There's no-one worth voting for.

With the General Election due in the coming months, I just can't see that any party are worth voting for tbh.

Labour: proven uselessness
Conservative: almost guaranteed uselessness
Lib-Dem: Faceless & more-or-less anonymous, weak and useless
UKIP: about as much use as blocked portaloo at a festival, and just as repugnant
BNP: I'd take a row of portaloos at the end of Glastonbury over this lot because they'd still be less full of... well you know what.
The Green Party: Weed smoking know-it-all self righteous hippies that have never had a real job in their life.
Monster Raving Loony Party: Actually looking less mad than some of the others, but ultimately their existence is pointless.
Communist Party of Britain (+Respect - The Unity Coalition, Revolutionary Communist Party of Great Britain, Socialist Equality Party, Socialist Labour Party, Socialist Party, Socialist Party of Great Britain, Socialist Workers Party): Workshy idealistic uni dropouts & militant shouty types with no clue as to the fundamentals of a real democratic society.
Pensioners Party: Bunch of geriatric forgetful, incontinent curmudgeons wanting to take us back to how it was when they were young, like when beating women and children was legal, them good old days eh grandad.
Plus all the others too pointless for me to mention.

Trouble is, if you don't vote, I don't believe you can have cause to complain about the eventual outcome.

What to do...:rolleyes:

This really is the worst election to be my "first".

This time around though, it's not about who you want to be in, it's who you don't want to be in.

Well only the top two are real contenders.
I say its better to have the uselessness that you know than the one you don't.

I'm going to vote Labour. I was going to vote tory, but they have said some damn stupid things in the past year - I think they wouldn't have handled the crisis anywhere as well as Brown and Darling.

Matty has pretty much nailed it there, as indeed has OiD.

In the absence of finding anything to vote for, I shall just vote against who I don't want. I'm a bit heartened in that the Labour incumbent round here is one of those Ministers mentioned fairly prominently the expenses farce, so just maybe there will be sufficient backlash to get an alternative candidate in.

I still suspect that if a properly funded "none of the above" party had stood nationwide, this time it just might have got elected, such the level of public distaste for the current crop of politicians seems to be. I sure as hell would have been tempted.

if you live in worcester or bury north you can vote pirate party

I think I might just vote Lib-Dem this time round, just because they aren't Labour or Tory, as OID says, keep out who you don't want.

I know they may seem weak etc etc but maybe it is just time for a change, I doubt they will get in anyway but at least I will have made my stand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0iD

Trouble is, if you don't vote, I don't believe you can have cause to complain about the eventual outcome.

What to do...:rolleyes:

---

Vote as I did last time time then..Spoit Ballot paper... I draw a bit cross over the lot of them. I voted as is my right,and my responsibility but refused to pick any of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oolon

Vote as I did last time time then..Spoit Ballot paper... I draw a bit cross over the lot of them. I voted as is my right,and my responsibility but refused to pick any of them.

---

Might as well wipe my arse with it, for all the good it'll do.

Hold on... idea forming... :naughty::puke:

Remember the episode from South Park.

It's always a decision between Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.

Add another line on the ballot paper - "Autobots"

Just imagine - Optimus Prime Minister :)

Yeah it's a crying shame. It's like having to choose between a smug, posh kick in the nuts, or just a plain old kick in the nuts.

No-doubt we'll prob have one of the worst voter turnouts ever recorded. I expect I'm going to vote Lib Dem. Definitely will not vote Tory. I can't see myself voting Labour, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiM

I'm going to vote Labour. I was going to vote tory, but they have said some damn stupid things in the past year - I think they wouldn't have handled the crisis anywhere as well as Brown and Darling.

---

Are you talking about the crisis, that was in part caused by the current Government, removing safeguards that were there to prevent such an occurrence ever happening?. The same Government that deluded a Nation with Weapons of Mass Delusion, that have record levels of spending and borrowing and that happily lose millions of people's private data and waste Billions on IT projects that are never completed and then lie about Armed Forces spending and the need for massive cuts.

