Electoral Idiots...

alcxam · May 2017

Democracy is the greatest conjob ever perpetrated by the ruling elite. We get to vote for the public face of the monsters who serve the globalist machine. Bilderberger group is a clue... Self-serving, self-centered, greedy entitled humans are all that they need to keep this charade on the go - and the world has 7.5 billion of us. Still, work hard guys and reap your rewards.

ThePrettyDamned · May 2017

Sporky said:

CabbageCat said:

Anyone who votes thinking they understand all the factors in play is lying to themselves.
All we have to go on is second-hand information, educated guesses, rough philosophy and trust. One man's knee-jerk hearsay is another man's earnest research and all of it is filtered through our own personal agendas and a hundred past political arguments.
We're all human. We're all stupid. Standing above the rest of the world pretending you aren't feeling ignorant and uninformed might fool some people, but not everyone.

Izzackerly.

Like pretty much everyone else, I like to think I'm fairly bright, but this politics nonsense is baffling. None of them do what they say they will, and if they did that'd be worse. None of the parties are a good enough match for my many varied and sometimes-self-contradictory positions that I feel voting for them is sensible, and logically, voting isn't worth doing - the effort involved is disproportionately larger than the influence of my one vote. I have never voted for the candidate or party that's won - and that's not something I'm exactly proud of.

The only difference is that I don't think this makes me better than everyone else. I certainly don't think I make better choices, or that I'd be better at the politics thing.

Wizzes, everywhere

randella · May 2017

I vote for the candidate with the nicest smile.

I'm better than all of you.

Fretwired · May 2017

Emp_Fab said:

Is anyone else of the opinion that elections are generally decided by a significant number, maybe even an overall majority, of electoral idiots ? By this I mean people who have no real interest in politics, are too lazy to read any of the manifestos and vote on the basis of any combination of the following;
Who they've always voted for
Who their peers / mates are voting for
Follow the political bias of their chosen media outlet (newspaper / TV etc)
Rejection of particular parties / leaders based on nothing more than knee-jerk hearsay prejudice (e.g. "Corbyn wants the 1970's back")
A desire not to look stupid when discussing politics so they just regurgitate the hearsay and media outlet bias as they don't have to think at all then or risk being asked any questions that might expose their lack of knowledge.
I believe a significant number of people in the UK cast their votes on the basis of these - certainly more than enough to change the outcome of an election. This begs the question whether elections really do represent the "will of the people". I would argue that the coming election will be decided 60% on the points above and 40% on manifesto promises.

In order to make elections more accurately reflect the true will of the people, we have to either get more people to impartially read manifestos and learn how to ignore media bias and peer pressure - an almost impossible task IMO, or remove the 60% above from the polling stations - far easier but very controversial indeed. In an ideal world, I would implement a system that asked you to name three main manifesto pledges from three main parties before you would be allowed to have a ballot paper.

Is it right to deny people from voting if they aren't actually voting on what they believe in ?

No.

This is looking like a rerun of the chavs thread - :-)

You're voting Labour - I doubt you've read the manifesto fully as it's not out yet. So you're basing your decision on a leaked document and comments in the press. You've certainly not read the Tory manifesto as its not out yet, so your decision to vote Labour must be based on:

Who you've always voted for
Who your mates are voting for
The political bias of your chosen media outlet (newspaper / TV etc)
Rejection of particular parties / leaders based on nothing more than knee-jerk hearsay prejudice (e.g. "May - Strong and stable leadership")
A desire not to look stupid when discussing politics so you just regurgitate the hearsay and media outlet bias

Should we be letting you vote?

crunchman · May 2017

Emp_Fab said:

Is anyone else of the opinion that elections are generally decided by a significant number, maybe even an overall majority, of electoral idiots ? By this I mean people who have no real interest in politics, are too lazy to read any of the manifestos and vote on the basis of any combination of the following;
Who they've always voted for
Who their peers / mates are voting for
Follow the political bias of their chosen media outlet (newspaper / TV etc)
Rejection of particular parties / leaders based on nothing more than knee-jerk hearsay prejudice (e.g. "Corbyn wants the 1970's back")
A desire not to look stupid when discussing politics so they just regurgitate the hearsay and media outlet bias as they don't have to think at all then or risk being asked any questions that might expose their lack of knowledge.
I believe a significant number of people in the UK cast their votes on the basis of these - certainly more than enough to change the outcome of an election. This begs the question whether elections really do represent the "will of the people". I would argue that the coming election will be decided 60% on the points above and 40% on manifesto promises.

In order to make elections more accurately reflect the true will of the people, we have to either get more people to impartially read manifestos and learn how to ignore media bias and peer pressure - an almost impossible task IMO, or remove the 60% above from the polling stations - far easier but very controversial indeed. In an ideal world, I would implement a system that asked you to name three main manifesto pledges from three main parties before you would be allowed to have a ballot paper.

