With abstention it is understood that one gives free rein to the winning option, whatever it will be. Therefore, the "they" in "they'll vote for you" are the other voters. In other words, if you don't vote you let the others decide for you.
Are political threads allowed?
-
-
And last, but not least, a lot of battles had been fought in order to have universal suffrage. In my opinion, voting should be compulsory.
-
No, you said "They'll vote for you" - don't try and say that what you said is not what you said, or you'll be Paula Vennels.
You're on fire today.
-
And last, but not least, a lot of battles had been fought in order to have universal suffrage. In my opinion, voting should be compulsory.
Really?
2019 election: 3 choices: Boris Johnson: can't vote for him, reasons being obvious. Jeremy Corbyn: can't vote for him, wants to borrow when we are already saddled with debt by last Labour gov't as Brown tries to buy election, post credit-crunch. (Imagine if he had, THEN we'd had Covid!!!) Jo Swinson: can't vote for her, hypocrite leading Liberal DEMOCRATS who states she is not going to invoke the democratic will of the people in the EU Referendum (later turns out she's one of the enablers of Post Office scandal along with Ed Davey among others.) So, who you gonna vote for if you are legally required, but have a brain?
I accept that what you said about "they'll vote for you" is a badly worded explanation, given your reply saying "I''m not a Conspiracy Theorist Horsecrap at all!!!!" is not even grammatically logical. I assume English is not your first language?
-
Interested bystander here, I have no horse in the race as I don't live in the UK. Actually because of my immigration status, I can't even vote in the stupid country I live in for now.
My observation on the above discussion re no good candidates, is that this doesn't negate the value and importance of voting. Even if the candidates are all terrible, one is probably worse than the others, and preventing that person from being elected is worth doing. Fair enough if one believes there are absolutely no tie breakers and can't decide, but I think it would be pretty rare for a set of personal values and candidates' stated positions not to result in a "yes that's my guy/gal" or at least "oh dear God no, anyone but them".
-
I accept that what you said about "they'll vote for you" is a badly worded explanation, given your reply saying "I''m not a Conspiracy Theorist Horsecrap at all!!!!" is not even grammatically logical. I assume English is not your first language?
Are you kidding me?
English is my Mother Tongue.
I wrote "I'm not a Conspiracy Theorist Horsecrap at all!!!!" while being incensed by your uncalled for remark. My reply was grammatically logical as I'm not one of those shitheads parroting conspiracy theories. Furthermore, it is a far more natural English sentence than your Byzantine declamation "I accept that what you said about "they'll vote for you" is a badly worded explanation, given your reply saying [it] is not even grammatically logical.", it looks like a broken Google translation.
And last, but not least, I wrote "I'm not" not "I''m not".
Those like us who have English as a first language know that only a single apostrophe is needed for a verbal contraction rather than a double one.
-
My observation on the above discussion re no good candidates, is that this doesn't negate the value and importance of voting.
That was my point.
-
In other words, if you don't vote you let the others decide for you.
Those other words are the words you should've used in the first place and saved the need for all the above.
-
Really?
2019 election: 3 choices...
In any UK election there are always more than 3 choices. Infuriatingly, our system as it stands means the range of options on our ballot papers only ever yields either Con or Lab as the UK government. Unless we move away from FPTP we can at best vote to return decent established sitting constituency MPs, vote genuinely with conscience for whichever candidate is the most appealing, or protest vote by avoiding the main parties in the hope that just maybe enough people will do that to give a clear signal of discontent.
-
In any UK election there are always more than 3 choices. [...] Unless we move away from FPTP we can at best vote to return decent established sitting constituency MPs, vote genuinely with conscience for whichever candidate is the most appealing, or protest vote by avoiding the main parties in the hope that just maybe enough people will do that to give a clear signal of discontent.
That is also my point
-
Really?
2019 election: 3 choices: Boris Johnson: can't vote for him, reasons being obvious. Jeremy Corbyn: can't vote for him, wants to borrow when we are already saddled with debt by last Labour gov't as Brown tries to buy election, post credit-crunch. (Imagine if he had, THEN we'd had Covid!!!) Jo Swinson: can't vote for her, hypocrite leading Liberal DEMOCRATS who states she is not going to invoke the democratic will of the people in the EU Referendum (later turns out she's one of the enablers of Post Office scandal along with Ed Davey among others.) So, who you gonna vote for if you are legally required, but have a brain?
