Market Research Company | Marple Stockport

Author Topic: Mayoral and General Elections 2017  (Read 31817 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

andrewbowden

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 766
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #124 on: May 18, 2017, 09:16:03 AM »
The issue with supposed landslides is that if they seem destined to happen, people stay at home rather than vote.  This is one reason why May occasionally mutters "not taking anything for granted".  She doesn't want people to stay at home.  But when the polls give you runaway leads, that's a tough message.

It's also why, if you oppose the Tories, getting out and voting is essential.

Dave

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #123 on: May 18, 2017, 07:35:48 AM »
There is some truth in that, I find it weird to support a political party in the way I, for instance, support a football team.

I think people still do that to some extent, but less than they used to in past years. There was a time when politics was more tribal - people  voted for the party that looked after 'people like us'. So if you were working class and lived in a council house you voted Labour, and if you were middle class and owned your own house you voted Conservative. There were variations on that (for example, if you were a member of the Methodist church and a teetotaller you voted Liberal), but that was more or less how it was when I were a lad.

The social changes which we have seen in the past fifty years (multiculturalism, the collapse of mining and heavy industry, the expansion of higher education etc etc) have changed all that. There is still a huge gap between the wealthy and the poor, but it's less 'tribal' now, so people don't automatically vote for the same party all the time.  I would like to think it's now about what Tony Benn used to call 'ishoos', but I fear it isn't, it's more about the personal qualities of political leaders.  So although opinion polls show that a lot of people agree with many of the policies in the Labour Manifesto, Corbyn's prospects of being prime minister are vanishingly small.  Whereas the Tories are staking everything on Theresa 'strong and stable' May. They are portraying her as Thatcher.2. She patently isn't, but it will work.  But something tells me she won't get the landslide that they are hoping for.

Duke Fame

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #122 on: May 18, 2017, 01:30:55 AM »
The problem @Condate is that for many of those that bother to vote, their vote simply doesn't count in a first-past-the-post system.  (This is why the Greens have v little representation and we have and a government formed in the past who haven't come top of the popular vote.)  We have a "representative democracy" and yet no-one represents my views in parliament.  Worse still do any casework for me if it goes against (his) ideology, which it probably would, based on his voting record.  @andrewbowden I think nailed it.

If you remove party names (as they once did), parties need to bang out their candidate's names all the time.  A waste of time.
 A whole host of people vote for the party, particularly at a General.  And on the basis of what they THINK a party represents rather than reading the manifesto (more typically read after an election to see what the winners have failed to deliver on).  For instance "Tories are good on the economy and immigration" but policies of austerity and net non-EU immigration have failed quite badly.  (I could give other parties' examples, including our own, but they are currently in government.)

I do yearn for a more responsive and representative democracy.  And fairer voting would be part of that.  Ditching some of the more absurd traditions of parliament, getting an elected 2nd chamber of statesmen-and-women rather than political hacks and PR will help.  After all most people are the in middle of the political system by definition, but the current system gives you a right-wing government about 2/3rds of the time ("let's stick with what we know") and a left-wing one the rest of the time. 

Life means making some compromises and forming friendships with people of slightly different opinions - why shouldn't politics be the same?


I am sorry, dear readers, that was a long one.  I've been away too long!  (Friends will know I've been doing a lot of caring recently.)  2 things to end up on, re comments below.
1) Former MP Andrew Stunell WAS the chief whip for a while!
2) Election expenses rules mean you declare everything, including large donors.  Most Lib Dem money is raised locally.  Would that we had the massive resources of the Tories!

(All comments above are my own although any resemblance to Lib Dem policies, alive or dead, is probably not co-incidental as I am a Lib Dem!)

There is some truth in that, I find it weird to support a political party in the way I, for instance, support a football team. The blind devotion people have seems strange when the party is just a set of ideas / ideals / ideology which are able to change very quickly. Now, I cheered like mad when Kevin Keegan scored and equally when George Riley netted because they wore black and white. I find it hard to see how people can cheer for Tiny Blair and Jeremy Corbyn on the basis of the same rosette.

CllrGeoffAbell

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #121 on: May 17, 2017, 11:56:47 AM »
Actually, it's very fair. Each local area elects a person to represent the area in parliament. What could be fairer than that? Of course if the electorate fail to do their job and just vote for whoever has the right party label, that's the fault of the electorate, not the system. The system could be improved certainly. Getting rid of party names and symbols on the ballot paper would be a good start.

The problem @Condate is that for many of those that bother to vote, their vote simply doesn't count in a first-past-the-post system.  (This is why the Greens have v little representation and we have and a government formed in the past who haven't come top of the popular vote.)  We have a "representative democracy" and yet no-one represents my views in parliament.  Worse still do any casework for me if it goes against (his) ideology, which it probably would, based on his voting record.  @andrewbowden I think nailed it.

