General Election 2015

[Veggie Legs]

The Greens have a very real chance of taking Norwich South. They got 15% in the last election and with the Lib Dem vote likely collapsing I think they might just do it.

I'd definitely be voting for them if I lived there. Don't think they've got much chance in Norwich North, unfortunately.

 

[Alty]

Agreed. And now the DUP (4th largest party at Westminster) are rightly questioning the logic of leaving them out if PC are included.

The original line-up made far more sense. The broadcasters have bottled it. Should have called Cameron's bluff.

EDIT: @ EG

 

[Alty]

What has the Green-led local Council been like for Brighton, out of interest? Anecdotally I've heard good things about Lucas as an MP but quite a lot of criticism of the local council.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

Re the stuff upthread - I think that we as a nation probably need to get away from the mindset of there being such a thing as a wasted vote. The reality is that relatively few people are in a position to influence the outcome of an election in the UK. For those people, voting tactically has some merit. For everyone else, the safe seat dwellers, you may as well vote for a minority party if you think they have something to offer. The more farcically unrepresentative our parliament appears, the easier electoral reform will be to sell.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

I don't see anything wrong with increasing the number of participants in the tv debates but I tend to agree on the subject of the nationalists inclusion. Over 90% of the electorate are unable to cast a vote for them.

What has the Green-led local Council been like for Brighton, out of interest? Anecdotally I've heard good things about Lucas as an MP but quite a lot of criticism of the local council.

Yes, this very much does seem to be the case. The consensus, so far as I can gather, is that the council have performed really poorly. Lucas, on the other hand, does seem to be genuinely popular - there have been polls conducted for Brighton Pavilion which suggests she'll retain the seat. I hope that is the case - it would be a real shame if the only Green MP lasted one term.

 

[Tilbury]

As an individual she really is a great MP. Would be nice if they could win 3-5 seats but I'm not sure they will even if they do end up with 7%.

 

[Hooped Wizard]

Why aren't the Respect party in the TV debates yet the Greens are?

 

[SUTSS]

Because virtually no one votes for Respect?

 

[Hooped Wizard]

They both have one MP.

DUP and Sinn Fein should both be there as well if the bloody Greens are,

 

[SUTSS]

But the Greens are polling at a similar level to the Libs. What are Respect polling? 0.1%?

 

[Hooped Wizard]

Polling doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things - two of the three most reputable political polls had Scotland going independent two days before the referendum. And that stil doesn't answer the question of DUP and Sinn Fein.

 

[Hooped Wizard]

Also I've heard Natalie Bennett is pretty shocking - I have no doubt in my mind she'll be ripped apart in the debate(s?) They should get Caroline Lucas to do it - or their Scottish leader.

 

[SUTSS]

If polling doesn't matter lets give every party in the country a place on the debates. A single poll can give an odd result, poll trends give a decent picture of the true nature.

 

[Tilbury]

The Greens are a far bigger party.
For example at the last election the greens had 310 candidates, respect 11. Greens got 0.9%, Respect 0.1%. And then you take into account the huge swell in support for the greens and it's a no brainer.

 

[Tilbury]

'Polling doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things'. Who is this joker?

 

[Hooped Wizard]

'Polling doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things'. Who is this joker?

Of course they don't at this stage in the game anyway, Liberal Democrats were polling ridiculously well this time five years ago but they went back to mediocrity come May 2010 - and I've gave another good example of why they don't a couple of posts ago. Fair enough don't agree with me but why you turn to insults I don't know.

 

[SUTSS]

The Scottish referendum polling was really quite accurate bar a couple of outliers.

 

[Tilbury]

Of course they don't at this stage in the game anyway, Liberal Democrats were polling ridiculously well this time five years ago but they went back to mediocrity come May 2010 - and I've gave another good example of why they don't a couple of posts ago. Fair enough don't agree with me but why you turn to insults I don't know.

Insults? When determining who should be in the TV debates of course you have to look at polls, popular opinion is exactly what it should be based on.
Especially when you're comparing someone with 6-10% and someone with nothing.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

They both have one MP.

DUP and Sinn Fein should both be there as well if the bloody Greens are,

No they shouldn't. Northern Ireland's political landscape is totally different from the rest of the UK.

 

[Pyeman]

The more farcically unrepresentative our parliament appears, the easier electoral reform will be to sell.

Theoretically I agree. However, I fear finding a buyer for electoral reform will prove nigh on impossible, regardless of the sales pitch. Those with the power to enact change are unfortunately the same people who benefit the most from the current system.

 

[Pilgrim Meister]

One interesting thing which has cropped up is the strong potential for a SNP & Labour Coalition Government

How would that one go down

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

They'd probably find themselves in a similar position to the Conservatives and Lib Dems when the dust has settled. I doubt the SNP would be quite as decimated, but it would surely hurt. Don't see who it would really help in the long term.

