kaberett: Trans symbol with Swiss Army knife tools at other positions around the central circle. (Default)
kaberett ([personal profile] kaberett) wrote2014-11-24 01:38 pm
Entry tags:

General election murblings

I have been saying for some time that I really need to look at voting statistics for my borough in order to determine whether I need to vote for my (mostly competent, keeps trying to pick twitter fights with Julian Huppert) Labour MP Andrew Slaughter in order to avoid a Tory, or whether Andy's sufficiently safe that I can vote LD or Green instead depending on policies and candidates.

As it turns out, there isn't enough record to make a good call because the borough's only bloody existed since like 2010 (in its most recent incarnation; it previously existed 1885-1918 and 1983-1997, but I'm not poking at boundary maps hard enough to work out whether that's meaningful for my purposes). Anyway, it looks like Andy's sufficiently safe that I can vote according to my politics + desire for candidates without risking getting a bloody Conservative in; which means I will wait for Green & LD candidates to be announced and then make my mind up. (For all Andy annoys me he does mostly respond plausibly to letters and I approve of his interactions with the NHS, so.)
ex_we935: A photo of a dark-haired woman, with a sort of sepia, chiaroscuro effect applied to it. (Kerry - Chiaroscuro)

[personal profile] ex_we935 2014-11-24 01:46 pm (UTC)(link)
I wish it wasn't so difficult to have to decide between voting for a party that's less horrifying than the competition and voting for a party that actually suits your principles - I think this the reason why neo-liberal parties like New Labour, the US Democrats etc end up getting so many votes, even in areas where parties like the Greens would be more likely to match the voters' actual beliefs.

~K.
catyak: Baby Tesla (ZombieDog)

[personal profile] catyak 2014-11-24 04:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Sadly it has long been a case of voting for least-worst rather than best.

Last time out it was important to dump Labour who were turning us into a nanny state. Now it looks like the UK is becoming a police state (although the previous government weren't exactly blameless for that either) so it's necessary to work out who might stop that.

[personal profile] swaldman 2014-11-25 08:46 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not sure that we can stop the creep of the police state by voting. We have an (arguable) choice between the party that says it believes in human rights, versus the party that says it believes in civil liberties[1]. Both appear to believe what they are told by the spooks.

[1] Actually, I'm not sure that's even true any more.
ext_51145: (Default)

[identity profile] andrewhickey.info 2014-11-24 04:37 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, this is why we need a decent preferential voting system, so then you could rank your preferences 1) Lib Dem, 2) Green, 3) Labour or whatever (that'd be my preference), and not have to worry.

In this case, I think Slaughter is safe. He had a substantial majority at the last election, the worst for Labour in many decades, and both the Tories and (especially) the Lib Dems are now much less popular. That looks like a very safe Labour seat to me...

[personal profile] swaldman 2014-11-25 08:47 am (UTC)(link)
While I should not enjoy a broken electoral system delivering undemocratic results, I will nevertheless have quite a lot of Glee if the Tory vote should get hopelessly split with UKIP and cost them both seats, given how keen they were to retain the system that allows this to happen.
ext_51145: (Default)

[identity profile] andrewhickey.info 2014-11-25 08:58 am (UTC)(link)
Oh, absolutely.
What I *really* hope is that we get an (entirely possible) situation where the Tories come first in votes but second in seats, Labour second in votes but second in seats, UKIP third in votes but with no seats at all, the SNP fourth in votes and seats, and the Lib Dems fifth in votes and third in seats, and end up with a Lib-Lab coalition.
In a situation like that, where we get a completely *stupid* result, electoral reform might be a possibility again...

[personal profile] swaldman 2014-11-25 09:13 am (UTC)(link)
I think you have confused yourself above :-P
(possibly you meant to say "Labour second in votes but first in seats"?
ext_51145: (Default)

[identity profile] andrewhickey.info 2014-11-25 08:34 pm (UTC)(link)
That's what I meant, yes. I was decaffeinated when typing...