| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. 08:45 - Dec 12 with 1793 views | Pinewoodblue |
No falsehoods, no fake news.
Just a reminder that even if your vote isn’t going to make difference just do it. VOTE |  |
| |  |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 09:44 - Dec 12 with 501 views | Kropotkin123 |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 09:42 - Dec 12 by noggin |
So as someone else said, vote for an independent candidate. There are no buses but they'll give you the directions so you can walk. |
No independents stand in my area (At least, none that I have seen what they are promoting). And you still have to actually trust them to do what they say they will. [Post edited 12 Dec 2019 9:44]
|  |
| |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 10:30 - Dec 12 with 477 views | Guthrum |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 09:41 - Dec 12 by Kropotkin123 |
"Just a reminder that even if your vote isn’t going to make difference just do it. VOTE"
From a slightly different angle. I think it is sad that we implicitly recognise that some people's votes don't make a difference.
It is indicative of the system that fails its citizens at the core fundamental principle of democracy that each vote should be equal in worth. It clearly isn't. [Post edited 12 Dec 2019 9:42]
|
Altho that, in itself, is partly an outworking of democracy in that each area will have its (sometimes minority) groups which form a local majority. That's how parties like the SNP and Plaid Cymru win any seats at all. On a pure, UK-wide proportional representation system, they would almost never exceed the usual kind of threshold levels (3-5%) for any seats at all.
The real problem is the domination of large political blocs, forcing people into voting for a very restricted range of options. [Post edited 12 Dec 2019 10:35]
|  |
| |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 10:33 - Dec 12 with 470 views | Guthrum |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 08:54 - Dec 12 by hampstead_blue |
Definitely the first time I've voted whilst pinching my nose.
Not very pleasant. |
Did you sort of have to hold the paper still with your elbow while putting the cross? Very awkward. | |
| |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 11:18 - Dec 12 with 444 views | Pinewoodblue |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 09:41 - Dec 12 by Kropotkin123 |
"Just a reminder that even if your vote isn’t going to make difference just do it. VOTE"
From a slightly different angle. I think it is sad that we implicitly recognise that some people's votes don't make a difference.
It is indicative of the system that fails its citizens at the core fundamental principle of democracy that each vote should be equal in worth. It clearly isn't. [Post edited 12 Dec 2019 9:42]
|
We need an elected second house with no more than 200, elected in the same way as the European elections.
With the two buses going in opposite directions surely one of them takes you closer to where you want to go. | |
| |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 13:33 - Dec 12 with 433 views | Kropotkin123 |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 11:18 - Dec 12 by Pinewoodblue |
We need an elected second house with no more than 200, elected in the same way as the European elections.
With the two buses going in opposite directions surely one of them takes you closer to where you want to go. |
This is part of the problem with politics at the moment. People generally think it is as simple as taking a left or right turn. Where they are along this line generally dictates how they vote. I'm not left or right, I'm "up". I look to science to back up how I should best manage to move "up".
Left = Cooperation
Right = Competition
Up = libertarian
Down = Authoritarian
If you put it on a graph I usually come out around -4,8. On issues that were important to me, I came out 40% Green, 40% Lib Dem and 20% Labour. Ironically, the Greens weren't my choice for the environment.
I won't back the Greens as they are unrealistic in their approach to the economy and they are unscientific in their solutions to energy production. I am a proponent of nuclear. It is factually the safest per energy produced, it is the least damaging to the environment, and it is the best for the ecology. This is important enough for me to dismiss them entirely
I wouldn't vote Liberal Democrats as they proved that proportional representation was not more important to them than power when they formed a coalition with the Conservatives. Brexit is not a massive thing for me, but this is the core of their current policies.
Labour, sure, nationalise a load of stuff. Give the details on how you are going to achieve this, please. What is the cost to the public? Is it going to get sold off for a rubbish price as soon as the next party gets in? Like the banks after we rescued them. The state is a bloated body as it is, is it really the best way to control services? or is a soft form of corporatism more effective?
