Voting to 'Get the Tories Out'

[DewHopper]

Pro Labour posters are all over this platform telling posters to vote for whoever gets the Tories out. It does not seem to matter who it is as long as voting for them gets the Tories out nationally.

It's a worrying voting strategy from my pov but I tend to vote at constituency level. If I had an excellent Tory MP who cared about the things I cared about and served their constituents well, I would vote for them. Similarly Labour ( I would absolutely vote for Rosie Duffield) or Independent.

Do those people who will just vote for anyone as longs as this will oust the Tories - and what could be a very good MP - ever consider the effects of this locally? They may have got the Tories out at a national level but saddled themselves with a useless MP who does nothing for the locality.

Take for example women's rights. I am a gender critical woman and care very deeply about the erosion of women's single sex spaces etc. I am sure that many of the 'Tories out at all costs' people feel the same. The pro Labour people keep telling us that Starmer will be better for women's rights BUT if you vote on a single issue - getting the Tories out - you may well elect a hopeless constituency MP who is TWAW and who will be standing up to every pro woman move that Starmer makes. I worry that there will be a lot of these in the next parliament.

So should we be voting on the single issue - get the Tories out? I don't think so - AIBU?

Every thread? I think I’m on a total of 3. All started as general threads and that’s why I was on them.
Banning? What? You genuinely seem to think someone who has a different voting preference from you, and tries to explain it, is ‘dictating’ to you or ‘banning’ you. I don’t get it.
I haven’t even said who I’m voting for, never mind who I think you should vote for. And if I did make a suggestion, you’re obviously free to ignore it.

edit: why is it ‘badgering’ when I post my beliefs and argue with you or others I disagree with but not when you (or they) reply - in your case accusing me of insulting you and wanting to ban your vote?

So you didn't like my practical examples that pose problems for your ideal world view that single sex spaces should be strictly adherred to.
I fail to see who trying to further the discussion that you appear keen to have is whataboutery.

So if it matters to you why are you whinging it’s a topic on this thread?

My son is currently applying to unis, some are in London. The London ones definitely have double room options. But no they are not the norm.

It was scaremongering when women said that men could access women's prisons. It happened. It was scaremongering when women said men could compete in women's sport, it happened. There are many further examples of this.

I'm not scaremongering by pointing out the implications of the current laws. I want the incoming government to change the laws to protect women. That's not unreasonable.

I don't understand why you post in this style?

I am asking in good faith as I'd like to learn about it, this sort of shit comes back.

As far as I understand it, it is insulting to disagree, especially when that disagreement is thoughtful and comes with evidence.

Why are you moaning about the direction of the thread?

Why is the GC side allowed to "pile on" but opposing views have got to go and go and start their own thread.

Insane indeed!

It’s insulting to tell women to stop speaking up 🤷‍♂️

And a few posters spend a lot of time doing that

Apologies if you don't like my tone, that wasn't intended.

I just get a bit frustrated when people say that because something hasn't happened that it won't happen.

This has been going on for years now. How many women and girls have to be harmed by males in single sex spaces to make women want the Labour Party to take clear action on this by changing the law to protect us? It always seems it's N+1.

@cardibach I'm going to be off MN for a bit but I'm interested in an expansion of this, if you'd care to - e.g. why would standing up for women lead to a culture war any more than failing to do so, & why would the results be worse than the culture war which will probably happen on this issue? Will look for any answer later.

'I’d like them to up their game. I think they aren’t because their (professional and knowledgable) pollsters tell them it’s not going to make a blind bit of difference to the election result but could lead to huge culture war nonsense in the press which couldaffect the result.'

Tactical voting wouldn't need to be a thing if we had a fair voting system. The archaic first-past-the-post system has created this problem.

Not withstanding that, it's like you're saying local issues might be more important than national ones. That's a whole other topic, and quite a complex one. Can I point out the obvious, that those who want the Tories out no matter what, feel quite strongly about that, and more than you do.

Is that the point you're really making? Why not just say that.

It’s the op’s thread and clearly it’ll go towards what they’re interested in

Is there a shortage of mn space or something

Nobody is piling on.
Women are giving their opinion. Don’t you like that?

@EasternStandard you do realise that you’re the only one issuing direct instructions to other posters don’t you? It’s ballsy to act like people are telling you what to do when you’re outright telling posters to start their own threads when all they’re doing is debating (debating is not bulldozing their PoV on others, although it might feel like that when they make points you don’t feel you can counter).

Why are you yet again trying to shut down posters with your acerbic wit?

To me it looks like you often run out of argument.

Where are you being berated please?
I disagree with you and I say so. Why is that berating? If it is, then you are also berating me, surely?

There was massive tactical voting in the last GE. That’s how the red wall fell.

Be careful of pointing out the implications of actions and laws. Apparently it is whataboutery.

Where have I whinged that it’s a topic on this thread please?

Double? For couples? Or twin for people who don’t know each other?
Many unis have double rooms, yes. You apply for them as a couple.

Forums don’t work like that. An OP starts a discussion but they don’t get to control where that discussion goes, that’s grown by other members contributions. An OP is an invite to discuss not an instruction to only participate if people feel/think the same.

Where?

Telling me I only use this topic to legitimise a vote is not only wrong but insulting

I couldn’t be more politically motivated on sex based rights for women, including dd and my dc generally

And no I’m not on every Labour thread there’s many I look at and see over a certain amount of posters in a Labour echo chamber and hide. Look at all of you on this one having to have your say why would I want that

I wasn't moaning! I was responding to what someone had posted upthread.

Well join in but don’t moan if you can’t police it and keep a topic off it