Is it right to deny people from voting if they aren't actually voting on what they believe in ?

What's the point of that? Everyone knows they won't do what the manifesto promises.

I'm trying to research our individual candidates. The main opposition to the sitting MP was actually our MP from 2010 to 2015 so at least they both have a voting track record I can look at.

The problem for me is that both all of the main parties have major drawbacks.

The Tories are wedded to the "private sector does it better" ideology. They are also doing nothing significant about air pollution.

I like the Labour idea of bringing the railways and some energy infrastructure back into state ownership but Corbyn is a friend of the IRA and Hamas and is completely unsuitable to be PM. Also, the money isn't there for a lot of their promises.

Meanwhile the LibDems would try to keep us in thrall to the corrupt, bureaucratic EU monster.

Drew_TNBD · May 2017

alcxam said:

Democracy is the greatest conjob ever perpetrated by the ruling elite. We get to vote for the public face of the monsters who serve the globalist machine. Bilderberger group is a clue... Self-serving, self-centered, greedy entitled humans are all that they need to keep this charade on the go - and the world has 7.5 billion of us. Still, work hard guys and reap your rewards.

a: you're a conspiracy theorist
b: you're lazy

Legionreturns · May 2017

If we're going to judge who to vote for on manifesto promises, we should probably also measure how much of previous manifesto fluff has actually been followed through, otherwise it's just voting for wishes.

Snap · May 2017

CabbageCat said:

Anyone who votes thinking they understand all the factors in play is lying to themselves.
All we have to go on is second-hand information, educated guesses, rough philosophy and trust. One man's knee-jerk hearsay is another man's earnest research and all of it is filtered through our own personal agendas and a hundred past political arguments.
We're all human. We're all stupid. Standing above the rest of the world pretending you aren't feeling ignorant and uninformed might fool some people, but not everyone.

all of this. Wise words.

Democracy is about giving everyone the opportunity to have a voice. What you do with that voice is upto you, but just because your choice of what to do with it doesn't resonate with anyone else should not diminish your right to make it heard.

Freebird · May 2017

I wholeheartedly agree with this, anybody who doesn't vote for the same party that I do is a total idiot!

jellyroll · May 2017

Most people, quite reasonably, vote in their own economic self interest. You don't have to be Stephen Hawking or Laura Kuensberg to work out which party that is.

Myranda · May 2017

Legionreturns said:

If we're going to judge who to vote for on manifesto promises, we should probably also measure how much of previous manifesto fluff has actually been followed through, otherwise it's just voting for wishes.

Which as Corbyn and May never drafted a manifesto and then ran a government means neither has a track record of sticking or not sticking to manifesto pledges.

But a manifesto without budgeting is pointless and no one ever posts a fully costed manifesto, so maybe they're all pointless.

Besides... We vote local candidates to parliament so lets see if we know of our local candidates and their track record... If we're talking about taking elections more seriously

Fretwired · May 2017

@Emp_Fab

Good news .. Labour MPs have rejected the party manifesto but Corbyn and co are pushing ahead with it. Labour in Wales are issuing their own which doesn't have things like nationalising the railways in .. how are you going to decide now? A party with two manifestos ... the agony of choice.

webrthomson · May 2017

This is hardly a new issue:

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Churchill.

However, about 40-50% of people don’t actually vote so some of your problems are already solved!

It’s already been said but if you want to change this situation then schools should teach people to respect their vote and maybe understand how to use it to better their situation? I live in hope!

jellyroll · May 2017

alcxam said:

Democracy is the greatest conjob ever perpetrated by the ruling elite. We get to vote for the public face of the monsters who serve the globalist machine. Bilderberger group is a clue... Self-serving, self-centered, greedy entitled humans are all that they need to keep this charade on the go - and the world has 7.5 billion of us. Still, work hard guys and reap your rewards.

You'd think the "ruling elite" would come up with a better system than only giving themselves one vote each in the face of tens of millions of votes allotted to the plebs.

Flink_Poyd · May 2017

It tends to be bullshit, promise (that will be broken) and some sort of gimmick. They all do the same so I just have no interest in voting.

ICBM · May 2017

jellyroll said:

Most people, quite reasonably, vote in their own economic self interest.

No they don't. They vote in what they perceive to be their own short-term economic self interest… which is quite a different thing.

jellyroll · May 2017

ICBM said:

jellyroll said:

Most people, quite reasonably, vote in their own economic self interest.

No they don't. They vote in what they perceive to be their own short-term economic self interest… which is quite a different thing.

True. But how many would they vote differently if the distinction was brought to their attention?