PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

British GE - Powerswitch decides
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who would you vote for in the British general election?
Conservatives
26%
 26%  [ 6 ]
Labour
56%
 56%  [ 13 ]
Liberal Democrats
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Greens
13%
 13%  [ 3 ]
UKIP
4%
 4%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 23

Author Message
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13990
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr. Fox wrote:
Seriously, 'Nobody' won the last election by a landslide!

Last time there were ~45m voters, of which ~11m voted Tory and ~15m voted 'Nobody' (by not turning out). Cool

Can't we just have sortition and get on with our day? Rolling Eyes


I'm not totally convinced by sortition (although I like it) but it's way better than FPTP.

The Brits voted against even a limited reform of the voting system so there's really no hope for them.
_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6267
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Beria3 wrote:
Shocked by the levels of support for the Tories on this forum. If a bunch of hard left and deep green hippies are supporting the Tories in such numbers looks like a big Tory victory is looming...


Don't take the result too seriously !

Out of well over 100 active members, and several hundred members who are less active but participate to an extent, just 13 have voted.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4120
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It certainly doesn't feel like a 100 active members on this forum.

Normally the forum is virtually dead other than a few regulars.

The fact that only a small number have "voted" is testament to the number of genuinely active members.

Anyway, my point stands. I am (pleasantly) surprised by the depth of the Tory support on PS.
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4331
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Beria3 wrote:
It certainly doesn't feel like a 100 active members on this forum.

Normally the forum is virtually dead other than a few regulars.

The fact that only a small number have "voted" is testament to the number of genuinely active members.

Anyway, my point stands. I am (pleasantly) surprised by the depth of the Tory support on PS.
If you sort the member list by number of posts you only need 450 to be in the top 100. With 4000 I'm number 16 but of course didn't vote in the poll as I don't know enough about your political parties to have an informed opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7650

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's the latest poll from Wikipedia page:
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/sites/tns-bmrb/files/KPUK%20Polling%20tables%20-%2023.5.2017.pdf

Lots of interesting stuff, the voting intention by age is striking. Exclude the 65+ folk and Labour win a landslide.

This suggests to me that disproportional turnout by age means the election basically gives the 'wrong' answer. It would be interested (though obviously politically impossible) to have the election result weighted by age, in that 18-24 votes count twice as much 65+ age band.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5696
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2017 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Latest YouGov poll now puts Labour just 5 points behind the Tories

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/are-tories-losing-ground-or-regaining-it/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4120
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lol.

Great stuff. The blairites must be shitting themselves.

A better then expected performance by Corbyn will ensure the hard left will stay in power after the ge.
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13990
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
It would be interested (though obviously politically impossible) to have the election result weighted by age, in that 18-24 votes count twice as much 65+ age band.


Crikey, that would be a fascinating turnaround, given the history of enfranchisement. Notwithstanding me heading for your cut-off age, I'd give that suggestion serious consideration.

I'm all for abolishing lower age limits anyway. I was politically 'aware' (in an admittedly narrow sense, given there was no political or civic education at my school) at 13/14. A voting age of 18 is disenfranchisement.

It would love to see greater electoral turn-out in the young.
_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5696
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Messing around with electoral weightings would be crossing a dangerous Rubicon. It is stupid at best and deeply sinister at worst.

So what next? - greater weighting given to those who pay the highest tax since they are the biggest contributers? Or, how about only giving it to property owners?

Jesus wept, I can hardly believe that anyone would even consider going down this road. to be honest.

As for lowering the voting age. I am bound to say no to that. I teach young people from the age of 11 to 18 and they are demonstrably not capable of making responsible decisions. Now, of course, the same could be said of many adults. But, as with the age of sexual consent, a line has to be drawn arbitrarily somewhere and 18 is good enough.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13990
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LJ, fair enough but it was in a historical context I was imagining it. Votes historically went to older, white property owners and to go down this route takes it in a complete opposite direction. Of course it's not going to happen but thinking about it does no harm.

And let's face it, there is a massive political weighting towards those with the most money/property anyway, despite individuals having one equal physical vote. And, of course, the actual voting system itself is unbalanced.

As for younger people, I wanted the vote when I was 14 and my political views over the decades have hardly changed. I might be an exception in that regard but I always resented that denial.

My attitudes to young people have been coloured by Irish youth, who on the whole seem more aware and trustworthy than their British counterparts; some other ex-pats agree.

Edit: coincidentally, George Monbiot has just written (yet again) about money and politics.
_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AutomaticEarth



Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 818

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
Here's the latest poll from Wikipedia page:
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/sites/tns-bmrb/files/KPUK%20Polling%20tables%20-%2023.5.2017.pdf

Lots of interesting stuff, the voting intention by age is striking. Exclude the 65+ folk and Labour win a landslide.

This suggests to me that disproportional turnout by age means the election basically gives the 'wrong' answer. It would be interested (though obviously politically impossible) to have the election result weighted by age, in that 18-24 votes count twice as much 65+ age band.


I would suggest moving the voting age to 40+ as a lot of the 18-34 voters do not have a clue about politics. They want their lattes and MacBook Airs paid for by everyone else.

Saying that, my 21 year old nephew is doing very well, and is a steaming Tory, so it's not all bad.


Last edited by AutomaticEarth on Sat May 27, 2017 12:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4331
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain
Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13990
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vtsnowedin wrote:
Quote:
If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain
Smile



Gosh, what bollox! VT, you can be a card sometimes.
_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 886
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Beria3 wrote:
The fact that only a small number have "voted" is testament to the number of genuinely active members.


As Mr Fox has already pointed out, you haven't offered the most popular option (Nobody).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6267
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vtsnowedin wrote:
Lord Beria3 wrote:
It certainly doesn't feel like a 100 active members on this forum.

Normally the forum is virtually dead other than a few regulars.

The fact that only a small number have "voted" is testament to the number of genuinely active members.

Anyway, my point stands. I am (pleasantly) surprised by the depth of the Tory support on PS.
If you sort the member list by number of posts you only need 450 to be in the top 100. With 4000 I'm number 16 but of course didn't vote in the poll as I don't know enough about your political parties to have an informed opinion.


"number of active members" is a bit subjective, but in my view "active" could mean more than say about 200 posts, of which at least a few dozen have been made in the last few months.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group