EU Elections - Will you be voting?

[AGTDenton]

Geniune question to those not voting. Why? Don't you want to have a say?

Nobody I want to vote for, not a single party or member has convinced me anything will change if they're voted in.
I do not believe the words that come out of their mouths.
They only tell you of the existing problems, never how they are going to solve something with a true plan of action or when they expect to do it by. They never keep you informed and always try to hide from the truths.

For me it would be an inaccurate vote to please somebody else if I was being forced.

[Saracen999]

I guess it's down to the individual and how comfortable they feel with what they do.

Personally, I don't feel comfortable steamrollering ahead - I don't believe in a Democracy you can just ignore voting rules.

Different folks and all that though.

On pretty much any other election I would see it that way, too.

This one, for me at least, is different.

Why?

Because in the interests of democracy, we had a referendum, were told specifically, in an unqualified manner and in writing that the result will be implemented, and we then voted to leave no matter how those not getting what they want wish it weren't the case.

Yet here we are, three years later, not left.

I don't care what groups parties are in for the simple reason we shouldn't be boting at all, if our supposedly democratic MPs could get thrir heads out of wherever they've stuck them for 5 minutes and grtvon with leaving.

I don't care what EU groups contain what parties in much the same way that I don't care which US states cast electoral college votes for which party - I'm an observer, with no voice, no vote. I feel the same way sbout the EU. We voted to Leave, we were told (by both sides) that it takes two years and three years later, we're still in.

What it comes down to is that our "democratic" MPs won't deliver on democracy, so why should I care what group a bunch of MEP's join when as far as I'm concerned, the UK has no democratic right to be represented in the EU Parliament in the first place. A legal right under EU law, for sure, but not a democratic right in UK terms.

I, personally, don't get much say in how either our government, much less the EU, is run and what little say I do get will be used to make what tiny, minuscle, almost immaterial difference I can and right now that is to send a signal to the parties here that I would traditionally vote for that they have lost my vote while this farce continues and that if they don't pull their fingers out, they will have lost it permanently because there's no point voting democratically for any party that then ignores the will of the people in the single largest single-issue democratic vote we've had.

If the system is bust, why carry on voting for those that broke it?

Unless, of course, our so-called democracy is, as I've said many times and over many years, a confidence trick, an illusion, a scam, by those in power. A combination of the effectively two-party system, FPTP, the three-line whip and MPs frequent claims that they are reoresehtatives jot delegates, really means that we have no actual democracy, just a once-per-5-years chance to affect which particular bunch of lunatics are running the asylum.

My one, tiny and almost imperceptible chance to have my say heard consists of getting as many Brexit-supporting MEPs elected as possible because that, and that alone, sends the signal I want sent. That is my democratic voice, for what it's worth.

What they do once elected, I care not, because they are part of a system we shouldn't be part of at all, at this point. If they want to go sit on a beach somewhere, fine, build me a sandcastle. If they want to go to EU Parliament and be as big a psin in the tush as they can .... pass the popcorn.

But what group they join? Don't care. And I say that as someone that for family reasons probably ought to be inclined to the PES, seeing as a cousin used to be their leader.

[adidan]

On pretty much any other election I would see it that way, too.

This one, for me at least, is different.

Why?

Because in the interests of democracy, we had a referendum, were told specifically, in an unqualified manner and in writing that the result will be implemented, and we then voted to leave no matter how those not getting what they want wish it weren't the case.

I'm not talking about wishing.

Vote Leave accepted they broke the rules and accepted a fine. Should we just ignore rule breaking? Sure, so, why do we have them? They're pointless if not adhered to.

Looking to Switzerland who hold many, many, many referenda they've just overturned one because the public were presented with incorrect figures that may have influenced the result. That doesn't sound outrageous or anti-democratic.

I'm not remoaning, i'm just trying to view the situation objectively. I agree with some of the Leave supporters arguments, I think they particularly had a valid point when they started the petition calling for another referendum before the result "if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 percent based a turnout less than 75 percent." - I was onboard with that before the result came in.

[Ciber]

Vote Leave accepted they broke the rules and accepted a fine. Should we just ignore rule breaking? Sure, so, why do we have them? They're pointless if not adhered to.

Looking to Switzerland who hold many, many, many referenda they've just overturned one because the public were presented with incorrect figures that may have influenced the result. That doesn't sound outrageous or anti-democratic.

That's a very good point.

Because perhaps one of the reasons people think the EU doesn't work for the UK is because their MEPs haven't been working for the UK for at least the last decade either?

