Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 19, 2024, 10:59:05 AM

Login with username, password and session length

The "Who Should I Vote For" Thread, 2021

Started by Kelvin, April 04, 2021, 06:37:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Fambo Number Mive

£10,000 is a huge amount of money as it is. I thought the £500 needed to be an MP was too much as it is. I don't think that standing for election should be limited to those who have hundreds (or in the case of the London Mayor, tens of thousands) of pounds. Charge a £20 admin fee or something at most.

George Oscar Bluth II

It's that much? Fucking hell! That's a lot of money for bantz isn't it.

I'm voting Labour, Labour and Labour FYI. Not crazy about Sadiq, but not for the reason online racists aren't crazy about Sadiq. I think beyond the "London is open" stuff after the referendum there hasn't been much vision or creativity about what can be done with the office he holds in contrast to, say, Burnham in Manchester.

He's been good on cycling though, which I appreciate, and his Tory rival is basically promising to rip up cycle lanes so fuck him.

Buelligan

Obviously, it'd never happen but I think the fairest way to calculate a deposit would be to work out a percentage of someone's wealth, even if it's a tiny one, rather than a flat fee.  That way, you could discourage people who are not serious about it but make sure everyone can stand if they really want to.

George Oscar Bluth II

Yeah I don't think £10k is actually that much to the former banker YouTube conspiracist with 2m followers. Feels inherently unfair.

Fambo Number Mive

It's returned if you get more than 5% of the votes. There's quite a few candidates who I hope get less than 5% of the votes.  Even with the 5% rule, it's still unfair and I like Buelligan's idea.

George Oscar Bluth II

In 2016 9 out of 12 candidates lost their deposit, including the Liberal Democrats. Suspect this year a few more will sneak over the threshold because of how terrible the Tory candidate is and how little of a contest the race actually is.

JaDanketies

Alright then it's decided, I'll vote for the independent candidates so they don't lose their cash. They probably care about something-or-other, too, which is always nice.

Zetetic

Quote from: bgmnts on April 04, 2021, 07:30:42 PM
Either Labour or Plaid in the Senedd, probably Plaid.
Definitely Plaid in the Regional vote if you're in the South East.

(Not least so we don't lose Delyth Jewell.)

The Ombudsman

Quote from: George Oscar Bluth II on April 06, 2021, 05:12:42 PM
Yeah I don't think £10k is actually that much to the former banker YouTube conspiracist with 2m followers. Feels inherently unfair.

And the bastard with crowdfund that too.

Zetetic

On deposits, I wonder if you could run a system where a £s and signatures are almost entirely interchangeable?

So anywhere between e.g. 9900 signatures + £100 and £9900 + 100 signatures would get you on the London mayor ballot.

I don't know what a fair exchange rate would be. I don't know how many signatures you can get per-hour just asking anyone on the street.

pigamus

I might vote Green if there is one. It's all Labour here so it won't matter.

pancreas

Quote from: Shoulders?-Stomach! on April 04, 2021, 07:24:15 PM
In England :

1) If it's a Labour council seat that could be realistically be taken by someone even worse then vote Labour, as there is no opportunity to send a message.

2) If it is a safe Labour seat or one they don't have a prayer in vote for the next left one along, but do some research into candidates

3) If it is a Tory or Lib Dem seat Labour can win vote Labour.

In short, if there is a realistic least worst outcome that is in the balance, vote with head not heart. If it is already a done deal then fuck Labour.

I would make an exception if there is an especially awful local candidate you know is an embezzling nonce or something.

Disclosure: I live in a ward which is Scenario 2).

I would say that keeping Tories out is not clearly desirable if you have a Labour run council with virtually no opposition. Then it's better to send a message. Plus having an opposition, even if Tories, does have the benefit of keeping the council more honest. It's at that point that it really matters if they're a left-winger or not.

pigamus

What if spoil my ballot? Just write "Fuck Boris" on it or something? Has anyone here ever spoiled their ballot?

NoSleep


JaDanketies

Frankly the Tories are nicer to the people that vote them in anyway. They plunder Labour councils to prop up Tory councils. Selfishly you probably won't experience a major loss if the Tories get in when a completely selfless Labour council would've been hamstrung by uneven austerity anyway.

Not to say vote Tory. But the anti-Keith vote turning marginal council seats blue isn't the worst trade off in the world. Pragmatically you'd receive instant benefits from central government. Unfortunately you'd have Tories doling them out. So probably merely helpful to your local multinational.

Anyway a mixed bag of benefits and I'm willing to give Kier a pie face. Really I only ever voted Labour because of Corbyn but I retrospectively regret not voting for the hopeless Ed Miliband so I have room to come around

Blinder Data

Quote from: pancreas on April 06, 2021, 09:25:26 PM
I would say that keeping Tories out is not clearly desirable if you have a Labour run council with virtually no opposition. Then it's better to send a message. Plus having an opposition, even if Tories, does have the benefit of keeping the council more honest. It's at that point that it really matters if they're a left-winger or not.

I know that you hate Labour nowadays, there are many crappy hegemonic Labour councils and an effective opposition helps the body politic, but WTF!!! People should not be voting Tory, end of.

