fighting with Cameron for first in the line for a punt to the nuts if a focus group suggested it'd get them the vote of the nut punter.  Hmmm... there's a thought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  That picture of Miliband eating a bacon roll like a bit of a nerd was probably a focus group suggesting that people would vote for him if he publicly ate bacon.  He'd be fighting with Cameron for first in the line for a punt to the nuts if a focus group suggested it'd get them the vote of the nut punter.  Hmmm... there's a thought...

 

 

I hope he's not going to chase the gay vote.

 

;):ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he's not going to chase the gay vote.

 

;):ph34r:

Strangest gay people I've ever known if they go around punting each other in the nuts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strangest gay people I've ever known if they go around punting each other in the nuts!

Perhaps they'd then offer to kiss it better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always vote, but growing numbers don't, and that's a problem that needs addressing. It won't be addressed as long as 'mandates' continue to be endorsed when they represent ever-dwindling fractions of the electorate. How low is too low a share of the vote for the 'winner' to claim a genuine mandate, in an age when the drift of votes away from the two major parties looks set to continue indefinitely? 35%? 30% 25%. Lower than that? At what point do we admit 'this whole process is a sham' and begin to demand it be changed to something more representative?

 

Many people actively choose not to vote. That doesn't necessarily signal a disinterest in politics, more a general disgust at the process and the paucity of choice on offer.

50% according to theTories. Oh, sorry, that's just for 'Union Barons'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I think next years election results show will be brilliant television. The best since Labour's landslide in 1997.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

I hope he's not going to chase the gay vote.

;):ph34r:

I'm not sure what you mean

Can you explain?

Share this post


Link to post

The Scots reckon they;ll get an 80% turnout for the referendum, but that is a once for all vote.  If they vote "yes" they won't be able to say in five years that they've changed their minds.  It would be good though if just for once the people of this country could take the trouble to go to their local polling station and register their opinion.  Your vote does count, and if you don't use it you can't complain afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

Speak for yourself please

Come on then what does happen to them if Scotland goes independent? More to the point,?? given that most of them will be Labour, what happens if Labour win the election after Scotland's voted to go independent?  Assuming March 2016 as the date for separation, what happens next to the MP's?

Share this post


Link to post

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

Come on then what does happen to them if Scotland goes independent? More to the point,?? given that most of them will be Labour, what happens if Labour win the election after Scotland's voted to go independent? Assuming March 2016 as the date for separation, what happens next to the MP's?

Why should I bother

The point is that you don't speak for others on here

Share this post


Link to post

My prediction is that whichever party 'wins' the next election, they will achieve less than 40% of the actual votes cast on a turnout of about 65%, which won't give them much of a genuine mandate to do anything at all. Not that this will stop them claiming a mandate to do anything they choose.

This isn't unusual is it john. I think there's quite a long history if parties gaining power with less than half of the popular vote

It's a two edged sword in that at least we get a government in power that can carry out that mandate, rather than have to horse trade with other parties that's even true with the coalition in reality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

Why should I bother

The point is that you don't speak for others on here

I was speaking for those of us who don't know, including you by the sound of it!  In fact why don't you start up your own forum with only you on it, then there'd be no one do disagree with your views.

Share this post


Link to post

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

I was speaking for those of us who don't know, including you by the sound of it! In fact why don't you start up your own forum with only you on it, then there'd be no one do disagree with your views.

Whatever

FYI I've been following the independence issue closely for several years.

Again, please speak for yourself rather than appoint yourself as spokesperson for others without consulting them

Share this post


Link to post

I predict no party will have an overall majority forcing another GE within months. Clegg would have to be pretty dumb to get into bed with the Tories again, even if he had the opportunity too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

aren't we on fixed term parliaments now?  the GE is yet 9 months away. Plenty of time for things to change, in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

Whatever

FYI I've been following the independence issue closely for several years.

Again, please speak for yourself rather than appoint yourself as spokesperson for others without consulting them

No you were just being routinely unpleasant to someone you don't like (me.) Like you were being routinely unpleasant to Ian Clayton when you described "When Push Comes to Shove" as "ghastly"  It's what I've come to expect from you.

Share this post


Link to post

aren't we on fixed term parliaments now? the GE is yet 9 months away. Plenty of time for things to change, in any case.

Good point

We've got the Tories trying to out UKIP UKIP

Labour trying to say that image doesn't matter whilst working their asses off on Milliband's image

UKIP trying to think of something else now that they've played the immigration and Europe cards

The Lib Dems wishing the world would end

The Monster Raving Loony party a shadow if its former self without screaming lord sutch

I'll be voting for someone though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

No you were just being routinely unpleasant to someone you don't like (me.) Like you were being routinely unpleasant to Ian Clayton when you described "When Push Comes to Shove" as "ghastly" It's what I've come to expect from you.

I don't know you so I can't 'not like you'.

I worked on the book and thought it was ghastly , my feelings towards mr clayton are irrelevant. I am allowed to think that a book is ghastly on account of its content. I've described what I found embarrassing, debilitating and unenjoyable about the content. Is it somehow compulsory to like the book? I never mentioned mr clayton please don't attempt to second guess my thoughts

Share this post


Link to post

I predict no party will have an overall majority forcing another GE within months. Clegg would have to be pretty dumb to get into bed with the Tories again, even if he had the opportunity too.

He won't have enough seats to make it worth the other party's while

I reckon we'll have a lame duck minority government that as you say won't last long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

n please don't attempt to second guess my thoughts

Don't need to I can read them like a book

Share this post


Link to post

Posted · Hidden by ckn, August 2, 2014 - No reason given

Give over children, or you'll go to bed early!

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017