People should not be criticised for not voting, the right to abstain is a fundamental component of a democratic society.
Well, I agree with that if you and the others who say that could at least be bothered to go down to the polling station and write "none of the above" or even something stronger, on your ballot slip. That way it gets counted, and an actual message can be clearly inferred from it. By the way I imagine that Australia and Belgium consider themselves democratic societies, voting there is compulsory. Meanwhile I have to fight like hell to make sure I retain my right to vote - and indeed that the buggers send the postal voting form out in sufficient time.
Anyway, Surbiton remains my constituency and I'll be voting for Ed Davey, an outstandingly hard working constituency MP. As will several of my friends who are naturally either Tory or Labour voters. As an example I've got my personal email from Davey assuring me that he's kicked the electoral office's asses to get the papers out earlier than the 10 days in advance they were planning on. Some of you voting from abroad for the first time may want to look sharp about returning your papers.
I didn't say that I don't vote or don't intened to. I have cast my vote in every election I've been eligible for. I simply said that abstention is a right.
Option One: I tickle my ballot paper, give it a kiss and pop it in, unadorned, yet loved. Blank, in the eyes of some, yet potent. Option Two: I write what I want on my ballot paper, lambasting the system and including a fictitious or real character, of my choosing. William Blake. Or Robin Hood. Insert your choice. Option three: Labour / Tory.... Same old story. Your choice. Hasn't been too clever thus far, has it?
I'm starting to feel sorry for Farage. How can you run a proper election campaign when your candidates, just can't stop saying
"A Ukip parliamentary candidate has been replaced after he called for Barack Obama to be kidnapped.
Jeremy Zeid, who was standing in Hendon, said the President should be treated in the same way as a Nazi war criminal after the U.S. declassified documents about Israel’s nuclear capability.
He wrote on Facebook: ‘Once Obama is out of office, the Israelis should move to extradite the b*****d or “do an Eichmann” on him, and lock him up for leaking state secrets. After all what's sauce for the Pollard goose is sauce for the Obama gander, don't you think?"
"Look" or "Well, look" seem to be the words of choice this year whenever politicians don't answer the question they were asked.
Heard so far: Chukka Umunna this morning on Breakfast and Shabana Mahmood last night in a debate between finance spokespeople. She was dreadful; as well as "looking" all over the place, she was also "ummimg", "erring", and "you knowing" - no wonder she gave up being a barrister! Her opponent on the other hand Priti Patel was very impressive.
I can't tell you how shocked I was this morning to read that the likes of firebrand socialists like Sir Philip Green are supporting a party that wants to reduce corporation tax even further.
In other news, the unions would prefer a Labour government and the Pope remains a Catholic.
"Look" or "Well, look" seem to be the words of choice this year whenever politicians don't answer the question they were asked.
Heard so far: Chukka Umunna this morning on Breakfast and Shabana Mahmood last night in a debate between finance spokespeople. She was dreadful; as well as "looking" all over the place, she was also "ummimg", "erring", and "you knowing" - no wonder she gave up being a barrister! Her opponent on the other hand Priti Patel was very impressive.
So can we find some more "lookers"?
See him (Chukka Umunna) on BBC News *spits* this morning getting owned by Naga Munchetty! Quality telly
"Look" or "Well, look" seem to be the words of choice this year whenever politicians don't answer the question they were asked.
Heard so far: Chukka Umunna this morning on Breakfast and Shabana Mahmood last night in a debate between finance spokespeople. She was dreadful; as well as "looking" all over the place, she was also "ummimg", "erring", and "you knowing" - no wonder she gave up being a barrister! Her opponent on the other hand Priti Patel was very impressive.
So can we find some more "lookers"?
"Chaos" is the one that is currently make me shout at the radio. Lynton Crosby has done a good job in ensuring this gets thrown in regardless of it being appropriate or relevant to the subject.
"Look" or "Well, look" seem to be the words of choice this year whenever politicians don't answer the question they were asked.
Heard so far: Chukka Umunna this morning on Breakfast and Shabana Mahmood last night in a debate between finance spokespeople. She was dreadful; as well as "looking" all over the place, she was also "ummimg", "erring", and "you knowing" - no wonder she gave up being a barrister! Her opponent on the other hand Priti Patel was very impressive.
So can we find some more "lookers"?
"Chaos" is the one that is currently make me shout at the radio. Lynton Crosby has done a good job in ensuring this gets thrown in regardless of it being appropriate or relevant to the subject.