That's probably very true. MEPs probably should have been far more visible and accountable to us, the voters. I've never understood why the media have never shown much interest in what our MEPs actually do. What they do is important but most members of the public have no knowledge of what goes on in the European parliament or indeed what the EU does to benefit us (a lot more than you would think).

[Ciber]

What do MEPs do? http://www.europarl.europa.eu/united...o_they_do.html

[Saracen999]

I'm not talking about wishing.

Vote Leave accepted they broke the rules and accepted a fine. Should we just ignore rule breaking? Sure, so, why do we have them? They're pointless if not adhered to.

Looking to Switzerland who hold many, many, many referenda they've just overturned one because the public were presented with incorrect figures that may have influenced the result. That doesn't sound outrageous or anti-democratic.

I'm not remoaning, i'm just trying to view the situation objectively. I agree with some of the Leave supporters arguments, I think they particularly had a valid point when they started the petition calling for another referendum before the result "if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 percent based a turnout less than 75 percent." - I was onboard with that before the result came in.

If there's a decent case for sny such rule-breaking having affected the result, then naybe so. But as far as I've seen, there isn't ... and both sides broke rules.

As for figures, you did see the "forecasts" Renain kept pushing I presume? Did you also read the statistical critique made of the methodology used? It was, in several respects, subject to considerable question. Yet those forecasts were pushed, relentlessly, to predict doom and gloom, and senior (and governmental) Remainers predicted economic catastrophe if we so much as voted to Leave, never mind actually doing so. Remember some bloke in some job predicting an immediate recession, and an emergency budget if we just voted leave? Well .... where is it that recession?

What bloke? Oh, only the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

So, when it comes to figures, think there's any chance that, the doom and disaster threatened by our chief financed minister just might have influenced a few people to vote Remain to avoid such economic Armageddon?

Yet .... it didn't happen. We had a currency drop ..... which, by the way, city analysts had been predicting anyway, before the referendum was called because the pound was over-valued, but the other threats of doom have, so far, proven utterly unfounded and most economic indicators are doing pretty well.

This is not to say everything is great. We still have problems, not least a perversely persistent productivity issue, but that way preceeded any hint of Brexit and is clearly fundamentally structural. What's a bit surprising is that, given that, other things like unemployment and employment, are where they are.

All told, armageddon didn't happen, despite major Remain-camp figures predicting it. Which about coincides which what I expect from econometrics, particularly once politicians get their clammy mitts on forecasts, and I say that as someone trained in econometrics.

Look, I don't want to go over all the old arguments yet again. All this stuff about turnouts and degrees if win is just remainer arguments for why they didn't lose, when they did,

It was, remember, a Remainer Prime Minister that called for a Referendum, and that sponsored the law establishing it, and no mention was made of mjnimum turnout or margins, not least because it would rightly have been seen as loading ghe result. Everybody eljgible to vote coukd have, and if they didn't turn out, don't blame Leave, or try to rewrite the result.

We wrre promised a regerendum and, by that same Remainer PM, that it WILL BE implemented.

So implement it.

Or we don't have an actual democracy.

[Ciber]

Or we don't have an actual democracy.

LOL. Lately I feel like we don't have a working democracy.

[Smudger]

If there's a decent case for sny such rule-breaking having affected the result, then naybe so. But as far as I've seen, there isn't ... and both sides broke rules.

.

Billionaires and Russian Oligarchs aren't known for spending money where they don't have to, or it won't have any effect, so you'd wonder why they did spend that extra money, and go to the lengths they did to hide it, if it wasn't going to have any effect? The 'both sides broke the rules' but implies equivalence, but Leave actually broke the law, not just the rules. And tried to hide it.

[Corky34]

If there's a decent case for sny such rule-breaking having affected the result, then naybe so. But as far as I've seen, there isn't ... and both sides broke rules.

If it didn't effect the results then they wouldn't have spent the money, it's the same argument put forward for why companies advertise, if it didn't work then they wouldn't do it and sure there's an argument to be made that they're only standing still but that's why spending limits are put in place for political campaigns.

And yes, both sides broke the rules but that's like saying a murderer and someone who dropped a sweet rapper both broke the law, they're magnitudes apart and so was the levels of law breaking during the referendum, IIRC one side has been fined around £800k and the other around £20k and one side is also the topic of an international criminal investigation because the electoral commission had "reasonable ground" to believe the source of funding was not from a UK resident.

Then there's the suspected Russian interference, if all of that didn't result in an extra 1.3m odd votes then it raises the question of why they bothered.