Yeah, seems like the right party to vote for!!::angst::laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiM

Well only the top two are real contenders.
I say its better to have the uselessness that you know than the one you don't.

I'm going to vote Labour. I was going to vote tory, but they have said some damn stupid things in the past year - I think they wouldn't have handled the crisis anywhere as well as Brown and Darling.

---

The problem with the way Brown/Darling have handled the crisis is that so far we've had the measures, and we've had some level of successful result, or at least that may well be as a result. What we haven't yet had is the bill for their measures arrive.

Essentially, they put the "fiscal stimulus" measures on the country's credit card. They've spent the money and incurred the borrowing to pay for it. But now we have to pay back the loans, and will be doing it for years.

Unfortunately, we can never know whether things would have been better or worse if the Tories had been running things. What we do now know, because Darling admitted it today, is that the cuts that are coming after the election will be "tougher and deeper" than those implemented by the Thatcher administration on the 80s. That's awfully cheering.

So even if they have handled the crisis better than the Tories would have, and I think that is an assertion that is questionable, I'd suggest that you also take into account that Brown was the Chancellor that got us into this in the first place. Darling doesn't take much blame for that, but Brown sure does.


It also makes me wonder quite what Darling is up to.

First, we had the "worst recession in 60 years" remark that resulted in the "forces of hell" being unleashed on him by Brown's attack dogs.

Then we got the "forces of hell" remark itself, pointing the blame at Brown and his attack dogs.

Now, ONE DAY after a pretty nondescript budget that was far longer on political manoeuvring than economic measures, we get a quote like that which is absolutely guaranteed to be used by the Tories to ridicule Brown's "Labour investment versus Tory cuts" mantra. I can only imagine Cameron and his top team have wet their pants with glee over that remark.

So either Darling is terminally inept at keeping his gob shut, or each of these "slips" has been quite deliberate. And I doubt he's that politically inept that these snuck out accidentally. Which makes me wonder what game he's playing. I wonder if he's calculated that he's toast if Brown wins, and out of a job anyway if Brown doesn't, and has decided to stick the knife onto Brown and try to take him down too. Maybe he knows he's got weeks left as Chancellor either way, and sees his position in Labour as stronger in a defeated Labour that will probably then ditch Brown, than in political Coventry if Brown pulls of a miracle and wins? Better Labour shadow Chancellor than a backbencher on Brown's poop list if Brown wins?

Either way, it's a gift for the Tories and just might be the start of a lot more honesty from both sides about the scale of the pain that's coming post-election. And if they want any shred of credibility at all with the public, they can't keep up the current FUD about spending cuts, because
even if the public is politically stoopid, surely it can't be that stoopid. Can it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fraz

Yeah it's a crying shame. It's like having to choose between a smug, posh kick in the nuts, or just a plain old kick in the nuts.

---

I wonder if an elitist and aristocratic kick in the nuts might be a little more restrained that a good old Socialist, 'working man' kick in the nuts? It sounds like it ought to be more .... effete?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fraz

.....

No-doubt we'll prob have one of the worst voter turnouts ever recorded. .....

---

Maybe, but maybe not. It depends if indignation over expenses and "cab for hire" lobbyists outpaces boredom and the "pox on all your houses" factor or not.

Don't worry guys. The people who usually fixes issues aren't the people you usually see on TV anyway.

The reason I won't be voting Tory is that for lack of a better term, or quote in this case:

Quote:

---

[He is already]Measuring the drapes for the Oval Office.

---

- John McCain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

I still suspect that if a properly funded "none of the above" party had stood nationwide, this time it just might have got elected, such the level of public distaste for the current crop of politicians seems to be. I sure as hell would have been tempted.

---

I wonder how long before a political party is born from Facebook. Okay it might not be for you, but I am just thinking of that Rage Against the Machine ordeal back when people felt like 'taking control' of the Christmas number 1. Although I'd probably fear such party just as much as any of the current ones.