Personally, I believe that instead of cutting £12 billion from the welfare budget we could stop the £12 billion we give away instead, in the form of overseas aid.
We should then looked to offer aid when it is actually required for disasters and the like.
I know it's difficult, but why are we so keen to help the rest of the world before our own welfare dependents ? If we can afford both, then fair enough, but we can't.
I am afraid I don't agree for historical, practical and moral reasons. Britain was able to tramp and trash around the world with the creation of colonies, and suck the resources from the countries it occupied to fuel it's industrial development. Many of those places now are incredibly poor, and the west still gains because the children of those poor make our Primark clothes, and Nike Trainers on the cheap. If we abandon support for the poorest countries, unrest and the desperation of a lot of people will impact on us one way or another. I also believe we can afford it whatever the argument about our struggles as a nation. One cup of Costa Coffee represents a couple of days wages for a lot of workers around the world, I also believe that it represents a small percentage of our annual wealth. I also like to think that as a country, governed by whichever party, that we would want to help if we can. I do know there is an argument that a lot of aid is siphoned off by dodgy characters, but that is something we can try to tackle.
It is ironic that the Republic of Ireland is the 'goodest' country in the world
when Ireland has largely taken the hit in the Eurozone without whinging, and tried to find ways to climb back. If a tiny state like the Republic of Ireland, itself a previous British Colony, can still reach out to try to do good in the world, then I reckon Britain can continue with it's overseas aid.
It's a shame Seth plum has such a low opinion of the british empire and the way the British spread industrialisation and civilisation across the world.
I'm guessing Seth would prefer the disgusting murderous and communist Chinese empire.
If Seth wants to give more money to the third world, rather than it coming from the tax payer, Seth should put his hand in his own pocket.
A good way to start would be to cancel your broadband and give that saving to the third world. This has two advantages; it appeases Seths conscience and secondly it saves the rest of us from reading his left wing, pretending to offended at everything nonsense.
Personally, I believe that instead of cutting £12 billion from the welfare budget we could stop the £12 billion we give away instead, in the form of overseas aid.
We should then looked to offer aid when it is actually required for disasters and the like.
I know it's difficult, but why are we so keen to help the rest of the world before our own welfare dependents ? If we can afford both, then fair enough, but we can't.
I am afraid I don't agree for historical, practical and moral reasons. Britain was able to tramp and trash around the world with the creation of colonies, and suck the resources from the countries it occupied to fuel it's industrial development. Many of those places now are incredibly poor, and the west still gains because the children of those poor make our Primark clothes, and Nike Trainers on the cheap. If we abandon support for the poorest countries, unrest and the desperation of a lot of people will impact on us one way or another. I also believe we can afford it whatever the argument about our struggles as a nation. One cup of Costa Coffee represents a couple of days wages for a lot of workers around the world, I also believe that it represents a small percentage of our annual wealth. I also like to think that as a country, governed by whichever party, that we would want to help if we can. I do know there is an argument that a lot of aid is siphoned off by dodgy characters, but that is something we can try to tackle.
It is ironic that the Republic of Ireland is the 'goodest' country in the world
when Ireland has largely taken the hit in the Eurozone without whinging, and tried to find ways to climb back. If a tiny state like the Republic of Ireland, itself a previous British Colony, can still reach out to try to do good in the world, then I reckon Britain can continue with it's overseas aid.
It's a shame Seth plum has such a low opinion of the british empire and the way the British spread industrialisation and civilisation across the world.
I'm guessing Seth would prefer the disgusting murderous and communist Chinese empire.
If Seth wants to give more money to the third world, rather than it coming from the tax payer, Seth should put his hand in his own pocket.
A good way to start would be to cancel your broadband and give that saving to the third world. This has two advantages; it appeases Seths conscience and secondly it saves the rest of us from reading his left wing, pretending to offended at everything nonsense.
Personally, I believe that instead of cutting £12 billion from the welfare budget we could stop the £12 billion we give away instead, in the form of overseas aid.
We should then looked to offer aid when it is actually required for disasters and the like.
I know it's difficult, but why are we so keen to help the rest of the world before our own welfare dependents ? If we can afford both, then fair enough, but we can't.
