Jump to content


By-elections

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, El Cid said:

I do not vote for the person, because that would be daft. My local area changed from Labour to Conservative, because more people voted for that party.

At a local level, I vote more for the person and less for the party.

Why is it daft to vote for the person?

 

I mean, I'd never vote for Rees-Mogg because I'm not landed and living in the 18th century, but I'd probably vote for Ken Clarke because I agree with his views on the economy and Brexit.

Similalry I'd slam the door on Comrade Corbyn but I would equally happily vote for Chukka Umunna for the same reasons as Ken Clarke. Party associations are always generally a secondary reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Obelix said:

Why is it daft to vote for the person?

 

I mean, I'd never vote for Rees-Mogg because I'm not landed and living in the 18th century, but I'd probably vote for Ken Clarke because I agree with his views on the economy and Brexit.

Similalry I'd slam the door on Comrade Corbyn but I would equally happily vote for Chukka Umunna for the same reasons as Ken Clarke. Party associations are always generally a secondary reason.

Precisely.  We have to vote for people (ie representatives) because if we simply voted for a party we would be giving them carte blanch to populate the House of Commons with whoever they felt like.  We would then be governed by unelected representatives, none of whom received a single vote.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, L00b said:

Which is dafter?  Voting for the party in ignorance of the fact that it is the candidate whom you are electing?

 

Or voting for the party irrespective of the personal qualities and beliefs of the candidate?

1

So if the best candidate by a country mile is a Green Party or Liberal Democrat no-hoper, who do you vote for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, bendix said:

Precisely.  We have to vote for people (ie representatives) because if we simply voted for a party we would be giving them carte blanch to populate the House of Commons with whoever they felt like.  We would then be governed by unelected representatives, none of whom received a single vote.

 

So what about the Party manifestos, are they meaningless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't generally specifically apply to you or your constituency though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, El Cid said:

So if the best candidate by a country mile is a Green Party or Liberal Democrat no-hoper, who do you vote for?

What do you mean by 'best candidate'?  That's a value laden phrase.   If your political views are broadly aligned to Labour, then YOU personally will think the Labour candidate is the one you vote for because it stands to reason he or she will best serve your interests. That isn't always the case though.

 

None of this negates the fact that you are voting for the candidate, not the party per se because as I have said a hundred times, if you didnt vote for a candidate then the winning party could, in principle, put a lump of coal there to represent you (or Dianne Abbott, whichever is dumber).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, geared said:

They don't generally specifically apply to you or your constituency though.

That is correct, that is when you are electing a local councillor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bendix said:

None of this negates the fact that you are voting for the candidate, not the party per se because as I have said a hundred times, if you didnt vote for a candidate then the winning party could, in principle, put a lump of coal there to represent you (or Dianne Abbott, whichever is dumber).

1

So if you had a 'dumb' Tory and you voted Labour, you would get Dianne Abbot as the Home Secretary.

I can't say that many people get to know the candidates that well, don't they generally promote Party policy and not their own views?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bendix said:

If your political views are broadly aligned to Labour, then YOU personally will think the Labour candidate is the one you vote for because it stands to reason he or she will best serve your interests. That isn't always the case though.

This not always an easy choice.

 

If I lived in Vauxhall I would find it very hard to stomach voting for the vile Brexit and fox hunt supporting, terrorist apologist Kate Hoey, but if I believed that the country would benefit from the election of a Labour government I would have to vote for her to ensure that government had enough MPs to have a working majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

This not always an easy choice.

 

In general elections I usually vote for the manifesto which I think is the best one, so its the party. Whereas at local elections they don't even have a manifesto, you rarely hear from them. So the candidate and how good they are is much more important, at the local level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the real world, most people just vote for the candidate representing the party whose manifesto they are most supportive of. Most people vote for the party.

 

Bringing up examples of Ken Clarke, Rees Mogg, etc, is slightly unfair. The majority of candidates aren't nearly as well known to the electorate. Besides, if you wanted a Tory government but preferred the Labour candidate as a person, you'd still vote for the Tory one. And vice versa. Ultimately who is in government is more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, El Cid said:

So if the best candidate by a country mile is a Green Party or Liberal Democrat no-hoper, who do you vote for?

The 'best' candidate's label matters little to me, he or she is the individual whose views and qualities I value the most, relative to the other candidates, to preserve my constituency's best interests.

 

So it may be the 'no hoper' indeed, or the Tory or the Labour candidate just the same.

 

Your question provides an interesting insight: that Green or Libdem candidate is a 'no hoper' precisely because voters (like you?) adopt this competitive mindset about elections, feeling that irrepressible need not to 'waste' their vote (for 'winning' the election), constrained as you are by the FPTP system which is designed to maintain Labour/Tory tribalism.

 

As I posted earlier, if voters took the time to find out about candidates, and enough of them shirked that herd mentality to vote for that 'best no hoper' instead of the rosette...then he or she wouldn't be a 'no hoper' anymore, would they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.