As mentioned above, there is an option for the "none of the above" its called spoiling your paper. You have taken the time and effort to go to the polling station to say they are all useless. Imagine an election where a significant portion (i.e proportional to the amount of people who have lost faith in our political system) of the voters spoilt their paper, the governments "mandate of the people" would be in tatters.

It's what I did at the last election and I intend to do the same again.

Politics... garbage in, garbage out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk.

He might be a comedian, but he hits the nail on the head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [DW]Cougho

As mentioned above, there is an option for the "none of the above" its called spoiling your paper. You have taken the time and effort to go to the polling station to say they are all useless. Imagine an election where a significant portion (i.e proportional to the amount of people who have lost faith in our political system) of the voters spoilt their paper, the governments "mandate of the people" would be in tatters.

It's what I did at the last election and I intend to do the same again.

---

It isn't a 'none of the above' vote, though. It's as close as we get, or probably ever will get, but it isn't the same thing. The reason is that ballots can be spoiled for a variety of reasons, including mistake, confusion and accident.

A classic example is where there are two elections running concurrently (as will be the case if May 6th is the election date as expected) and where one is a first past the post and the other a single transferable vote (which is not the case in May. On one paper, you mark with a tick or X or whatever, but on the other, you rank candidates in order of preference, to give the "transfer" bit of the system. If people get confused between the two, or don\'t understand the difference, the result is likely to be a spoiled ballot.

A "none of the above" option, on the other hand, gives an explicit and deliberate choice, on a valid paper, rejecting giving your mandate to any of the options.

And because a spoiled paper can be for all sorts of reasons, nobody pays any attention to spoiled ballots, except possibly where there are unusually large numbers of them when it might become an issue.

Finally, the other difference is that most people won\'t spoil their ballot, but given an explicit option to poke their finger in the eye of the system with a "none of the above" option on the paper, they just might take it in numbers too large to ignore. And that\'s why we\'re never likely to get it. The only people that could make it happen are the politicians in the major parties, who are, of course, precisely the people such an option would be aimed at, and who therefore have an very clear vested interest in making sure it never happens. They can ignore spoiled papers and non-voters, but ignoring an explicit rejection would be a lot harder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

I wonder if an elitist and aristocratic kick in the nuts might be a little more restrained that a good old Socialist, 'working man' kick in the nuts? It sounds like it ought to be more .... effete?

---

Maybe. But bear in mind that posh people tend to wear pointier shoes.

as long as labour don't get back in due to voter apathy I'll be happy.

I would disagree that there's no one worth voting for: Anyone who's simply NOT Gordon Brown has a lot to recommend them, in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fraz

Maybe. But bear in mind that posh people tend to wear pointier shoes.

---

Don't all working class types wear steel toe-capped boots?

Point or steel toe-cap? Hmmmm. Decisions, decisions. :D

This is the first general election I've really given serious consideration to not voting at all.

That said, it feels wrong not to. Very, very undecided. I may go Tory. I'd vote Pirate Party if they were standing in my neck of the woods. It's probably going to be an on the day decision when I go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

Don't all working class types wear steel toe-capped boots?

Point or steel toe-cap? Hmmmm. Decisions, decisions. :D

---

Not many people know Saracen has his shoes hand made from the tanned skins of his vanquished foes... well the people who died of old age/boredom/brain edema whilst valiantly trying to read one of his more epic and convoluted posts in it's minutiae.


True story :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shooty*

I would disagree that there's no one worth voting for: Anyone who's simply NOT Gordon Brown has a lot to recommend them, in my opinion.

---

That won't be a problem then, unless you live in the Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath constituency.

Touche.

OK, I meant to say "Anyone who doesn't belong to the same party as Gordon Brown" etc etc etc.