"send a message to the hated centrist Tory enablers by voting Tory" is bizarre logic. it's the sort of position TFM might have arrived at when Corbyn was leader...!

Fambo Number Mive

I dont think Pancreas is saying vote Tory, more saying dont vote Labour just to keep the Tories out if you have a Labour run council with no viable opposition and there is a decent other party to vote for?


PowerButchi


Shoulders?-Stomach!

Quote from: pancreas on April 06, 2021, 09:25:26 PM
I would say that keeping Tories out is not clearly desirable if you have a Labour run council with virtually no opposition. Then it's better to send a message. Plus having an opposition, even if Tories, does have the benefit of keeping the council more honest. It's at that point that it really matters if they're a left-winger or not.

I think we are in agreement then by the sounds of it.

Not sure why BD is getting so worked up. It doesn't mean voting Tory in that scenario, it may mean voting for another party or just not voting.

I agree that any centralisation of power without decent opposition and stringent checks and balances leads to complacency, arrogance and corruption, none of which help the cause Labour exist to support and isn't always necessarily better than any alternative.

All roads lead to Proportional Representation. Or should do.

George Oscar Bluth II

Quote from: JaDanketies on April 06, 2021, 09:39:11 PMPragmatically you'd receive instant benefits from central government.

This is pretty much explicitly the deal in English politics now. Vote Tory in your area and we'll give you treats. Don't vote Tory and you won't get treats. Think about the way the "towns fund" cash was doled out.

TrenterPercenter

Quote from: Blinder Data on April 07, 2021, 01:15:03 PM
I know that you hate Labour nowadays, there are many crappy hegemonic Labour councils and an effective opposition helps the body politic, but WTF!!! People should not be voting Tory, end of.

"send a message to the hated centrist Tory enablers by voting Tory" is bizarre logic. it's the sort of position TFM might have arrived at when Corbyn was leader...!

I think the idea is that if Labour do really badly then this will send a message to Labour HQ that they will need to get rid of Starmer and appoint a leftwinger as it will of course be read as Starmer is not leftwing enough; then in the ensuing leadership elections a leftwing leader will take control of the party again.

Nothing could possibly go wrong with this plan.

NoSleep

Quote from: TrenterPercenter on April 07, 2021, 06:40:21 PM
Nothing could possibly go wrong with this plan.

There's absolutely nothing to lose, either.

TrenterPercenter

Quote from: NoSleep on April 07, 2021, 07:00:40 PM
There's absolutely nothing to lose, either.

Said every Brexiteer as they thumped their tub.

NoSleep

Quote from: TrenterPercenter on April 07, 2021, 07:05:09 PM
Said every Brexiteer as they thumped their tub.

But in this case there really is nothing to lose (except fucking Kieth).

TrenterPercenter

I'll just say for clarity; this could work; it could precipitate the demise of Starmer and the election of a leftwing candidate who will restore all of the lost votes and a create popular and progressive left-wing party; I've no doubt dispatching Starmer is a milestone in this.  There is potentially much to gain if this worked; however if you think there is nothing to lose then I've afraid you haven't thought this through.

I'm ready to listen though; what have you identified that could go wrong; resulting in you losing more than you had, and how are you sure that this cannot happen?

Buelligan

What do you think there is to lose Trenter?

TrenterPercenter

Quote from: Buelligan on April 07, 2021, 07:19:11 PM
What do you think there is to lose Trenter?

It all depends as to what you value isn't it.

On a party level for you perhaps

Labour is annihilated in the locals; and the Tories do well; and the press and public view this this as proof that the public endorse the Tories and not Labour; and the Overton window is moved rightwards again; and the problem with Labour is that it is perceived to be too leftwing by the public; and the leftwing membership has already been told to leave; and the party has a leadership election in which a much more rightwing leader is selected by the membership; and the new leadership precipitates a bigger level of discontent in the leftwing membership changing internal policy and uses this as the basis to to roundly kicked them out of the party (like they were before); over time Labour starts winning back votes from the Tories; and the Tories sit back and think perfect we are back to where we started.

You think we are already there already I know. We aren't but we could be and that is a losing more than we have now (we have 20 leftwing MPs for example and still some influence).  A price worth paying perhaps; that is for all of us to consider individually but it isn't true that there is nothing to lose and there are very few situations in which thinking like this is helpful[nb]though I get the spirit[/nb]

Outside of that I think bringing in Tory councils is bad news for the NHS, local services, the disabled and those with mental health problems, people in poverty especially women, minorities and much more.  Labour councils do look after their vulernable people better than the Tories; even the ones that are run by people that didn't like Corbyn (with a few exceptions perhaps).

Buelligan

And what is to be gained by supporting Starmer's Labour?

TrenterPercenter

Quote from: Buelligan on April 07, 2021, 08:31:11 PM
And what is to be gained by supporting Starmer's Labour?

That isn't the question but you can extrapolate some answers to it from what I've written there.

lose = to lose something you already have (even if you don't realise it)
gain = to gain something you don't already have

So the question really is how are you ensuring that you will gain something and not lose something? It's all I'm asking really; considering what you might lose is just part of any logical appraisal of that; it is by no means the whole reason for doing something.