No one is prepared to have a grown-up discussion on even a level this simplistic, let alone a complex one. More interested in points scoring and being "correct". Rarely do politicians have a holistic idea of what real people experience.
Currently our political system is monolithic. Layers of sh!t on top of each other. You can't get in there easily and target a specific area for reform. You like a party's healthcare policies and end up giving them a mandate to destroy public transport.
We need to copy coding principles. We need microservices. Each sector should be containerised. Eg, You vote for the healthcare ministers based on their healthcare policies.
You must be qualified from that sector, so we know you have the real-world experience. This will get rid of the Eton career politicians who view the government as an extension of their political classroom.
The Prime Minister is an economic position. They should be an economist. Ban politic/history/etc graduates from running - the fantasists that put ideology before evidence.
Obviously lots of tangents there. But I don't believe in the current system. We need fundamental changes to the structure of our democracy. I'm not going to stand by a validate this dross by participating in elections. If you keep voting for dross, you will continue to get dross. [Post edited 12 Dec 2019 13:34]
| |
| |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 13:41 - Dec 12 with 420 views | DanTheMan |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 13:33 - Dec 12 by Kropotkin123 |
This is part of the problem with politics at the moment. People generally think it is as simple as taking a left or right turn. Where they are along this line generally dictates how they vote. I'm not left or right, I'm "up". I look to science to back up how I should best manage to move "up".
Left = Cooperation
Right = Competition
Up = libertarian
Down = Authoritarian
If you put it on a graph I usually come out around -4,8. On issues that were important to me, I came out 40% Green, 40% Lib Dem and 20% Labour. Ironically, the Greens weren't my choice for the environment.
I won't back the Greens as they are unrealistic in their approach to the economy and they are unscientific in their solutions to energy production. I am a proponent of nuclear. It is factually the safest per energy produced, it is the least damaging to the environment, and it is the best for the ecology. This is important enough for me to dismiss them entirely
I wouldn't vote Liberal Democrats as they proved that proportional representation was not more important to them than power when they formed a coalition with the Conservatives. Brexit is not a massive thing for me, but this is the core of their current policies.
Labour, sure, nationalise a load of stuff. Give the details on how you are going to achieve this, please. What is the cost to the public? Is it going to get sold off for a rubbish price as soon as the next party gets in? Like the banks after we rescued them. The state is a bloated body as it is, is it really the best way to control services? or is a soft form of corporatism more effective?
No one is prepared to have a grown-up discussion on even a level this simplistic, let alone a complex one. More interested in points scoring and being "correct". Rarely do politicians have a holistic idea of what real people experience.
Currently our political system is monolithic. Layers of sh!t on top of each other. You can't get in there easily and target a specific area for reform. You like a party's healthcare policies and end up giving them a mandate to destroy public transport.
We need to copy coding principles. We need microservices. Each sector should be containerised. Eg, You vote for the healthcare ministers based on their healthcare policies.
You must be qualified from that sector, so we know you have the real-world experience. This will get rid of the Eton career politicians who view the government as an extension of their political classroom.
The Prime Minister is an economic position. They should be an economist. Ban politic/history/etc graduates from running - the fantasists that put ideology before evidence.
Obviously lots of tangents there. But I don't believe in the current system. We need fundamental changes to the structure of our democracy. I'm not going to stand by a validate this dross by participating in elections. If you keep voting for dross, you will continue to get dross. [Post edited 12 Dec 2019 13:34]
|
A microservice democracy is a fun thought. |  |
| |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 14:36 - Dec 12 with 403 views | SouthBucksBlue |
| No preaching involved in the writing of this post. on 08:53 - Dec 12 by SaleAway |
turn up and spoil your ballot then....
one of the things we need is a "none of the above" option, but its only by spoiling ballots, that the discrepancy between turnout and valid votes will start to be noticed...
if you don't turn up, then they think you just don't care.... |
Quite. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