But well pedanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0iD

Not many people know Saracen has his shoes hand made from the tanned skins of his vanquished foes... well the people who died of old age/boredom/brain edema whilst valiantly trying to read one of his more epic and convoluted posts in it's minutiae.


True story :)

---

Oi!

I've 'ave yer know, mate, I 'ave steel toecaps, 'igh-vis an a 'ard 'at and 'ave to use 'em on-site.

This time round for me it has to be the Lib Dems, just because of what they are saying about unfair taxes (council taxes etc). If they can put into practice what they have been talking about things could actually be better for the common type person.

Labour or Conservative we've had many times in the past and have proven time and time again that they are incompetent and greedy. Time to give someone else a go, as long as its not one of these 2 I'll be happy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shooty*

Touche.

OK, I meant to say "Anyone who doesn't belong to the same party as Gordon Brown" etc etc etc.

But well pedanted.

---

I was being flippant, but there was a point behind it ;) If the concern is with an individual then you can always ask your MP to represent your views. There might well be plenty of labour candidates who would happily do that, some of them might even not be willing to sell out to the highest bidder. We have a fairly locally representative system here, and it's worth using it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ferral

This time round for me it has to be the Lib Dems, just because of what they are saying about unfair taxes (council taxes etc). If they can put into practice what they have been talking about things could actually be better for the common type person.

Labour or Conservative we've had many times in the past and have proven time and time again that they are incompetent and greedy. Time to give someone else a go, as long as its not one of these 2 I'll be happy

---

Trouble with the LibDems is that they seem to say one thing in one place and another somewhere else. Their strongest point is Vince cable, for whom, like many, I have considerable respect. Unfortunately, the package comes with Nick Clegg too and after his highly unconvincing performance on the daily Politics, on which in my view he came across as vacillating and evasive to a degree far more than even Brown, I just can't see me voting for him or his party because I want them. On the other hand, I can't think of anyone I do want, at least, based on their performance so far.

Right now, I'm pretty much in agreement with shooty, and round here, that means voting Tory to (try to) get the Labour incumbent out. If the LibDems were the second party, I'd vote for then for the same reason - not to endorse or support the LibDems but in the hope of getting Labour out. But round here, until this time, it's pretty much been a Labour sure thing, with the Tories being the only ones with a prayer of taking it away from them.

The real trouble with the Lib Dems is that they got rid of a good leader unnecessarily, for spurious reasons, simply because his face didn't fit any more.

That and the fact that no-one thinks they can win, as John Cleese pointed out so successfully in 1997 :D

Given the number of people that are saying they're sick of the two main parties, I think the Lib Dems could probably do better this time round than they have done for a very long time.

I don't think they've got a hope in hell of becoming the next party in power, and even becoming the opposition seems highly unlikely, but they may well get a fairly high proportion.

It's sad really, because judging from recent conversations most people feel shoe-horned into voting either Labour or Tory - anything else is considered a wasted vote. Doesn't feel like politics in a way - more of a "pick bunch A until they make a few mistakes in a row, then move to bunch B, then repeat" situation. Admittedly, I only barely remember the '97 elections, so maybe my point of view isn't so valid, but that's how it feels to me.

Also, knowing that my constituency has been Tory since 1950 and their vote will only have increased this time round, I might as well stop worrying and stay at home.

The Lib Dems did reasonably in 1997 - a slightly lower share of the vote but more seats. I remember it well because I was standing in the local elections that happened at the same time, and my step-dad was standing for parliament. Our constituency didn't do so well, which is a shame considering we should have been natural Lib Dem territory - but the LD vote in the constituency had been on a steady decline since 1987 (my first election wandering round putting leaflets through doors - I blame my parents).

Of course, all this was before I finally realised that what we farcically call an electoral system doesn't even approach democracy, and all the nice fluffy liberals who claim to want democracy go all ashen-faced when you point out that if we had something that even resembled democracy the BNP would take ~ 10 seats in parliament this year...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiM

Well only the top two are real contenders.
I say its better to have the uselessness that you know than the one you don't.

