So it's over and done and won't be back for another ten years or so (hallelujah). They didn't need to count the second choice votes as:
a.There weren't any, and
b. They weren't needed anyway!
So those who managed to turn out and exercise their democratic rights voted to maintain the status quo, which is the only success from the whole sad and sorry (did I mention costly?) episode. The only thing sadder than the vote was the fact that Clegg has developed and 'anti-Midas' touch in that whatever he appears to be touching is turning to something of much less worth than gold! I think that is a sadder than the fact that many of the Lib Dem types, not realising that they are at least in power (which is a minor miracle considering they're really only a 'protest and lobby group' within parliament at best) are now muttering about 'wicked' Tories and making the coalition struggle. Do that and they'll realise that not only aren't they fit to govern but they'll prove it in a splendid way such that the next election will make last week's polls look like a vote of confidence!
So, we move on and rather than engage in clever mathematical exercises or mutter about 'majorities' and point to 51% we need people to understand that the person who receives the most votes is the popular choice. What we need to do is look at how we can raise the turnout such that the percentage of the population who votes are the 80's and 90's.
We also need to see the parties stand for something other than all stand on the same bit of popular policy ground and claim imaginary differences based on historic traits. After all, Labour is no more the working man's party that the Conservatives these day, it's only the moronic masses who haven't realised that who keep voting because of the 'working class' fallacies! Tories aren't all monied 'yahoo henry' types with loadsamoney either. Liberals (or whatever they're called this week) are always the middle ground party who claim to support 'whatever the others don't' and oppose 'whatever the other support' and they'll raise the taxes!
How about some credible parties with some real policies such that people want to get out and support them. The weird and wonderful parties out there, like the Greens and others, stand for what they stand for and as a result they get people who believe in them vote for them, just isn't enough of them to make a difference! But it's a lesson the others might learn.
Pax
7 comments:
Personally I'm pleased about the AV result and it is the one I voted for.
As for the wierd greens etc. had there been one (a green candidate I mean). I would have voted for him/her. as there wasn't. I voted as I always do for 2nd best.
That's my perspective!
But the thing with Greens is that they are committed and attract votes from people who share that commitment or wish to support what they see as integrity. I think this is one of their greatest strengths for a number of people.
Something you don't see in Con, Lab or Lib (sadly),
V
Not monied yahoo henries?
70% of the cabinet from private school. 70% from oxbridge. 80% of them millionaires. 25 of them white, middle aged men. 4 of them women.
Not sure that they're exactly able to understand the average uk voter...
Yes. Your admiration is great, but realistically most people won't vote for the Greens or any of the minority parties even if they support the policies. This is because the big parties will (with some justification) tell them it is a "wasted vote". So even those who might share at least some of their aims will guess the odds and continue to cast their single FPTP vote for their least worst option from Labour or Conservative. If you really wanted to change this attitude, you just blew it.
Well hopefully the chance to do something is still with us, it's just a different something from AV!
Looking at the various parties it seems to me that the Oxbridge and upper-end of the spectrum types are much more evenly distributed (although not equally) than in days gone by!
I have met an increasing number of peoe who have regarded the 'wasted vote' as a growing and indicative voice to their ballot, and this will aid voting turnout if it continues. Not only that, but if the 'main' parties see this, they too will seek to follow suit in their quest to win
Thanks for comments - food got thought (as ever),
V
"it's just a different something from AV!"
Yep. It's same old, same old.
And it needs to be (as I see it) because we're looking at accommodating poor turnouts by mathematical meddling which, if I read the Aussie's reports correctly begets an even weaker turnout. Not only that but the 51% winning line only really works naturally with two candidates and so perhaps the answer is two ballots, the first two past the post enter a second ballot and the winner is the obvious majority winner.
Still think we need some integrity and credibility from our politicians.
pax
Post a Comment