RE: Voting Tactics

RE: Voting Tactics (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

dcnovice -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/10/2007 2:17:34 PM)
quote: 1) Voting according to your values? 2) Voting tactically to keep a particular political party out of government at all costs? I'm a combination of (1) and (2). I try to keep my values paramount, but I recognize that each election is ultimately a choice among specific options. I try to pick the best option of those available. quote: 3) Voting in terms of the wider picture and attempting to break the status quo? I think, perhaps mistakenly, that this was what a lot of Nader voters tried to do in 2000. Unfortunately, they helped land us with George W. Bush, a result I still have trouble forgiving.

Vendaval -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 12:01:26 AM)
I go for options 1 and 2. Choose the best you can with the policies and leaders available at that time. Sometimes that can only be the "lesser of 2 evils". (Edited for formatting)

NorthernGent -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 1:44:42 AM)
Dc and Vendaval, I'm similar to yourselves. I vote based on what is realistically on offer, rather than a candidate or a small party's ideas which fit mine. If breaking the status quo was an option, I would have left The Labour Party the minute they became involved in Iraq. Genuinely, the founders of The British Labour Party will be turning in their graves at what blair has done. It is meant to be a party with respect for people, regardless of nationality. Sadly, we're not ready to alter the staus quo, so realism is the best of a few bad options.....caught between a rock and a hard place etc. Will it be a close run thing in 2008, or are the current lot on their last legs?

dcnovice -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 12:45:46 PM)
quote: Will it be a close run thing in 2008, or are the current lot on their last legs? Too soon to tell, I think. A lot depends on what happens in Iraq and whether the (barely) Democratic Congress manages to exert leadership on some front(s).

Vendaval -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 1:02:05 PM)
There is a large component of fear and profiteering driving the war in Iraq, and a large number of citizens who want us to pull out and keep the troops stateside. The next election is likely to be messier and dirtier than usual because of the war, and people may well change their voting patterns in response. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Will it be a close run thing in 2008, or are the current lot on their last legs?

Archer -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 4:10:33 PM)
Current voting tactic although subject to change certainly is alot of Party line voting (Libertarian Party), with a few tossed in votes when the race might be close (pretty rare in my district which is a "safe Republican District") If they offer a Libertarian candidate I generally vote for them, when they do not I often leave the vote blank for that office so they will know I chose not to cast my lot with either of the candidates. I do tend to vote one way or the other on almost every referendum item on the table though, and vote my concious after reading any available primary document personally. (ie I read the actual text of the referendum ahead of time not the abstract they provide on the ballot)

Dtesmoac -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 4:31:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Dtesmoac, I read your education point with interest because Labour had to shift to the right. They followed the British people and their conservative whims - hence, this "tough on crime" bollocks and breaking up the grants system. They were in danger of never being elected again. If you want free education for all, then you're too late. The chance to rein in class structure was there for the taking in the 1980s and the British people rejected it - hence the traditional left-wing party moving towards the centre and imposing wealth redistribution by stealth. You know the script - "tax! scroungers!". The free education one is not such a straight left v right item though. The reason for removing the free fee's and the grant was beacuae there was a push to have much wider participation in higher education which "could then not be funded by government" and so the loss of grants and then the introduction of fees. My solution is to set a certain standard and then say if you meet the standard no matter your age or background we (the country) invest in you i.e. no fee and full grant. Yes people from private schools etc may have an advantage but they do anyway due to Mum and Dads money, but at least this way someone with no finances behind them but the ability to perform within academia can go. Labour's never being elected risk in the 80s was due to other policies. The new system results in over qualified or mickey mouse qualified people with over expectaions and big debts entering the workplace. It would be nice one day to positively vote for a party, I know for me that Labour & LibDems seems impossible and Conservatives seam highly unlikely. As to actual politicians I would vote for Denis Skinner & Ken Livingston (I agree with very little of their politics but they are conviction politicains and not money grabbing gits) John Major, given a poison chalice but apart from taste of Edwina someone I could understand & Clement Freud & Cyril Smith - they just don't make them like that anymore.

popeye1250 -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 8:50:03 PM)
As if McCain isn't in enough trouble Henry Kissinger backed him last week! I didn't think he was still alive! Cripes, he must be 90! Are they going to form a wheel chair brigade for McCain? Sure, Kissinger will get out the vote; "I tink brrrr, bzzzzzz, brzzzzz, bradzzzzzzzz." The 18-25 y.o. voters will just love him!

Sternhand4 -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/11/2007 9:09:51 PM)
McCain is done.. He cant win the primary.. But Fred Thompson can..

NorthernGent -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/12/2007 11:15:01 AM)
Dtesmoac, If there was a general positive climate towards public spending programmes, the Labour Government could quite conceivably have mainted a grants system for those from less than affluent backgrounds. The problem lies in the mindset of Britons in that, as a nation, we are incapable of seeing the wider picture and the need to invest heavily in areas such as education and health. As a nation, our priorities are elsewhere. Hence, the pressure is always to reduce tax and spend policies. It's fair to say we have a difference of opinion on the solution. It should be means tested, thus providing grants only to those from poorer households. Where the line is drawn would need some working out, but as a general principle, if not having a grant genuinely prevents a person from going to university, then a grant should be on the table. For me, this is part of a wider drive to redress the wealth gap in our society (even the conservatives are saying the wealth gap is out of control - possible spin, but it's the first time in my life I've heard a conservative politician raise the issue). There will always be the wealthy, the middle class and the working class - no arguments here, but what we have is an underclass which is almost a third world country in our closet. Let's find ways to at least find a modicum of balance in our society and provide opportunity for those poorest socio-economic groups. Grants for everyone will maintain the current divide and, realistically, where is the funding coming from? The money isn't available to provide grants to 50% of young people attending university (the government's target), so something has to give. Those most in need should be first in line, in my book.

