Boris's Johnson, Liberalism, The BBC - it's all here..

[onebatmother]

Anyone want to continue the sick-at-heart/flushed-with-triumph thread.

We were just discussing the BBC and liberalism.

councils send a registration form to each address on their records - all you need to do is put down Tom, Dick Harry and their 20 best friends. No-one checks that those people actually exist or live there.

As a matter of fact, my vote was stolen in my very first general election, when I was just 18. And the council didn't give a toss - couldn't be bothered to investigate my complaint, although it was an open and shut case.

Hate to say it but I think that BJs spangle has got people voting. Some to keep him out, more to get him in.

It's depressing. Jimmy Saville next time, you mark my words.

He's still alive, right?

Ach, he'd probably still get in.

Ah, but I didn't say I was going to vote Labour, did I! Best option round here if you did want to nick a few votes would be to go Lib Dem, I suspect.

but how do they get the 20 people onto the roll for that one address in the first place, edam?

Really interested, as I've often thought that it seems v easy to "do" voter fraud, but then I've always come up against a brick wall.

Eg: I turn up at polling stations state a name and a corresponding address and I can vote.

Electoral fraud seems alarmingly easy in this instance.

But actually, as soon as one or two people said - hey, I haven't voted yet, what do you mean you've already ticked me off the list? - it would all be over.

I think we are in the same ward, Swedes, do you think it's ever returned anyone other than a Tory?

"If one person voted Labour the police would be called."

Oh LOL Swedes.

That's what happened to me, onebat - I arrived to vote only to be told the person at that address had already voted. No-one gave a flying fuck.

I think in the most recent cases the fraudsters stole/asked people to hand over their voter registration cards.

Edam - If you were still in London who would have been deemed worthy of your vote? Ignore if you don't want to say.

Edam - Never, not even St Alban the martyr defeated the Tories in Harp W.

Oooh, tricky one, Swedes. I dislike Ken intensely and think he deserved to be turfed out - had got to that stage of power corrupting a long time ago. I think he believed that anything he did or thought was right by virtue of him thinking or doing it, and the rules only applied to the little people. Mind you, I never voted for him when I did live in London so I'm no loss to his cause!

Maybe Brian Paddick...

Do you think there's a rule of thumb - if the average house in the ward has more than four bedrooms, it's always going to return a Tory?

I believe Hampstead and Highgate has been Labour for some decades,ladies?

But Ham and High is a special case, I think! Hardly typical of the UK at large.

off to bed. See you all tomorrow.

Onebat -Ham & High election results I think I'm correct in saying that affluent Hampstead and Highgate are Labour thanks to multiculural Kilburn (which is part of that part of that constituency). The idea of that seat being all thespian and left wing is lovely but a total myth. I used to live in NW3.

Glad to see this is still going . I am not hiding in the MN bunker, have been out enjoying the sunshine.

I would like to state that I am not pro-Boris, I am anti-Ken and would view myself as neutral on the election result - am interested to see what will happen. I don't think the entire city will explode, but if it does I am willing to proved wrong .

Interestingly, I would call myself left wing (certainly liberal) but I object to being told What To Think and What Is Best For Me. Which leads me to suspect I should stay off MN . And that my chances of feeling at home in the Labour Party are slim.

This has inspired me to do some serious thinking and research before the next election - who knows, I may even be able to come off the liberal fence and vote for a part that might actually win...

Yes, I did go and try to remove my extra dubya in shock at the connotations of Bush support.

Now the conjunction of 'Bush' and the surgical removal of excess has brought to mind the dangly fanjo thread.

One of the very many enjoyable things about BJ (which I han't noticed before) is that he has a nicely rude abbreviation.

I can't comment seriously on the London elections because I have no idea of the electoral system there, or the major policies (as I am from that small hamlet known as 'the rest of the country' -- London bias rather than lib bias I's say!)

I was shocked in my county by the consequence of a move to a unitary authority. The now-abolished district councils were a check on Labour dominance cos Lib Dems had a chance of winning in some of them. The new unitary has just returned a stonking Labour majority.

That would have been a source of joy to me years ago, but I have zero zilch nada support left for them.

Threadie - For me your Bush connotations bring to mind the Philosophical Hairstyles thread.

...stickig my neck in to make a very irrelevant ? comment... Which is worse... clever, disguised vote rigging by authorities that don't give a damn...or the Zimbabwean model (I am not referring to the actual violent intimidation)

am later here -- you're probably not up

but ready to re-engage later on the idea that the large-scale failure of understanding has become apparent to you only now that Labour has lost

has everyone had a perfect comprehension of the issues since 1997, and now suddenly become rather dim about things?

it's a glib way of putting it.. but come back to me

Effie, me too! Relieved at finding another 'anti-Ken' not 'pro-Boris'.

hello stuffit

I think you've got me wrong, honest. I'm not a Labour supporter. I voted Green in 1997 and in all the General Elections since. I'm not convinced that the electorate is any more confused or ill-informed now than it was 15 years ago; I think Labour only got in in the first place because people thought that it was 'time for a change' (and if that's not a stupid reason for electing a government, I don't know what is). I could have had this discussion with you about the electorate's levels of ignorance at any point over the last 20 years - I remember, when I was doing my politics A Level , discussing in class a survey which showed that something like 40 per cent of those surveyed thought that nationalisation was a Tory policy.

I take it you're not in the UK? It is my impression, from listening to radio phone-ins and reading the vox pops published in newspapers, that people are really quite clueless about which policies parties are actually espousing. In the case of BJ and Cameron, this is exacerbated by the fact that they really don't have many published policies. The fact that this doesn't seem to have hindered the public's decision to vote for them is rather alarming, I think, but not because they are Tories - just because people cannot know what they are voting for, other than 'a change'.

there's surely a good reason that the administration tends to change periodically? 10+ years is presumably unusual. Maybe the majority of the electorate fall somewhere in the middle in terms of political outlook, but tend to swing one way or the otehr given the political climate and how irritated they are with the particular weaknesses of the party in power.

I think that if people vote for 'change' without knowing what policies they are voting for, that's dumb. Sorry, but I do.