Will you change political allegiance?

Don't bother. Apparently Tories will win no seats at all. Biggest landslide ever for Corbs.

I see what you mean....

Don't bother. Apparently Tories will win no seats at all. Biggest landslide ever for Corbs.

As I said, I'm a bit confused who is voting on there. It's a legit site, the votes being cast on there are real, but I'm a bit confused as to how they can show such a skewed picture. I posted it mainly to show 'beware of polls'...

But also, funny how you only 'trust' polls that show the outcome in your favour...

Did you actually look at Labours manifesto which is fully costed, unlike the Tories which isn't? The Tories have massively increased borrowing during their 7 years in power, more than tripling it since they defeated Labour in 2010.

 

Vote whichever way you want, but when you come out with reasons why you are supporting one party over another that aren't correct expect to get called out on it. On paper at the moment if your biggest concern is national debt then Labour are the better choice.

Brexit is a mess whether Tories or Labour are in power, but I can see why someone supporting Brexit would rather the Tories be in power for that. But equally the Tories are demonstrating day in and day out that they haven't got a clue about Brexit. Their own secretary for exiting the EU has admitted he doesn't have a plan...so again, I ask why are you supporting the Tories?

I had a closer look at one of those costings. The income tax for instance. Full fact say the rate cut from 50 to 45% raised £8bn so reversing it will presumably induce behaviour that will cost in the region of £5bn (allowing for deferred receipts). Not only that but Labour say people in the 100 bracket will only pay an extra £1000/year. But here's the thing. Less than 4% of tax payers earn over 100k. They aim to raise £6.4bn from those 4% then that's 1.25 million people. £6.4bn/1.25million = £5120 per person. That doesn't seem to add up to me. Even if there are another 10% of people earning over 80k (a quick but extremely generous estimate based on this ) then that is roughly £1400 per person across the whole distribution, most of whom Labour reckon would pay less than £1000.

EDIT TO ADD:

Having taken a better look at this, it's even more unbelievable. HMRC data from 2014-5 the latest available puts only 4% of tax payers above 80k!!

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/percentile-points-from-1-to-99-for-total-income-before-and-after-tax

---------- Post added 22-05-2017 at 15:01 ----------

As I said, I'm a bit confused who is voting on there. It's a legit site, the votes being cast on there are real, but I'm a bit confused as to how they can show such a skewed picture. I posted it mainly to show 'beware of polls'...

 

 

But also, funny how you only 'trust' polls that show the outcome in your favour...

The professional electoral polls at least attempt to use a representative sample. All that net poles require is a well organised group of one party's supporters to skew them massively.

As I said, I'm a bit confused who is voting on there. It's a legit site, the votes being cast on there are real, but I'm a bit confused as to how they can show such a skewed picture. I posted it mainly to show 'beware of polls'...

 

 

But also, funny how you only 'trust' polls that show the outcome in your favour...

Polls are different. Polls are weighted and properly sampled.

---------- Post added 22-05-2017 at 15:16 ----------

Those are valid reasons to vote Tories not based on some outdated 'belief' that somehow Labour trash the economy which has been debunked several times. I don't agree with them, but differences make the world go around

 

It's more costed than the Tories one isn't it?

It is in that they've put some numbers in there. However renationalisation is by far the biggest cost they will have and that is not costed.

And some of how they will raise money is in very vague and bland statements, such as 'reviewing corporate tax reliefs'.

I voted for Blair the second time, then I voted for Lib Dems for 2 elections and then Conservative last time and I think this time. However like I said earlier, not sure why I bother as Labour have held this seat since 1931 in various guises.

Polls are different. Polls are weighted and properly sampled.

 

---------- Post added 22-05-2017 at 15:16 ----------

 

 

It is in that they've put some numbers in there. However renationalisation is by far the biggest cost they will have and that is not costed.

 

And some of how they will raise money is in very vague and bland statements, such as 'reviewing corporate tax reliefs'.

 

 

I voted for Blair the second time, then I voted for Lib Dems for 2 elections and then Conservative last time and I think this time. However like I said earlier, not sure why I bother as Labour have held this seat since 1931 in various guises.

Many economists have gone over Labours manifesto and have said it adds up. But equally other economists will say it doesn't. Hence unbelievers well stated lines about how economics is a soft and not a hard science...

I've voted Tory about 15 years ago, then Labour I think under Blair (sorry for that!), then LDs, then Labour and this time I'm still undecided between LDs, Greens and Labour. I did sway towards LDs a couple of weeks ago, but like Labours manifesto and not feeling it with LDs lately so probably between Green and Labour. Like you my area would vote in a donkey with a red rosette on it so I think I'll vote with my heart for once as there's no gain for me voting tactically like there might be in some areas. I'd bucking the trend of getting more right wing as you get older!

Tactical voters are untrustworthy people in my opinion. It's pettiness voting for a candidate which is not your first choice, in the hope of preventing a third party candidate from winning.

Tactical voters are untrustworthy people in my opinion. It's pettiness voting for a candidate which is not your first choice, in the hope of preventing a third party candidate from winning.

I'm untrustworthy according to random guy on the internet. I'm distraught, utterly distraught.

I actually think we should do negative voting, vote for the person you LEAST want to win and whoever gets the fewest votes is the MP. People seem to be more inspired by hate than love so I reckon it would up the number of voters. How often do you hear people saying 'I can't stand that guy!' over 'I really like that guy!' when it comes to politicians?

I'm untrustworthy according to random guy on the internet. I'm distraught, utterly distraught.

 

I actually think we should do negative voting, vote for the person you LEAST want to win and whoever gets the fewest votes is the MP. People seem to be more inspired by hate than love so I reckon it would up the number of voters. How often do you hear people saying 'I can't stand that guy!' over 'I really like that guy!' when it comes to politicians?

You seem a confused person. At one time women wrongly didn't get the vote. As a woman, you should have more respect for the democratic process. I don't mix with people who say"I can't stand that guy!". You would do better looking for positives rather than negatives.

Shame on you!

Tactical voters are untrustworthy people in my opinion. It's pettiness voting for a candidate which is not your first choice, in the hope of preventing a third party candidate from winning.

It's a good way of avoiding something you don't want

It's a good way of avoiding something you don't want

Yes, I understand the motives for tactical voting. Do you think by doing it, then you are showing a lack of respect for your fellow citizens, who want something different to yourself?

Yes, I understand the motives for tactical voting. Do you think by doing it, then you are showing a lack of respect for your fellow citizens, who want something different to yourself?

No because you can generally vote to get what you want, and if you can't get that you can vote against something you don't want. It's a completely rational and logical choice.

I won't be doing that, but I understand why people do.

Corbyn is a lot better than ed Miliband. You rather get someone else like Miliband in there?

Ed is another reason why Labour didn't get my vote last time round.

---------- Post added 22-05-2017 at 19:45 ----------

But do you like Labour's policies?

 

If you prefer them to the Tory's then vote Labour.

Sorry, I can't bring myself to vote for Labour while those two muppets are kicking around. Policies are ok, but where is the money coming from to pay for it all? I wont be voting tory either.