I'm going to vote Labour. I was going to vote tory, but they have said some damn stupid things in the past year - I think they wouldn't have handled the crisis anywhere as well as Brown and Darling.

---

And Labour have not said/done stupid things over the last 13 years ???? Yes the Tories have not helped themselves, but do you really want Labour to dig a bigger sand pit?


I'll be voting Tory even though i'm not a 100% happy with all their policies, the reason being I can't put up with an inept donkey of a government (sorry Labour).

Its because the general populace could identify with Charles Kennedy - I mean, everyone likes a tipple right ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terbinator

Its because the general populace could identify with Charles Kennedy - I mean, everyone likes a tipple right ?

---

A friend of mine cancelled his LD membership and cut up his card over that. He pointed out that in any other employment CK would've had a pretty good case for unfair dismissal. Besides, everyone knows that Lib Dem leaders rely on that kind of "scandal" to become truely popular - look at Paddy Pantsdown... ;)

I've said for many years that there should be a "none of the above" box on voting forms. Spoilt papers don't count neither does voters not turning out, but a big "you're all lying cheating schemers" vote just might do the trick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scaryjim

A friend of mine cancelled his LD membership and cut up his card over that. He pointed out that in any other employment CK would've had a pretty good case for unfair dismissal. Besides, everyone knows that Lib Dem leaders rely on that kind of "scandal" to become truely popular - look at Paddy Pantsdown... ;)

---

But c'mon how many more votes would they of got for him if they wouldn't of turfed him out - and i think anyone would be partial to the old cough medicine if it was coming free :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiff Lemon

I've said for many years that there should be a "none of the above" box on voting forms. Spoilt papers don't count neither does voters not turning out, but a big "you're all lying cheating schemers" vote just might do the trick.

---

As said above by Saracen, having a none of the above box is about as likely a party standing who is truly in touch with the common man, and works for his benefit. I.E it will never happen in any of our lifetimes (I will not say it will never ever happen, too much changes to say that).

That's why i stand by the opinion that spoiling your paper is the best option, granted its not perfect but if it happened in great numbers it would be hard to ignore. I recognise this is the same argument that the Lib Dem supporters have been using for years, people don't vote Lib Dem (or spoil their paper) because they believe there aren't enough people who would do the same to make a difference.

Unfortunately I know that my vote will not make a difference, however knowing that I have spoilt my paper will allow me to walk out of the polling station knowing not only have I done my bit to maintain the democratic process but I can also take comfort in the fact that none of the frankly awful parties got my vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [DW]Cougho

As said above by Saracen, having a none of the above box is about as likely a party standing who is truly in touch with the common man, and works for his benefit. I.E it will never happen in any of our lifetimes (I will not say it will never ever happen, too much changes to say that).

That's why i stand by the opinion that spoiling your paper is the best option, granted its not perfect but if it happened in great numbers it would be hard to ignore. I recognise this is the same argument that the Lib Dem supporters have been using for years, people don't vote Lib Dem (or spoil their paper) because they believe there aren't enough people who would do the same to make a difference.

Unfortunately I know that my vote will not make a difference, however knowing that I have spoilt my paper will allow me to walk out of the polling station knowing not only have I done my bit to maintain the democratic process but I can also take comfort in the fact that none of the frankly awful parties got my vote.

---

I'm getting kinda tired of of rhetoric...............anyone on Facebook (not me I'm afraid) care to take up the challenge.......NONE OF THE ABOVE is what it should be about.........two weeks and counting, but you have a vote here.

A facebook/twitter Vote: NONE OF THE ABOVE group does sound like a damned fine idea..

Especially if it could garner the support of a couple of solid like-minded celebs to raise the profile.. (Messrs Fry, Bailey & Jupitus anyone?)

Hmm.

Quote:

---

There's no-one worth voting for..... but whatever you do, do not vote Labour

---

Fixed :)