[Saracen999]

If it didn't effect the results then they wouldn't have spent the money, it's the same argument put forward for why companies advertise, if it didn't work then they wouldn't do it and sure there's an argument to be made that they're only standing still but that's why spending limits are put in place for political campaigns.

And yes, both sides broke the rules but that's like saying a murderer and someone who dropped a sweet rapper both broke the law, they're magnitudes apart and so was the levels of law breaking during the referendum, IIRC one side has been fined around £800k and the other around £20k and one side is also the topic of an international criminal investigation because the electoral commission had "reasonable ground" to believe the source of funding was not from a UK resident.

Then there's the suspected Russian interference, if all of that didn't result in an extra 1.3m odd votes then it raises the question of why they bothered.

Ever spent money and not got the results you wanted/expected? Happens almost every time I bug a lottery ticket, and a reasonable percentage of the time when I buy tech goods.

As for the Electoral Commission, fines were in relation to musreportjng, and that same Commission also said that based on "information available" there no "no reasonable grounds to suspect" PPERA had been broken, case closed.

And on the subject of bias, what about a government spending some £10m sendung a leaflet to every household in the country, suggesting the economic roof would fall in if we were stupid enough to vote Leave and we strongly recommebd Renain .... but hey, your choice and we will implement what you decide.

Nice way to start off an even-handed campaign, when that leaflet could have been used to put both sides or even to simply explain the caveats go the numerous disaster "forecasts".

[Corky34]

But we're not talking about lottery tickets or tech goods, we're talking about political advertising.

The electoral commission fines were for Breaching statutory spending limit, Breaching statutory spending limit for a non-registered campaigner, Failure to notify the Electoral Commission of political contributions, Failure to deliver a complete and accurate spending return, and Failure to deliver complete and accurate pre-poll transaction report and post-poll spending information (Source).

And then there's the ICO fines, Sending people text messages without having first gained their permission to do so, 296,522 direct marketing emails delivered without subscribers' consent, two instances of 1,069,852 Eldon Insurance direct marketing emails to 54,000 subscribers without consent, and in some instances both the EC and ICO said the fines would've been higher but that was the maximum available to them at the time.

And the EC said "Following an investigation we launched on 1 November 2017, we have reasonable grounds to suspect that:"

Re the spending on a leaflet: First IIRC that was before the official campaigning started and secondly if we're going to go back to before the official campaigning started then we may as well go back over the last 40 years, I'm sure the amount of money Euroskeptic newspapers and UKIP spent far exceeds the Europhile spending.

Personally I'm not up for re-running previous conversations we've had on Brexit, and i suspect you're probably not either, however to suggest that the criminal activity and overspending didn't effect the result seems a little incredulous to me personally, you're obviously welcome to make up your own mind.

[OilSheikh]

I will be voting and for Nigel's Brexit party.
Hopefully, those folk in the parliament will get a hint.

[peterb]

I’m undecided - I’m not quite sure what role an MEP has.


I mean my MP is my representative in Parliament and if I have an issue with policy or other U.K. matter, I can take it to my MO who has considerable power in finding answers. He also represents a party.

But I can’t think of a single issue I would want to take to an MEP. So what else do they do? I suppose they represent political parties - and I suppose they are supposed to stand up for the interests of the U.K. - but as a minority in the European Parliament they are pretty toothless.

So that leaves voting as a protest activity and on that I’m still undecided if or how I will vote.
Pa

[usered]

I Have to vote because my dad says so.

[spacein_vader]

I’m undecided - I’m not quite sure what role an MEP has.


I mean my MP is my representative in Parliament and if I have an issue with policy or other U.K. matter, I can take it to my MO who has considerable power in finding answers. He also represents a party.

But I can’t think of a single issue I would want to take to an MEP. So what else do they do? I suppose they represent political parties - and I suppose they are supposed to stand up for the interests of the U.K. - but as a minority in the European Parliament they are pretty toothless.

So that leaves voting as a protest activity and on that I’m still undecided if or how I will vote.
Pa

As I understand it they are supposed to represent Britain's interests in the EU Parliament although as you'd imagine they view those interests very much down party lines.

I have no problem with UKIP or the Brexit Party standing or winning seats, but I don't like the idea that they will then use those seats to collect the wage and snipe from the sidelines. By all means work within the processes to further the goal of leaving but don't just try to gum up the works so nothing gets done.

If that's their intention... Well even Sinn Fein have the decency to refuse to take up their seats.

[Ferral]

Yes and No

Only reason for this though is that we are away on holiday next Monday so won't be in the country on polling day. If I was here I would be voting Liberal Democrat this time around.