Forthcoming Election..

[nachovx]

If I were to vote for any party, it would be the liberals - but as I've made a conscious decision to not vote anymore, I won't. I find it best to not get involved with 'society' and just do what you want instead.

[diplodocus]

most of the western world seems to be a choice between two forms of government, slightly left or right.
Here as far as I can make out it's the same same but with Labour/Tory on the right and Libs on the left.
My own personal leanings are to the left but I don't see enough actual strong ideas coming from the Libs to vote for them apart from opposing what the others do.
(My mate stood as a Lib candidate last year in a by election so i'm sure i'll get the third degree from him though)
When Labour got in they had some strong ideas such as minimum wage but their current ideas I feel could cause real damage to to future (50% of people going to Uni to come out with debts of 20-30k and a shit degree! fucking stupid idea)
The Tories just scare me after growing up under Thatcher and seeing the terrible effect their policies had on the area I lived in and the change in mentality of the country. This still has an effect now I feel in the way companies can fuck off British workers to make more profit, even when they already make a shit load.
I do feel a sense of duty to vote, we take it too much for granted in this part of the world, and it's not an eggageration that people have died to get it. but this time round will be the hardest choice i've had to make

soul search over, still no clearer

[Pervert]

Curious. I have a similar reason for loathing the SNP. They forced a vote of confidence in 1979 on the devolution issue, paving the way for 18 years of the Tories. Bunch of tossers.

I think the Lib Dems would get a lot more support if less people were frightened that a vote for them would let the Tories/Labour win in their area. Fear is the defining feeling of our age.

[Officer Dibble]

A vote for any of the main three parties will be a vote to maintain the status quo. There is no real difference between them ? they are all trying to occupy the same centre ground. Whoever is elected will just shuffle the cards slightly and then settle down to 4-5 years of talking parliamentary bollocks, platitudes and waffle - fiddling while Rome burns. There will be no clear and direct action to tackle the problems of the growing underclass (chavs), asylum and immigration, economic stagnation in Europe, a wanky education system dishing out devalued qualifications and no action the make British industry and commerce more competitive and relevant in the face of the Chinese economic dragon. There seems to be no real political power or will to actually do anything about these issues. Even if a government did have the will it would probably be thwarted by vested interests and political dogma in the public sector and civil service. Instead what you will get are more laws, rules and regulations, curbing your freedom to run your life and spend your money as you see fit. And talking of money, you will be forced to pay more for the administration of all the extra bureaucracy as well as the huge cost of maintaining a dependent, feckless, underclass.

So, unless there are any surprising and exciting developments in the next few weeks, I for one will be abstaining. Which is the worst it is in my power to do to them. Fuck all those middleclass twats. I do not give them my mandate, I do not give them my consent, and I nightly prey to the gods of the electoral roll that the turnout drops below 50%.


Officer Dibble

[Pervert]

Apathy, or trying to teach the bastards a lesson, is the way to let extreme parties gain power. Why do you think the xenophobic UKIP did so well last year---it certainly had nothing to do with Tango Kilroy Silk.

Whatever your reasons for voting for a party will be misinterpreted by politicians. Just because all Tories reach a consensus on their manifesto, or all Labour candidates on theirs, doesn't mean the Great British public agrees with them. Someone might vote for Howard because of his stance on immigration, but he'd see that as agreeing also with cutting public spending; or a vote for Blair because you think the economy is doing well will be seen by the Teflon twat as a ringing endorsement of his policies in Iraq.

I know someone once said we shouldn't vote, as it just encourages the buggers, but putting the responsibility in someone else's hands isn't the answer. Vote for your own reasons, but never be fooled into thinking the politicians listen to you.

[diplodocus]

that is so true, not voting as a means to hurt the politicians is very niave, it will only hurt yourself in the long run as it gives the extreme parties as you say the ability to gain some real power. Yes all the main parties are very similar, but that's simply because most people have similar thoughts on what is acceptable. I don't think anyone's life would change drastically if either of the main three got in but they would if we gave extremists like the BNP the power to run things

[Officer Dibble]

"all the main parties are very similar, but that's simply because most people have similar thoughts on what is acceptable."

If you go out onto the street or into the pub and ask ordinary voters what they think is acceptable I think you'll find that they are very, er, 'open mined' as to what would be acceptable. If they do vote for the established parties on polling day it will simply be because they are frightened of real change, frightened of the unknown - even though they detest what the establish parties are doing, or rather, not doing. I agree that it's a dangerous game abstaining and maybe allowing some nutmegs like the BNP or Greens into power and, unfortunately, I can't suggest who else to vote for as there is no other party with clear, concise, pragmatic ideas and policies to vote for. But I'm so pissed off at the inertia of those smug middleclass bastards in parliament and the civil service that I want to wipe the smirk off their earnest pompous faces and bring the whole house of cards down.

Also, do you class any party that actually suggests taking clear, no waffle, and direct action to actually deal with an issue, extremists? - For instance, asylum/immigration: If someone turns up on our doorstep without the secret to either cold fusion, superconductors, antigravity or a suitcase full of hundred dollar bills, we ain't got room for 'em and we don't need 'em. So why not just simply send 'em back on the next plane or boat from whence they came? I don't see a problem to be waffled and procrastinated over at huge taxpayer expense, and neither do the folks out on the street. Of course I know about the various international conventions and the like - but we're the forth biggest economy on the planet - if other countries don?t like it we could just tell 'em to fuck off, and let them take the migrants if they're so fucking upset about it. They?d change their tune then, I can tell yer.


Officer Dibble - sorting problems the no nonsense way

[Spook]

"Officer Dibble - sorting problems the no nonsense way"

Nope - sorting out problems the stupid way, in what I'd like to think is trollish bluster rather than the ignorance of prejudice.

We have immigration because the economy requires it.

You can argue as long as you want about controls on the level of immigration, but only the really really hard of thinking would consider it in the country's best interests to ban all immigration other than the super-rich.

[Lizard]

"But I'm so pissed off at the inertia of those smug middleclass bastards in parliament and the civil service that I want to wipe the smirk off their earnest pompous faces and bring the whole house of cards down."

Then we have anarchy Dibbs, and that would mean some chavs just strolling up your drive and taking your car, just because they can! and no one to stop them or no laws to punish them!...........................WAIT! a minute, thats what happens NOW isn,t it?