Who Will You Vote For?

[Malcolm Robinson]

With the forthcoming election generally accepted as being fought on economic matters it is very worrying that so little detail of what will actually be done by any party winning the election has emerged. I would be far more willing to accept the harsh realties of what lies ahead instead of turgid half lies and whispered promises which only makes for a less than appetising choice at the ballot box. Speaking of which, and here I can accept the previous postings which really are regarding lack of choice, there doesn't seem to be anyone on the national stage who has the where-with-all to steer us through this self inflected moribund economic mess we are in. I can think of only two exceptions to that and one of them isn't going to be in the government and the other is only an adviser. Even Mr Brown has accepted the limitations of his party as he has stuffed his cabinet with non elected people!

There will be at least 150-160 new faces sitting in the commons soon, and I think a lot more as people take out their frustrations at sitting and standing MPs, surly there might be a few who grasp the seriousness of the situation and have the capability of actually doing something about it. Course it is then the luck of the draw as we then have to consider if they have the right coloured ties on. This democracy we are so proud of is really just a sham!

[mobius]

Like i said, i won`t vote because it wouldn`t make any difference. Because whoever gets in will do what they want anyway, regardless of the promises they make.

I`ll not be complaining or ranting on about whoever gets in either. When things get worse and this country slides further down the pan, i`ll just say `I told you so`. Then i`ll blame the people that voted for them for allowing them to do it.

It's easy to adopt such a stance, it's common within an overwhelmingly safe seat such as Wansbeck, but by not voting, even if only out of protest, you are as complicit in the slide down the pan as any other. I'd go so far as to say it is this attitude which contributes heavily to the paucity of electors' voting power in our constituency. It's a self-defeating cycle.

Indeed you could wonder exactly how the current method of government can be described as an operating democracy. The party system does rather subvert the democratic principle, with a relatively small elite selecting candidates and deciding policy. The candidates are presented to us, and we vote for the party, not a person. I've joked amongst friends that Harold Shipman* could get elected in Wansbeck as long as he wore the right coloured rosette. I don't see it going away any time soon, because the people who can change the system are exactly those who have done very well out of the current arrangement, and who therefore are unlikely to see any problem with it.

* I doubt if even being dead would present much of a bar to his selection

[mercuryg]

Mobius,

Nothing wrong with what you are saying at all; my problem - in response to cympil and others - is not that I believe our politicians are a whiter than white biunch of honest men who are going to, somehow, turn this mess around, but that not voting because 'it won't make any difference' is actually the thing that is making the biggest difference!

Do those proclaiming complete and utter apathy at the thought of voting realise what the turn out was at the last election, i.e. what proportion of people with a vote actually bothered to use it? For the record, it was just over 60% (not as bad as the previous one where it was just under 60%....).

That translates as this - and i'm not being facetious in outlining something so simple: out of ten people who can vote only six bother to do so. Think what a difference there may be to the results if that remaining, and they are the 'i'm not bothering to vote because it won't make a difference' crew, actually cast a vote; presumably they are not happy with their lot, as it is primarily they you read on forums such as this spouting off about what a bunch of !*!@# our MP's are (not something i'm going to dispute) and how they are doing a really !*!@# job. If they are not happy with their lot, they have the opportunity to actually do somethign about it; granted, nothing is going to happen overnight, but being utterly complacent and choosing not to vote is not the answer to anything - short or long term.

This isn't a minor portion of the population we're talking about, it's 40% of them!

The thing is, Cympil, you may come back with your 'I told you so' line as things get worse, but what have you achieved? The pride in knowing that there isn't going to be an instant revolution? We all know that - it doesn't make you special! Further, you will have no right blaming anyone for voting for someone as those who did vote were at least deserving of your help, and you didn't give it!

If you have a vote use it, if you don't use it keep it zipped when you don't like what happens at the next t budget; me, I'll be ranting rightfully about the actions of a party that I voted for and didn't keep their promise, or one that i didn't vote for and aim to get rid of.

Edited April 13, 2010 by mercuryg

[ex Bedlingtonian]

I've joked amongst friends that Harold Shipman* could get elected in Wansbeck as long as he wore the right coloured rosette.

I always said the same, but intead of Harold Shipman I used to put the rosette on a chimpanzee.

[Monsta®]

[Mr Darn]

I've said it before and i'll say it again. If there is not a full choice, then theres no choice at all.

Its like a choice of Stella, Carling, Fosters or Carlsberg, when all you want is a decent pint of Guinness.

Bring in a "None of the above" vote on the ballot paper, see what comes of it...

...It wont help elect anyone, but it'll send a clear message to the commons that were not happy with the current choice, and we as a people demand better!

[Monsta®]

Bring in a "None of the above" vote on the ballot paper, see what comes of it...

nothing as there would not be a government to speak of if every one votes none of the above! some nut might then take it upon him/her self to take over as a dictator or civilation as we no it would break down and the french would invade! then we would have to say bonjour and eat frogs legs and snails!

[mobius]

It's interesting to see the constituencies which (in contravention of the Lord Chnacellor's recommendations) are refusing to count on election night.

From the Electoral Commission:

Argyll & Bute

Berwick Upon Tweed

Blyth Valley

Broadland

Buckingham

Cheltenham

Copeland

Henley

Hexham

Huntingdon

Kenilworth & Southam

Lancaster & Fleetwood

Morecambe & Lunesdale

NE Hampshire

Norwich North

Oxford West & Abingdon

Penrith & the Border

Saffron Walden

Skipton & Ripon

St Ives

Torridge & West Devon

Wansbeck

Wantage

Warwick & Leamington

Westmorland & Lonsdale

Nowhere in Northumberland will begin counting until Friday. I can appreciate the rural constituencies like Berwick should take longer - especially since it contains Holy Island and a lot of scattered settlements, but why should Wansbeck and Blyth Valley take the same time? I hardly imagine it's going to be a close count in either place.