If you remove party names (as they once did), parties need to bang out their candidate's names all the time.  A waste of time.
 A whole host of people vote for the party, particularly at a General.  And on the basis of what they THINK a party represents rather than reading the manifesto (more typically read after an election to see what the winners have failed to deliver on).  For instance "Tories are good on the economy and immigration" but policies of austerity and net non-EU immigration have failed quite badly.  (I could give other parties' examples, including our own, but they are currently in government.)

I do yearn for a more responsive and representative democracy.  And fairer voting would be part of that.  Ditching some of the more absurd traditions of parliament, getting an elected 2nd chamber of statesmen-and-women rather than political hacks and PR will help.  After all most people are the in middle of the political system by definition, but the current system gives you a right-wing government about 2/3rds of the time ("let's stick with what we know") and a left-wing one the rest of the time. 

Life means making some compromises and forming friendships with people of slightly different opinions - why shouldn't politics be the same?


I am sorry, dear readers, that was a long one.  I've been away too long!  (Friends will know I've been doing a lot of caring recently.)  2 things to end up on, re comments below.
1) Former MP Andrew Stunell WAS the chief whip for a while!
2) Election expenses rules mean you declare everything, including large donors.  Most Lib Dem money is raised locally.  Would that we had the massive resources of the Tories!

(All comments above are my own although any resemblance to Lib Dem policies, alive or dead, is probably not co-incidental as I am a Lib Dem!)

Condate

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #120 on: May 17, 2017, 08:35:49 AM »
Yes, you are voting for the MP but they are representing a political party and you can't ignore those policies.
They are a member of a political party, but they do not represent the party in Parliament, they represent the constituency. They presumably believe in the general principles of their party, or they would not be a member, but as for views on specific measures and issues, MPs of all parties differ. It may be you could vote for one candidate of a party, but not another. It all depends on the views of the individual.

Duke Fame

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #119 on: May 16, 2017, 11:20:41 PM »
Maybe you do and I know a lot of people do, but it defeats the whole point of the election. What I and a lot of people do is look at the constituency quite independently of what is happening in any other constituency. After all, we are not voting for a government, we are voting purely and simply for who we want as MP for Hazel Grove. If we vote as you suggest, we might as well get rid of the house of commons all together. If an MP is simply a voting machine for his or her party, why have them at all? Why not just have one MP for each party with a certain number of votes, depending on the party's success or otherwise?

Yes, you are voting for the MP but they are representing a political party and you can't ignore those policies.

Duke Fame

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #118 on: May 16, 2017, 11:16:02 PM »
Personally and based on hearing her at the hustings last time, I'd prefer almost anyone to Lisa Smart.

I voted Willie as I didn't think too much of Lisa. I liked Michael but not his party.

andrewbowden

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 766
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #117 on: May 16, 2017, 10:15:36 PM »
Such things are all on public record.
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?id=uk.org.publicwhip/member/41020&showall=yes#divisions

3 times going against the party line out of 419 votes.  Wow.  Rebel.

Hoffnung

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #116 on: May 16, 2017, 09:15:28 PM »
I think that out of 420 votes, Willy has rebelled 3 times.

Anyway, Andrew Stunell isn't standing for election. 

Harry

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #115 on: May 16, 2017, 09:06:28 PM »

Do you mean like Willy?

Actually if you look back at their last parliamentary sessions, it would be more like Andrew Stunell.

William Wragg has rebelled against the whip more than Mr Stunell did.


Hoffnung

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #114 on: May 16, 2017, 08:27:55 PM »
Quote
  If an MP is simply a voting machine for his or her party, why have them at all?


Do you mean like Willy?

Harry

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #113 on: May 16, 2017, 08:26:57 PM »
Yes I read that too. Gina Miller's pressure group is called Best for Britain. However, it's nothing to do with 'halting Brexit'. The group is simply backing candidates who want a proper parliamentary vote on the outcome of the government's Brexit negotiations.

If that's what you want to believe Dave, you carry on believing that.


Condate

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #112 on: May 16, 2017, 07:36:39 PM »
Not sure I agree with this. In a GE, you usually vote for your favoured govt and thus, you vote for the best manifesto which is the party line. The MP should toe the party line as that is why they were voted in.

Maybe you do and I know a lot of people do, but it defeats the whole point of the election. What I and a lot of people do is look at the constituency quite independently of what is happening in any other constituency. After all, we are not voting for a government, we are voting purely and simply for who we want as MP for Hazel Grove. If we vote as you suggest, we might as well get rid of the house of commons all together. If an MP is simply a voting machine for his or her party, why have them at all? Why not just have one MP for each party with a certain number of votes, depending on the party's success or otherwise?


Condate

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #111 on: May 16, 2017, 07:30:10 PM »
Yes,

I'd much prefer to see Lisa as our MP than Willy.

Personally and based on hearing her at the hustings last time, I'd prefer almost anyone to Lisa Smart.

Hoffnung

  • Guest
Re: Mayoral and General Elections 2017
« Reply #110 on: May 16, 2017, 07:05:50 PM »
Yes,

I'd much prefer to see Lisa as our MP than Willy.