In fact on second thought it could be fucking calamitous for a party like the SNP to have so much power over a country 92% of which they couldn't care less about.

 

[Tilbury]

The SNP will do anything to engineer more devolved power and ultimately, still, independence so I wouldn't rule anything out including forming part of a coalition.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

Theoretically I agree. However, I fear finding a buyer for electoral reform will prove nigh on impossible, regardless of the sales pitch. Those with the power to enact change are unfortunately the same people who benefit the most from the current system.

Quite. To some extent I think electoral reform's always going to be a bit of a tough sell. It's not, quite frankly, a very sexy subject, and if you're not very politically inclined it's unlikely to get your juices flowing. There's also, I'm sure, little desire on the part of the two main parties to resurrect an issue that the AV referendum looked to have killed off for a generation or more. And yet British politics currently appears more fragmented than ever with this year's election looking to have the potential to produce some manifestly unfair results. The Lib Dems, a party traditionally disadvantaged by FPTP, are on course to finish way behind UKIP in the popular vote, but will likely emerge with many more seats than them. The latter could well get a greater vote share than they do seats in a 650 member parliament, a parliament that will remain dominated by red and blue even though people are increasingly exploring other options. The main selling point of FPTP was always that it produced stable governments - it's an argument that's losing credibility, especially if, in May, we end up with another hung parliament. If that happens there's always the prospect of the kingmakers once again using electoral reform as a bargaining chip. Guess we'll have to wait and see...

 

[Pyeman]

I certainly agree that another hung parliament raises questions about the effectiveness of FPTP, especially as more parties begin to take a bigger share of the votes away from the 'big two'.

I think what the AV referendum showed was that whilst there is seemingly an appetite for electoral reform, people aren't really sure what a better option looks like. FPTP has its fair share of critics, yet when it came to actually being presented with an alternative, people were reluctant to vote for change. Like you say, it'll be interesting to see if another coalition government changes people's views in this regard.

 

[Alty]

I certainly agree that another hung parliament raises questions about the effectiveness of FPTP, especially as more parties begin to take a bigger share of the votes away from the 'big two'.

I think what the AV referendum showed was that whilst there is seemingly an appetite for electoral reform, people aren't really sure what a better option looks like. FPTP has its fair share of critics, yet when it came to actually being presented with an alternative, people were reluctant to vote for change. Like you say, it'll be interesting to see if another coalition government changes people's views in this regard.

AV was only a very slight improvement on FPTP. I don't think anyone saw it as a first choice. Electoral reform was another area in which the Lib Dems fucked up. I think they saw it is an easier sell because it was a sort of incremental step towards proportionality. But most people either didn't understand the proposed system or thought it wasn't very good. I should also point out, as someone involved in the campaign, that the 'Yes' campaign was organised and fought DREADFULLY. But that's neither here nor there really.

I think the best option would be the Additional Member System they use in Scotland. It produces broadly proportional results whilst still maintaining the 'local link' that people often point to as being a positive of FPTP.

 

[The Southbank]

Voted Labour all of my life, but there is absolutely no way I can vote for Ed Miliband.

 

[SALTIRE]

Voted Labour all of my life, but there is absolutely no way I can vote for Ed Miliband.

I can see why; we are lucky up here in that we have the SNP, but if I lived in England I don't know who I'd vote for, none of the politicians seem sincere, and you always look at them and see them thinking if they are saying the right things, how they will sound and look to certain demographics and their Spads. On top of that Labour is completely centre now so their is not a great deal of difference between them and the Tories on many things. At least in the Eighties you had real different choices to choose from.

 

[Pyeman]

AV was only a very slight improvement on FPTP. I don't think anyone saw it as a first choice. Electoral reform was another area in which the Lib Dems fucked up. I think they saw it is an easier sell because it was a sort of incremental step towards proportionality. But most people either didn't understand the proposed system or thought it wasn't very good. I should also point out, as someone involved in the campaign, that the 'Yes' campaign was organised and fought DREADFULLY. But that's neither here nor there really.

I think the best option would be the Additional Member System they use in Scotland. It produces broadly proportional results whilst still maintaining the 'local link' that people often point to as being a positive of FPTP.

I read an article on the Guardian website and it was pretty critical of the 'Yes' campaign. Admittedly, my interest in politics back then wasn't what it is now so I didn't pay a great deal of attention at the time.

Am I right in thinking that AMS is where the voter gets two votes, one for a local constituency representative and one for a national party? Whereby the party votes are used to essentially top-up the constituency seats, with the aim of achieving a balance between proportionality and local accountability? Assuming I'm right, this is pretty much the extent of my knowledge, but hypothetically it sounds like a good idea.

 

[Tilbury]

I'm not even sure that local representation is all that in this day and age. It's not like they represent what we want/need, they follow what their party whip tells them too and it's simple enough to lobby/contact any politician anywhere by email so you wouldn't really lose that. Bring in full PR.