General Election 2010

Posted on
Page
of 79
  • For the record, I didn't read Bristly Pioneer's post. Just saw the "Spoil you ballot" banner, and people knock it. It may say some weird shit that I don't agree with.

  • Or go and throw something at Nick Griffin.

  • yeah, spoil your ballot, let a minority extremist party in! Fuck yeah!

    If a minority party get in (Green, BNP, RMLP . . . ) then that is what the people want, which is the whole point of a democratic election.

  • +1 for Bristly Pioneer's 'Spoil you ballot' thing.

  • If a minority party get in (Green, BNP, RMLP . . . ) then that is what the people want, which is the whole point of a democratic election.

    was meant to be godwins style joke...sorry

    If everybody voted and a minority party got in that would be democratic. If nobody votes and the BNP get in, people will just moan that nobody did anything about it, when this is our chance to do something about it.

  • If nobody votes and the BNP get in

    How might that work ?

    A party gets elected with no votes ?

  • How might that work ?

    A party gets elected with no votes ?

    Sorry - I meant 'if their is a poor electoral turnout'.

  • So if some people spoil their ballots (people who are unlikely to have the party they're voting for win, hence their dissatisfaction), the BNP will win a majority? Fuck. I'm playing with fire.

    Who's naive now?

  • Spoiling your ballot is only a statement if more than a marginal number of people do it. In any other case spoiling your ballot will make even less of an impact than an actual vote.

  • In a situation where there is very little chance of your vote having an impact anyway, I'm not sure what they worry is? There is more chance of a spoiled ballot having the same impact as a non-spoiled ballot, than a non-spoiled ballot actually affecting the outcome of the election. That is the tragedy.

    Beyond that, it's both a symbolic gesture, which has its own intrinsic value which can be judged however you want to, and it is the actualization of one's civic responsibility without pandering to a system one doesn't agree with.

  • So if some people spoil their ballots (people who are unlikely to have the party they're voting for win, hence their dissatisfaction), the BNP will win a majority? Fuck. I'm playing with fire.

    Who's naive now?

    No I said if most people spoil their ballots a less mainstream party could in. Could be BNP, could be greens, UKIP, respect, whatever.

  • In a situation where there is very little chance of your vote having an impact anyway, I'm not sure what they worry is? There is more chance of a spoiled ballot having an impact as a non-spoiled ballot. That is the tragedy.

    Beyond that, it's both a symbolic gesture, which has its own intrinsic value which can be judged however you want to, and it is the actualization of one's civic responsibility without pandering to a system one doesn't agree with.

    A non-vote and a spoiled ballot are both seen the way. Its the equivalent of not playing a game because you don't like the rules. But you need to play to change the rules. You won't have helped anybody into power that has any desire for voting reform.

  • No I said if most people spoil their ballots a less mainstream party could in. Could be BNP, could be greens, UKIP, respect, whatever.

    If every labour, lib dem, and tory supporter decided to spoil their ballots, than it's possible. Would never happen though. Why?

    a) Labour and the Tories benefit from the current electoral system, so why would they protest against it?

    b) if they were opposed to the electoral system, as the parties that will have power, they could simply address the problem while in government, rather than protesting.

  • If every labour, lib dem, and tory supporter decided to spoil their ballots, than it's possible. Would never happen though. Why?

    a) Labour and the Tories benefit from the current electoral system, so why would they protest against it?

    b) if they were opposed to the electoral system, as the parties that will have power, they could simply address the problem while in government, rather than protesting.

    So vote Lib Dem! They are passionate about electoral reform. A spoiled vote will only say you don't care. I could understand (a little) if there was no one canvassing on an electoral reform ticket, but there is!

  • A non-vote and a spoiled ballot are both seen the way. Its the equivalent of not playing a game because you don't like the rules. But you need to play to change the rules. You won't have helped anybody into power that has any desire for voting reform.

    Voting won't help put anyone in power who has the desire to change the system. The electoral system is set up in such a way as to ensure that (unless we get a minority government which allows for the Lib Dems to agree to supporting a party in exchange for electoral reform. This is a possibility).

    (so why not vote lib dem [if they were the party I would want to support]? it doesn't change the fact that the system, as now, means my vote is not worth casting and will not affect the election results. A spoiled ballot is, at the very least, a symbolic gesture of dissatisfaction).

  • Not voting doesn't change anything, unless nobody votes. But as you've already said, that would never happen.

    I give up : (

  • yeah, spoil your ballot, let a minority extremist party in! Fuck yeah!

    We don't have proportional representation!

    I live in bethnal green and bow, any vote other than Labour or Respect is going to end up in the bin.

    Your vote doesn't carry on to the next round if someone you didn't vote for wins your ward.

    short of 4 or 5 constituencies in the country a spoilt ballot is no help to the BNP what so ever.

  • This is the essence of the argument: voting doesn't change anything either.

  • What does then?

  • Drinking? I'm hoping, anyway.

  • Getting drunk then rioting in Trafalgar Square did for the Poll Tax, so there's some hope.

  • Serious answer - the party who gets the largest minority of votes changes things. I.e., the party that the majority of the population did not vote for.

  • Apostrophe fail on that poster Bristly.
    It should be a closing apostrophe, on 'em not an opening one.

    Really???

    the apostrophe is to demark the missing TH

    Reject the lot of them!
    becomes
    Reject the lot of 'em!

    http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/apostrophe-1.aspx

    If you're writing fiction, you might use apostrophes to eliminate letters to formulate a character's dialect; for example, "I saw 'em talkin' yonder," with apostrophes to indicate that the speaker said 'em instead of them (t-h-e-m), and talkin' instead of talking (t-a-l-k-i-n-g).

  • What does then?

    Community organisation, taking responsibility ourselves and getting organised.

    The more people reject the current system and start doing things by themselves, the more the establishment freak out and attempt to hijack popular movements for their own parties manifestos.

  • No I said if most people spoil their ballots a less mainstream party could in. Could be BNP, could be greens, UKIP, respect, whatever.

    It would have to work like this (to make any sense at all):

    Most people who support the Labour and Conservative parties spoil their ballots, and most of the people who support the winning minority party do not.

    Which is unlikely to happen as the people who support the Labour and Conservative parties would have little to protest about as the system as it is favours them, while the people most likely to protest (through a spoilt ballot) are those minority party voters.

    If on the other hand most people (from all persuasions) spoil their ballots and the BNP (or any party at all) get in, then that is democracy at work.

    [EDIT . . . look like I just repeated what Horatio said above]

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

General Election 2010

Posted by Avatar for lpg @lpg

Actions