I accept that what you said about "they'll vote for you" is a badly worded explanation, given your reply saying "I''m not a Conspiracy Theorist Horsecrap at all!!!!" is not even grammatically logical. I assume English is not your first language?
Surely you would vote for the least worst person standing in your constituency, given that under the Westminster system you don't directly vote for the party leader.
As you all probably know, voting is compulsory in Australia where I am. I live in a very safe conservative seat so my vote doesn't matter most of the time, but I'm proud to exercise my right. But it it isn't compulsory I suppose people just say 'a curse on all their houses' as above.
Anyway I am looking forward to watching the election results on the BBC. I sometimes wish we had the first past the post system.
-
Why vote if the polls say your party has already lost?
-
I think voting should be compulsory to help decrease the apathy towards politics in the UK. It won't happen though, judging by the pointless recent requirement for ID to be able to vote.
I also think first past the post should be scrapped in favour of proportional representation to reduce tactical voting but the ruling party would never do that.
-
Are you kidding me?
English is my Mother Tongue.
I wrote "I'm not a Conspiracy Theorist Horsecrap at all!!!!" while being incensed by your uncalled for remark. My reply was grammatically logical as I'm not one of those shitheads parroting conspiracy theories. Furthermore, it is a far more natural English sentence than your Byzantine declamation "I accept that what you said about "they'll vote for you" is a badly worded explanation, given your reply saying [it] is not even grammatically logical.", it looks like a broken Google translation.
And last, but not least, I wrote "I'm not" not "I''m not".
Those like us who have English as a first language know that only a single apostrophe is needed for a verbal contraction rather than a double one.
QED!
-
Surely you would vote for the least worst person standing in your constituency, given that under the Westminster system you don't directly vote for the party leader.
As you all probably know, voting is compulsory in Australia where I am. I live in a very safe conservative seat so my vote doesn't matter most of the time, but I'm proud to exercise my right. But it it isn't compulsory I suppose people just say 'a curse on all their houses' as above.
Anyway I am looking forward to watching the election results on the BBC. I sometimes wish we had the first past the post system.
Well, the person who won the local constituency, Chris Matheson, was later kicked out of parliament, so that kinda didn't work either!
-
Why vote if the polls say your party has already lost?
Because your vote may prove the polls wrong.
-
Because your vote may prove the polls wrong.
i.e.- Trump in 2016. The polls had Hillary in a landslide, and yet….
By the way, I wouldn’t vote for Trump if my life depended on it. I usually don’t wade into politics with anyone other than my wife. Too visceral.
-
Opinion polls may also have the opposite effect, they could keep telling that X Party would win over Y Party with a comfortable majority, leading X to a self-complacency state of mind and its supporters failing to vote due to their belief in a assured victory. At the end, the ones who actually went as a whole to the polling station are the Y supporters with the result that Y won the election.
-
I am for:
Proportional representation in Parliament
Direct-elected Government and Prime Minister, regardless of Parliament
Automatic holding-up of a binding referendum whenever a sovereign issue is tackled, demanded by a third of MPs or required by a citizens' initiative of at least 1,000,000 signatures
Compulsory vote
Polling day either held on a Saturday or turned into a Bank Holiday
-
As you all probably know, voting is compulsory in Australia where I am. I live in a very safe conservative seat so my vote doesn't matter most of the time, but I'm proud to exercise my right. But it it isn't compulsory I suppose people just say 'a curse on all their houses' as above.
Incidentally, how do they enforce compulsory voting with a secret ballot system? If you just turn up, fold the paper and drop it in the box, does that satisfy them? I didn't know it was compulsory in Australia, and tbh, I'd be happy with such a system, but only if we had politicians who earn the respect to make it worth while. Not sure I can think of anywhere that such people are standing!
Also, I assume that, to enforce it, you need ID. I think ID is a good thing, without it, the system is open to all sorts of abuse, anyone could turn up and claim to be you, armed with enough knowledge of you.
