Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Euro elections results

463 replies

policywonk · 06/06/2009 11:53

Here's one prediction www.predict09.eu/default/en-us/state_analyses.aspx#united

Cheeringly, it reckons that the BNP won't win a seat. Here's hoping.

OP posts:
policywonk · 08/06/2009 16:14

'Wonderstuff, I got quite a few leaflets in the South East. Do remember though, it is all volunteers who deliver them and believe me absolutely every effort is put in by those volunteers who come out of the election exhausted. They need people like you, who care about the issues, to help them.'

A good point by Kitten I think. If everyone on this thread who's depressed about the BNP joins up with a local party and gets campaigning at the next election, it could make a serious difference.

I'm thinking about joining the Greens. They have some completely crazy policies, but it's a democratic policy-making process, so if you're a member you get a say. (Same with LibDems I think.)

OP posts:
policywonk · 08/06/2009 16:19

Sorry, having read the rest of the thread I realise I'm repeating what lots of other people have said

OP posts:
yappybluedog · 08/06/2009 17:06

jennimiles, I'm in the SW, I voted Green and took my dd too to show her the importance of voting

there is some hope

Tinker · 08/06/2009 17:30

Sorry, not read thread but did voting Green in the NW allow the BNP to gain a seat?

MANATEEequineOHARA · 08/06/2009 17:31

Wow, that sucks, I am in the South West, I voted Labour, I am gutted, had I not voted Labour I would have voted Green... I feel sick, absolutely disgusted with it really.

SomeGuy · 08/06/2009 17:43

The Greens picked up 35,456 votes over 2004. Not sure where those votes come from, but had all those 35,000 voted Lib Dem, then the Lib Dems would have taken the seat from the BNP.

Had just 2400 of them voted UKIP instead (which doesn't seem unreasonable, as the Greens are a Eurosceptic party), UKIP would have taken the BNP's seat.

Tinker · 08/06/2009 17:46

Thanks, just as I wondered. Was trying to work it out today but couldn't find any sort of PR calculator. Was trying to do it on a 3-way split of the Green vote between the main parties.

SomeGuy · 08/06/2009 17:52

My view is the Greens had nothing other than self-interest in mind with their 'vote Green stop BNP' campaign. If they really cared about stopping the BNP, as against more MEPs for them, they would have formed an alliance with the Lib Dems in the BNP danger areas, and then they definitely would have stopped the BNP in their tracks

AbricotsSecs · 08/06/2009 17:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

policywonk · 08/06/2009 18:15

I do feel sceptical, in retrospect, about the advice to vote Green to stop the BNP - and I'm sorry for publicising that advice on here (to the extent that any of you were influenced by me )

After reading SG's calculations, it was difficult to see how the Greens could have been so confident about this strategy. It will be interesting to see whether they get challenged about this over the next few days.

OP posts:
SomeGuy · 08/06/2009 18:23

I guess if they'd conned convinced just a few more people it might have worked. That's politics I guess.

policywonk · 08/06/2009 18:25

Yes, they seem to have decided to take a punt. Pretty risky context though.

I don't think you could construct a very strong argument for saying Green voters let the BNP in (could you?) - the real culprit seems to have been Labour voters who didn't turn out.

But still, I'm a bit unimpressed.

OP posts:
Swedes · 08/06/2009 18:46

I think unused votes should be distributed in line with those actually cast. It would be much more representative than not coun ting them at all. But really we should have compulsory voting. If people want fascist representatives in a legislature, they should at least be made to walk to the polling station.

Dearthworm · 08/06/2009 19:04

I wouldn't support compulsory voting. Compulsory attendance at the ballot booth, perhaps -- with an option to state 'none of the above', or 'opposed to the system'.

A vote has two roles (at least). It allows you to state a pref for a party but it also functions to endorse a system. That's why the one-party states in the former communist bloc held elections.

It is completely legitimate of course for a system to utilise a vote for any party as an endorsement for the system, a consensus builder, and a means to the aceptance by all of a govt elected by some. But it ceases to be legitimate if we are forced to vote.

We need to counter apathy and irresponsible neglect of political responsibility. But not by a compulsory tick for the established way of doing things.

Tinker · 08/06/2009 19:06

Aw, pw, your heart was in the right place

Dearthworm · 08/06/2009 19:07

And I espec wouldn't support distributing unused votes in line with those cast, because diff parties have diff levels of turnout in their demographic hardcore.

It would be punitive: 'If you won't choose I'll choose for you.' I've said that punitively to dcs.

Peachy · 08/06/2009 19:17

I don't regret my green vote- I joined up last week after being a Lib Dem member in the past 9chantges fdown to a change of local personnel)..... whilst keeping BNP out is important I still need to use my vote for something I beleive in; the greens are the closest mirror to my own.

Perhaps there's a need for a party known as 'anyone but the BNP' for people who can't bear to vote mainstream or for the alternatives (evangelical Christian party anyone?), but want to actively register against the BNp.

I think poeple who refuse to vote should have to turn up and tick an attendance box. besides, isn't it better to turn up, spoil a ballot and be counted as discontent than make it look like you just cannot be arsed?

AbricotsSecs · 08/06/2009 19:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

policywonk · 08/06/2009 19:35

Thanks Tinker and thank heavens for that, Hoochie

Peachy, aren't you in Wales? This Green/BNP opposition was in the NW.

It's interesting that this NW situation has echoes of the Nader/Gore/Bush fuck-up. As Peachy says, people who want to vote Green for ideological reasons should absolutely do so (and I strongly felt that with people who voted for Nader in 2000 - why should they bear full responsibility for electing Bush, rather than the people who actually voted for him?).

It's the advice to those of other persuasions to vote Green that seems to have been a bit dishonest, at worst, here.

I've had 3 hours of sleep so forgive me if this isn't making any sense

OP posts:
LeninGrad · 08/06/2009 19:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Peachy · 08/06/2009 19:39

PW makes absolute sense

Yewp, in wales,so the whole NE thing not affecting us but still to see that pretty much roughly same numbers voted fror Green as BNP; i'd have sworn it wouldn't be the case here.

Indeed am so shcoked I haven't even sworn once about tories being winners - that's a first!

policywonk · 08/06/2009 19:52

Len, I agree that anti-fascist alliances would be a good way forward. Of course, the ridiculous levels of rivalry and bitterness between centre-left party activists (from what I've seen) would work against this. (I'm sure Kitten is an exception ) (assuming she's centre-left)

But it would have to be in concert with attempts to actually address the concerns of those who've ended up voting BNP - NOT by pandering to anti-immigration sentiment, but by addressing underlying causes of economic hopelessness, shite public housing, awful schools in economically depressed areas, etc etc

OP posts:
AbricotsSecs · 08/06/2009 19:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Swedes · 08/06/2009 19:55

Worm - I agree with you really.

LeninGrad · 08/06/2009 20:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swipe left for the next trending thread