Happy with the Government?

[Hairyloon]

Why would any of the parties change their behaviour if a NoTA vote won? It can't win the seat, so one of them will eventually win.

That depends upon how the option was implemented.

I would suggest that in the event of a NoTA win, the election be re-run, but with the original parties excluded, then there would have to be a change.

 

Have you any idea how upsetting and offensive this is?

~The recommendation is to not feed the trolls.

[Manlinose]

That depends upon how the option was implemented.

I would suggest that in the event of a NoTA win, the election be re-run, but with the original parties excluded, then there would have to be a change.

 

what happened to democracy?

[Hairyloon]

what happened to democracy?

 

It is a myth.

But what is undemocratic about excluding the parties which were democratically rejected?

[dosxuk]

It is a myth.

But what is undemocratic about excluding the parties which were democratically rejected?

 

So in a vote which resulted in:

Party A: 47%

Party B: 1.5%

Party C: 0.5%

NoTA: 50%

 

You would prevent all three parties from restanding?

 

ETA: What about:

 

Party A: 25%

Party B: 25%

Party C: 24%

NoTA: 26%

 

?

[esme]

what happened to democracy?

We don't have a democracy.

 

What we have is a system where we are allowed to vote periodically, however once we have voted we can be ignored.

 

The total extent of our influence in politics is choosing who is going to ignore us for the next 5 years.

 

The people we vote for are under no obligation to keep the promises they made to us to get us to vote for them.

 

Once they are in office there is absolutely nothing we can do to influence their decisions.

 

The only option we have is to stand ourselves, but remarkably few people want to try this as without party backing it gets very expensive and people have to work and pay bills without the worry of standing for election.

 

I've previously suggested a way whereby a constituency can effectively elect it's own candidate to represent the constituency view in parliament but again very few want to try this, it seems most people who responded don't want a single representative in parliament representing them and debating issues they generally wanted the majority party in parliament to represent them and steamroller their pet policies through, after that they had little interest.

 

Very few people seem to want a democracy, what they appear to want is more of what we have now only on a few key issues they want their view to be the winning view.

 

---------- Post added 05-12-2013 at 17:28 ----------

 

That depends upon how the option was implemented.

I would suggest that in the event of a NoTA win, the election be re-run, but with the original parties excluded, then there would have to be a change....

You'll run out of parties very quickly that way.

 

It might be better to exclude those candidates and allow the party to select someone else to stand for them, preferably someone local to the constituency and not someone parachuted in

[Hairyloon]

So in a vote which resulted in:

Party A: 47%

Party B: 1.5%

Party C: 0.5%

NoTA: 50%

 

You would prevent all three parties from restanding?

First past the post was not my idea.

[Xt500]

What Labour is saying sounds nice, but then I think they're the reason we're in this mess in the first place.

 

Letting people claim disability because they feel a bit sad.

 

No, no no no no.

 

Conservatives are the least bad option right now, at least they're trying to get people working and off the dole.

 

Their job would be far more easier if there wernt millions of immigrants doing the jobs already.

Theres no shortage of jobs just for the british who cannot survive on £6 an hour.

Its ok tho we can call them names and look for ways to make em work for nowt.

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/433248/End-of-Benefits-Britain-Now-jobless-must-work-to-get-dole-says-George-Osborne

 

Then companies that needed workers wont employ them why would they when they can get them for nothing and there will be plenty more when their times expire.

[Hairyloon]

That depends upon how the option was implemented.

I would suggest that in the event of a NoTA win, the election be re-run, but with the original parties excluded...

You'll run out of parties very quickly that way.

Would you?

Think it through.

At the moment, in many constituencies we have a choice of red, blue, and a selection of also-rans.

Many people vote red just to keep the blues out, or blue just to keep the reds out because although they would prefer one of the other parties, they don't have a realistic chance because so many people are voting this way.

 

Consider how it could work with a NoTA option: the also-ran parties might choose not to stand, and thereby consolidate the "not purple" vote.

The other parties can then stand in the second round.

 

It might be better to exclude those candidates and allow the party to select someone else to stand for them...

It might, but I am not convinced.

If there was a chance they could get excluded, then it would encourage them to field their best candidate in the first place.

[Bypassblade]

Not read any posts on this thread, but no matter what you'll always get people happy, or not so with any government.

[Manlinose]

First past the post was not my idea.

 

no, but refusing people the right to stand for election was

 

---------- Post added 06-12-2013 at 09:13 ----------

 

We don't have a democracy.

 

 

we do have a democracy, just not one that you like - me neither for that matter