Posted: 2005-04-20 20:53:36
Get out and vote
All In London Forum
Page 1 of 1
susanna
I keep hearing all these stories about apathy amongst the public - we don't care enough about politics to get out and vote they say. I can't believe that this is true of Londoners. There has been such interest and debate here about political topics such as the Iraq war, the congestion charge and the rights and (more to the point) wrongs of the immigration debate, as well as the myriad of areas covered every day in the lively reader's section in the Metro... please can we prove these people wrong by ALL proving we care and going out to vote on the 5th?
TheMog
Agreed, we should really be ashamed of the turnout figures in the UK. We're all quick to make remarks at the TV when the news is on but when it comes to actually doing something that could make a difference we're not interested.
I'll be voting for....
I'll be voting for....
Posted: 2005-04-20 22:08:48
james
Politics seems to have got out of line with society. People no longer see it as important to them.
It used to much clearer. Labour was the party of the working classes and the Conservatives stood for the upper and middle classes... it is not so easy now...
These days all the parties are concentrating on focus groups, floating voters and the media with little true thought to what needs to be done to make the UK a better place.
Everyone should vote, every vote does count, it is a shame, but i can't see that apathy going away... at least not very soon.
It used to much clearer. Labour was the party of the working classes and the Conservatives stood for the upper and middle classes... it is not so easy now...
These days all the parties are concentrating on focus groups, floating voters and the media with little true thought to what needs to be done to make the UK a better place.
Everyone should vote, every vote does count, it is a shame, but i can't see that apathy going away... at least not very soon.
Posted: 2005-04-21 14:23:54
TheMog
Just been out and voted, thought I wouldn't be able to as I moved recently, voted under the old address though. 
Dissappointing to not see loads of people at the polling station. Hopefully this year we'll get some better turnout figures.
I really don't understand people who say they're bored with the election. Lets just hope all of these people who'd rather do something else on election day are tories the morons.
Dissappointing to not see loads of people at the polling station. Hopefully this year we'll get some better turnout figures.
I really don't understand people who say they're bored with the election. Lets just hope all of these people who'd rather do something else on election day are tories
the morons.
Posted: 2005-05-05 12:12:10
Fanthony
I consider myself a 'libertarian anarchist' and usually I spoil my ballot paper. I do this because I believe spoiled papers are counted and if enough of us do it (someday) we can show up the 'democracy' lie for what it is. However, this time I did vote (Lib Dem) - this was because I felt it crucial that Tony & Co were removed. I live in Tessa Jowell's constituency and decided to vote tactically to try and unseat her. The result here has usually been a Labour win followed by Cons and Lib Dem but this time we managed to boost Lib Dem into second place. It must have shaken up the local Labour Party because their website is full of anti-Lib Dem propaganda which all looks a bit strident.
Posted: 2005-08-19 11:33:22
Victoria Barnett
I think it is quite interesting how the lack of proper representation of public views in parliament has lead to a diminishing turn out at the polls which has then resulted in the making of an unrepresentative government. We are starting a vicious cycle!
But lets face it we live in a country which has a political system which is designed to be adversarial. So what happens when the government and the official opposition seem to be riding on the same side of the line? As a public we become disillussioned, the parties in power do not as much represent a division in the classes as much as it represents the division in Left Wing and Right Wing. When Tony Blair became labour leader it was not long before New Labour "hit the shelves". It was left wing socialist politics watered down and diluted with some right wing politics leaving us with an ideology which sits more or less on the center line. The outcome is a Labour party which was a little less of an aquaired taste, more conservatives would be prepared to shift. The problem with this though is that the conservatives whilst trying to shake the medal of economic unstability held by John Major's Conservative government previously held by pre-Thatcher labour found themselves doing the same thing.
Back to the central point, the house of commons was not built like the chilled out round tables of the EU and UN where everyone is supposed to get along (though they raerly do) but as two benches facing each other. It's perfect for a passionate left and right wing Westminister tribal war (also known as a debate). But how can we expect this when both the major parties have more or less found themselves in a position where their view hardly differ? A change in government used to mean a change in the way the country is run, do we feel that regardless of what happens, regardless of what party is in power little change will actually happen?
Further to this one point which I am curious about is that are we heading towards the situation which occured in the US when the Republicans and the Democrats ended up switching places? It's strange how the formerly left wing party with Abe Lincoln as its leader fought for the abolition of slavery and is now the voice of conservative america.
Personally I believe that there is a need for a rise in the use of the referendum. Maybe we could find ourselves with a far more representative government.
But lets face it we live in a country which has a political system which is designed to be adversarial. So what happens when the government and the official opposition seem to be riding on the same side of the line? As a public we become disillussioned, the parties in power do not as much represent a division in the classes as much as it represents the division in Left Wing and Right Wing. When Tony Blair became labour leader it was not long before New Labour "hit the shelves". It was left wing socialist politics watered down and diluted with some right wing politics leaving us with an ideology which sits more or less on the center line. The outcome is a Labour party which was a little less of an aquaired taste, more conservatives would be prepared to shift. The problem with this though is that the conservatives whilst trying to shake the medal of economic unstability held by John Major's Conservative government previously held by pre-Thatcher labour found themselves doing the same thing.
Back to the central point, the house of commons was not built like the chilled out round tables of the EU and UN where everyone is supposed to get along (though they raerly do) but as two benches facing each other. It's perfect for a passionate left and right wing Westminister tribal war (also known as a debate). But how can we expect this when both the major parties have more or less found themselves in a position where their view hardly differ? A change in government used to mean a change in the way the country is run, do we feel that regardless of what happens, regardless of what party is in power little change will actually happen?
Further to this one point which I am curious about is that are we heading towards the situation which occured in the US when the Republicans and the Democrats ended up switching places? It's strange how the formerly left wing party with Abe Lincoln as its leader fought for the abolition of slavery and is now the voice of conservative america.
Personally I believe that there is a need for a rise in the use of the referendum. Maybe we could find ourselves with a far more representative government.
Posted: 2005-08-24 10:03:11
Page 1 of 1