Page 3 of 4

Re: Letwin

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:47 pm
by Deuce Bigolo
Its called making yourself a small target

We all know that elections are won by using negative campaigning

As none/or very few of us actually read the policies of the different parties we judge them by vague outlines (better health,education & security) and who seems more competent & honest than the other

A good reason for voting to be non-compulsory really

cheers
B....OZ

Re: Letwin

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2004 11:40 pm
by Pervert
Proof, if it were needed, that politicians lie all the time: come election time, they all beat the drum for the manifesto---but how much of it is actually what individual candidates believe? Yet they can't afford to deviate from the script or the opposition will use them for target practice, and therefore principles are jettisoned for the good of the party.

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 12:22 am
by Deuce Bigolo
The only time they get to be themselves is the farcical conscience vote

Put aside for special occasions like voting on Politicians Superannuation
and emotive issues like abortion,gay rights,invitro fertilisation etc

Thats why its always the choice bewtween tweedle dee & tweedle dumb

Both Parties are ruled by big business through lobbyists so it really doesn't matter which party you vote for IMHO

cheers
B....OZ

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:49 am
by jj
.......like Ebony and Ivory, the Frog Chorus, Mull of Kintyre.....do I see a pattern emerging here?

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:50 am
by Pervert
Careful, JJ---you'll get Giles started again.

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:51 am
by jj
"If you can remember the 80s, you have my deepest sympathy".

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:53 am
by jj
It's OK- he's still listening to his Nik Kershaw comp, on loop.

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:58 am
by jj
........but the sinister edge to this is that, as more and more people come to feel their vote is worthless, fewer will vote- the politicians will have less of a mandate, and some of their brighter heads will begin to ask 'do we really need all that electoral nonsense'?
The only thing that will save our current set-up, by short-circuiting to a degree the party line, and addressing local issues, is PR- and can you see that coming in without, err, some form of PR?

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:06 am
by Pervert
We have PR up here for the Scottish Parliament, but they're frightened to use it in council or Westminster elections. On the plus side, it means that Greens and independents, as well as Tommy the tan and his socialist cohorts can find a platform for their views. On the minus side, it means the Lib Dems have to look bloody stupid to retain some sort of say in the power sharing since Labour are no longer pretending it's a real partnership.

Another worrying thing is that, having seen fringe parties win seats in an assembly, the racist arseholes of the BNP will start putting more and more candidates forward up here---and I'm no longer as confident as I once was that the people of Scotland will give them short shrift. September 11 allowed the timid bigots an opportunity to crawl from beneath their stones, and they've become accustomed to the daylight.

Re: Letwin

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:13 am
by jj
I think this is less of a real worry in Parliamentary elections- people then traditionally transfer their local BNP 'protest vote' to a more mainstream party.
1930s Germany didn't have PR, AFAIK............