[sizsells]

Greedy, dishonest, manipulating!*!@& that's why they're MPs :lol: You also missed out LYING and CHEATING but you're getting there!

If you on the dole and are caught cheating you get jailed, if you are an MP and get caught cheating your expenses you get a slap on the wrist and told don't do it again or start wild rumours about swine flu to get the expenses off the front pages, clever are'nt they!

For what its worth Mr Merlin I agree with you 100%

[sizsells]

It's easy to adopt such a stance, it's common within an overwhelmingly safe seat such as Wansbeck, but by not voting, even if only out of protest, you are as complicit in the slide down the pan as any other. I'd go so far as to say it is this attitude which contributes heavily to the paucity of electors' voting power in our constituency. It's a self-defeating cycle.

Indeed you could wonder exactly how the current method of government can be described as an operating democracy. The party system does rather subvert the democratic principle, with a relatively small elite selecting candidates and deciding policy. The candidates are presented to us, and we vote for the party, not a person. I've joked amongst friends that Harold Shipman* could get elected in Wansbeck as long as he wore the right coloured rosette. I don't see it going away any time soon, because the people who can change the system are exactly those who have done very well out of the current arrangement, and who therefore are unlikely to see any problem with it.

* I doubt if even being dead would present much of a bar to his selection

Another statement that I agree with... it seems to me that a lot of folks vote Labour because there familys have voted Labour for years they seem to have ignorred the fact that this party has changed it spots and is no longer the party for the working man/woman and the lies and deciet are tollerated at election time but they forget that AFTER the election and IF the unfortunate happens and they get

re-elected all they will do is stick up two fingers at them till the next time there blinkered votes are needed

[threegee]

Monsta: I will follow your recommendation, but not a General election where UKIP themselves are saying go out and vote for another candidate who supports a referendum. BTW there's only one Labour candidate they support. He alone has enough clout to resist the party line.

At this election it's the Tories who support local democracy, and Labour who wants to continue with the big government farce. At the European elections things are very different, and unless the Conservatives go a lot further than the current manifesto they deserve to lose badly then.

Whilst the LibDems are often the best choice at the local level their thinking on Europe is completely barmy. Though Vince Cable is a decent guy he called it very wrong on Northern Rock. Also I don't trust them not to form an alliance with power-mad Gordon Brown. They've kept an unpopular minority Labour government in power before, and ambitious Nick Clegg could easily do this again. This didn't do the Country any good back then, and it would be read as a disaster by the markets now!

[Monsta®]

Monsta: I will follow your recommendation, but not a General election where UKIP themselves are saying go out and vote for another candidate who supports a referendum. BTW there's only one Labour candidate they support. He alone has enough clout to resist the party line.

not quite they say where they have no candidates go and vote for the certain labour and conservative eurosceptics that will vote for a referendum.

[threegee]

not quite they say where they have no candidates go and vote for the certain labour and conservative eurosceptics that will vote for a referendum.

What I said. BUT there's only one Labour candidate who openly supports a referrendum at the moment, and no LDs.

This year we pay Brussels over £6,000,000,000 and next year it's set to rise to £10,000,000,000 odd when the rebate runs out. Any mention from the major parties about this? The cost of membership used to be an issue, now it's just too embarassing to talk about. Remember this when they are shutting a post office, or a library, or a community center, in order to save a few tens of thousands of pounds!

[sizsells]

GREEN PARTY.

Just to show I,m not just having a "go" at "NewLabour" Their bloody printing is done in SUSSEX and the candidate is from Morpeth and they witter on about climate change and GREEN ISSUES but they ship all there leaflets around the country something not quite right there methinks

[Andy Millne]

they witter on about climate change and GREEN ISSUES but they ship all there leaflets around the country something not quite right there methinks

Is it printed on recycled paper?

[Monsta®]

Is it printed on recycled paper?

needs printing on toilet paper!

[debrad65]

needs printing on toilet paper!

HA HA! well said!! :D

[sizsells]

Is it printed on recycled paper?

Erm Its in my recycling bin now

[Merlin]

I'm voting for the Volcano Party in the upcoming elections its done more for UK immigration in 5 days than the !*!@# Labour Party has done in 12 years!

[Monsta®]

labour party is in denial! the immigration mp said that immigration was on the decline. what !*!@# planet does he live on? or is his head that far up his own !*!@# he just cant see the truth?

david cameron is a monkey he wants to set a limit. well it better be no more than single figures. as for the lib dems they can all get on the next plane to iceland, the one that flies straight through the ash cloud! they said lets send the immigrants where there wanted i.e. up north! hold on nee one wants them up here! so they can just keep them down there in london!

[Merlin]

Planet of the apes maybe And if spokesman said this within the last few days he's tellin the truth then ain't he, its sure to be in decline when none of the Bar Stewards can get here! Spin my friend Spin!

[mercuryg]

This is a serious question, not one meant to be inflammatory at all, but how many immigrants are there in Bedlington?

[Stephen]

This is a serious question, not one meant to be inflammatory at all, but how many immigrants are there in Bedlington?

Don't know but Wansbeck constituency as a whole (i.e. the former Wansbeck district plus Morpeth) was 98.8% white at the time of the last census (2001) and 2.1% of people were born outside the UK.

[Merlin]

Serious when asked by some, racist when asked by others. It's make your mind up time folks

[Monsta®]

Don't know but Wansbeck constituency as a whole (i.e. the former Wansbeck district plus Morpeth) was 98.8% white at the time of the last census (2001) and 2.1% of people were born outside the UK.

2001 I but know one started to come till after 2004! so whats the real percentage? 20% 30%