NorthernGent -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/12/2007 11:25:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval The next election is likely to be messier and dirtier than usual because of the war, and people may well change their voting patterns in response. Sounds like you've an interesting election on your hands. If yours is anything like ours, they don't even bother to push their policies anymore - they just hammer the other party. A few years ago, the conservatives simply put a massive poster of Tony Blair with red devil eyes on bill-boards.....I mean, I'm no fan of Blair, but that just isn't politics! Politics really needs to get back to being politics, but then with business interests dominating proceedings, there isn't much chance of that.

Vendaval -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/12/2007 11:46:20 AM)
That is a very low level way to communicate. Some of the mud-slinging here is just too much for me to stomach. Debating of issues and policies is what needs to happen, but we live in a world where the "image" is more important. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Sounds like you've an interesting election on your hands. If yours is anything like ours, they don't even bother to push their policies anymore - they just hammer the other party. A few years ago, the conservatives simply put a massive poster of Tony Blair with red devil eyes on bill-boards.....I mean, I'm no fan of Blair, but that just isn't politics! Politics really needs to get back to being politics, but then with business interests dominating proceedings, there isn't much chance of that.

NorthernGent -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/12/2007 11:58:12 AM)
Very true, style over substance......even our spin doctor has a spin doctor!

Sinergy -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/12/2007 6:03:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sternhand4 But Fred Thompson can.. I would love to read source material for this. Besides which, winning the primary and winning the election are worlds apart. Sinergy edited to remove reference to McCain

Dtesmoac -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/17/2007 4:23:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Hi NG - been away and so not responded. mindset of Britons in that, as a nation, we are incapable of seeing the wider picture and the need to invest heavily in areas such as education and health. Not sure I really agree anymore. I think it is other arwas of spending that people disagree with and it is politicians that deflect the investement. Also in theory the NHS has had a large injection of cash, it is the expectations placed upon it and the growth of non "medical" costs that is the problem. As a nation, our priorities are elsewhere. Hence, the pressure is always to reduce tax and spend policies.Taxation currently is massivly higher than in past, it is how it is spent that is the issue. Event the IMF is warning the UK about the effects. It should be means tested, thus providing grants only to those from poorer households. One of the problems is that those that pay in feel anti the policies and so create a probelm. Universal benefits help the poor and ensure a higher proportion of the non poor feel included. Also when someone goes from the poor and enters the "middle income bracket if they are not laden down with debt they can start to influence the social structures rather than clearly being one of the oiks whose risen above their station. !!! Hit the more affluent through taxation and loop closing but still give them universal benefits. Where the line is drawn would need some working out, but as a general principle, if not having a grant genuinely prevents a person from going to university, then a grant should be on the table. what about rich kids whose parents don't want them to go? but it's the first time in my life I've heard a conservative politician raise the issue - no its often a theme, remeber just a labour is a very broad "church of views so are the conservatives . There will always be the wealthy, the middle class and the working class - no arguments here, but what we have is an underclass which is almost a third world country in our closet. - I agree and unfortunately they are unlikly to educate themselves out through universities, so additional mechanisms are required, but not sadling the bightest with big depts allows such people to take porer paying jobs which afoten / debatable, are aimed at more social justice. The money isn't available to provide grants to 50% of young people attending university - I think this is one of the problems, it is creating too many people with big debts and over expectation of what they can / will earn, who then have to obtain over inflated places to live etc, etc, etc. They end up chasing the money. The only ones that can get out of the cycle are people with wealthy parents. It actualy is creating a more fixed barrier across society than fewer kids going to Uni and not having big debts, because it was not such a gamble and crippiling burden upon those comming from less affluent housholds.

meatcleaver -> RE: Voting Tactics (3/17/2007 4:52:11 PM)
50% of young people going to university is a nonsense. Most achieve degrees that increase their expectations but are of poor quality and the sheer number of degrees just devalues them. Britain has qualification inflation in many areas while in areas where higher education is desperately needed there is a deficit. I remember when my wife worked in the city, she had a Dutch high school education and her only asset was she could speak four languages fluently, includuing being able to write English better than most of her English graduate colleagues. Within a couple of years she was in charge of the training dept of a big accountancy firm while many of her colleagues languished because they had degrees that were not useless but common. My wife ended up travelling regular to Paris, New York and Tokyo on business and had a whacking salary. The point? She had never been to university but had skills that were desperately sort after in the city. An ability to cross translate in four languages. As for the way I vote, I don't. I don't live in the UK so I don't feel I have the right to vote on something that won't effect me. Actually I hate all three parties, none float my boat and if I did vote, it would be to keep someone out and not vote someone in.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125