WTF won't Labour, Lib Dems (& potentially the Greens) endorse tactical voting?

[Pipsquiggle]

This is obviously prompted by the by election result in Uxbridge. If there was no Lib Dem candidate, Labour could have won that seat (assuming their votes went to Labour).

I'll make no bones about it. I really dislike the Tories and want them out ASAP. Their policies have embedded generational poverty in so many parts of the UK. I reside in the home counties, a Tory stronghold seat - my middle class neighbours have zero clue how hard it is to grow up in a poor part of the country and thrive.

I want Labour to win a huge majority with other left leaning parties also getting seats. I would love electoral reform - PR and mandatory voting. The first past the post system is just shit and doesn't represent how the country voted.

YABU - Political parties should not endorse tactical voting, it's fine as it is

YANBU - Tactical voting should be encouraged as the FPTP voting system is shit

The question that is never answered.

Labour have just said that they think ULEZ should be reconsidered given it's what caused them to lose

What was wrong with saying that their principal of protecting lives and environment is more important and that they would look to ensure that the poorest in society are protected from the additional costs resulting from climate change

So if they fail women and fail the environment I don't want them in

Never in all my years did I think I could say that

They'll do it for exactly the same reasons as they did last time with the Tories (and won't hesitate to get back into bed with them if they look as though they might be the better option). Fuck the policies, they'll abandon any they have the moment they scuttle into Downing Street.

What was wrong with saying that their principal of protecting lives and environment is more important and that they would look to ensure that the poorest in society are protected from the additional costs resulting from climate change

Because their principles were what they thought would win them votes. When they realise it isn’t, their ‘principles’ are fast ditched. Same as all the others.

Because for the vast majority of the electorate it’s not an issue. People can’t afford their mortgages, can’t get a GP appointment or a dentist, the number of kids living in poverty and visits to food banks go up every day. Those are things that people are worried about and that will decide how they vote.

And here, again, we see that people do literally no research before deciding their vote. If you had, you'd know that the Tory government have ordered Sadiq Khan to extend the ULEZ.

And all this "knows what a woman is" stuff is exactly the sort of thinking that brought us Brexshit - people have a single ill-thought-out idea and decide to ignore all the damage that could result. Sheer idiocy.

Ah yes, left wing gender critical women concerned about child safeguarding and the rights of women and girls are now suddenly raving fascists and bigots who are responsible for Brexit happening...heard it all before. From Owen Fucking Jones et al.

people have a single ill-thought-out idea and decide to ignore all the damage that could result. Sheer idiocy.

Rather like gender ideology wouldn't you say...?

Actually, I'd agree that the Gender Ideology that some are claiming is very flawed, but so is the GC movement. The polarisation is a) what the Tories want, as it's great for their Culture Wars, and b) making it far worse for both sides and, indeed, everybody else...

Pretty much spot on for gender ideology

Because for the vast majority of the electorate it’s not an issue. People can’t afford their mortgages, can’t get a GP appointment or a dentist, the number of kids living in poverty and visits to food banks go up every day. Those are things that people are worried about and that will decide how they vote.

This doesn't answer the question that @yogasaurus and I asked: Why, if the vast majority of the electorate doesn't care about this issue, are Labour clinging to the commitment to reform of the GRA like limpets to a rock? If nobody cares abandoning it would not cost them any votes but would gain them a large proportion of the GC votes, then they could tackle all those problems everyone cares about. It seems it is actually more important to them then securing as many votes as possible. Why?

Can you explain how the gender critical position is flawed? The way I see it is up until 5 minutes ago everyone knew that there were two sexes and that if you had a penis you were male - then along came gender ideology and now people pretend that males with penises are actually women and that babies can be 'trans'. I am critical of that and many other delights that this movement promotes.
I am also critical of political figures who pretend that the above is true to appease a small section of the electorate (or their party in Starmer's case) and the way that principled, intelligent female politicians like Rosie Duffield have been treated by men like Starmer. It is NOT acceptable and many women (and men) care about this shit and will vote accordingly.

I'm not going into detail here, as it's all complex, and there are no easy solutions. Removing rights completely from one part of society isn't known for working out very well, and, frankly, people on here just shout what they want without thinking. So I'll simply leave it here.

Literally any time there is a discussion on Labour/ conservatives on here someone chimes in with ‘least the Conservatives know what a woman is’ 🥱
Everything else is falling apart around us, but yes, let’s make the vote about gender ideology.

I'd rather get rid of FPTP than faff about with tactical voting.

Tactical voting has no impact in some constituencies - my constituency MP (happens to be from the party I'm a member of) had three times the vote of her nearest rival.
Even if that's the party I want to be represented by, it hacks me off that my vote is meaningless & I effectively have no say.
I spoil the ballot paper & write across it that I want a democratic voting system.

They don’t. It’s the Labour lot that use that line.

Plus Labour will need funding to resolve issues, where is that coming from?

That's literally the opposite of what has happened here.

Tory shill...

Ha at your lame insult.

Women who are concerned about women’s rights being eroded use other language.

All those posts with emojis and scoffing are from the Labour lot:

I’d call you a Labour shill but who the fuck cares. You seem uniformed and that’s enough.

I'm not criticising any "Women who are concerned about women’s rights being eroded use other language."

I'm calling out someone who I've seen at every opportunity push the Tory party line.

If you don't like it, well the truth hurts...

I’m amazed at how low down women place this issue so all they have is ‘shill’

It’s so weak as a rebuttal

No doubt you’ll be complaining when you see what losing rights means in reality

Your precious Tory party has removed people's right to protest, people's right to claim asylum, and they're working on many others.

But, yeah, it's me, some random powerless person in the internet who is removing everyone's rights...

Again with the insults

Is that all you’ve got, are you a Labour shill?

I doubt you’ll get the results you’re after and will have lost some rights to boot

Bravo got you, but take ownership. I won’t.

Is Starmer reversing the protest rights?

And what’s the take on asylum from Labour

Vote for them if you want. Don’t use the shill line because you are crap at debating.

Not everyone loves Labour like you do.

None of that actually makes any sense.

Stop shilling and nobody will call you a shill.

I'm not a big fan of Labour, as if you're interested, but I'll support them as necessary to get rid of these criminals destroying our country.

I'll leave you to get the last word in, I can tell you're the type!

Oh god give it up.

You want Labour to win

So what?

I don’t agree with you.