I am afraid I don't agree for historical, practical and moral reasons. Britain was able to tramp and trash around the world with the creation of colonies, and suck the resources from the countries it occupied to fuel it's industrial development. Many of those places now are incredibly poor, and the west still gains because the children of those poor make our Primark clothes, and Nike Trainers on the cheap. If we abandon support for the poorest countries, unrest and the desperation of a lot of people will impact on us one way or another. I also believe we can afford it whatever the argument about our struggles as a nation. One cup of Costa Coffee represents a couple of days wages for a lot of workers around the world, I also believe that it represents a small percentage of our annual wealth. I also like to think that as a country, governed by whichever party, that we would want to help if we can. I do know there is an argument that a lot of aid is siphoned off by dodgy characters, but that is something we can try to tackle.
It is ironic that the Republic of Ireland is the 'goodest' country in the world
when Ireland has largely taken the hit in the Eurozone without whinging, and tried to find ways to climb back. If a tiny state like the Republic of Ireland, itself a previous British Colony, can still reach out to try to do good in the world, then I reckon Britain can continue with it's overseas aid.
It's a shame Seth plum has such a low opinion of the british empire and the way the British spread industrialisation and civilisation across the world.
I'm guessing Seth would prefer the disgusting murderous and communist Chinese empire.
If Seth wants to give more money to the third world, rather than it coming from the tax payer, Seth should put his hand in his own pocket.
A good way to start would be to cancel your broadband and give that saving to the third world. This has two advantages; it appeases Seths conscience and secondly it saves the rest of us from reading his left wing, pretending to offended at everything nonsense.
Well well Smudge, what a generous post. Is this an example of 'Traditional British Values'?
2 hunt convicted child sex offenders Use the money saved in jailing them and creating new id into the NHS
3 Anyone claiming benefits to facilitate helping on the hunt, cleaning stables feeding spare body parts left from hunt to the dogs
4 tax vegetarians
5 the culling of all non season vegetables to be outlawed no eating spring veg in winter and winter veg in spring
Apart from number 2 what a wanky manifesto. Sadly though, I can see some donuts going for it.
I registered on the guardian election site and they asked for 3 policies on your wish list and one I have was to tax all animal products, including meat, as luxury goods at a rate of 100%+.
I also put lower the voting age to 16 and change immigration controls so only those posing a security risk be barred entry.
2 hunt convicted child sex offenders Use the money saved in jailing them and creating new id into the NHS
3 Anyone claiming benefits to facilitate helping on the hunt, cleaning stables feeding spare body parts left from hunt to the dogs
4 tax vegetarians
5 the culling of all non season vegetables to be outlawed no eating spring veg in winter and winter veg in spring
Apart from number 2 what a wanky manifesto. Sadly though, I can see some donuts going for it.
I registered on the guardian election site and they asked for 3 policies on your wish list and one I have was to tax all animal products, including meat, as luxury goods at a rate of 100%+.
I also put lower the voting age to 16 and change immigration controls so only those posing a security risk be barred entry.
Probably as flaky as the manifesto above. :-)
Would that rate of 100%+ also apply to cat food an all?
Re, the vote spoiling, would it be fair to argue that not voting at all is in fact far more effective a way of registering your displeasure, considering the turnout/'numbers not voting' figures always seems to be more of a headline than the number of spoilt papers etc.
Personally I have always voted and during the count have always enjoyed the many spoilt papers I have had to collate, but I think it's a justified question.
Non-voters usually get vilified but people spoiling don't - is there really any difference other than the exercise (less now due to postals of course)?
2 hunt convicted child sex offenders Use the money saved in jailing them and creating new id into the NHS
3 Anyone claiming benefits to facilitate helping on the hunt, cleaning stables feeding spare body parts left from hunt to the dogs
4 tax vegetarians
5 the culling of all non season vegetables to be outlawed no eating spring veg in winter and winter veg in spring
Apart from number 2 what a wanky manifesto. Sadly though, I can see some donuts going for it.
I registered on the guardian election site and they asked for 3 policies on your wish list and one I have was to tax all animal products, including meat, as luxury goods at a rate of 100%+.
I also put lower the voting age to 16 and change immigration controls so only those posing a security risk be barred entry.
Probably as flaky as the manifesto above. :-)
Would that rate of 100%+ also apply to cat food an all?
Re, the vote spoiling, would it be fair to argue that not voting at all is in fact far more effective a way of registering your displeasure, considering the turnout/'numbers not voting' figures always seems to be more of a headline than the number of spoilt papers etc.
Personally I have always voted and during the count have always enjoyed the many spoilt papers I have had to collate, but I think it's a justified question.
Non-voters usually get vilified but people spoiling don't - is there really any difference other than the exercise (less now due to postals of course)?
I think just not voting shows you don't care.
Actually spoiling shows you care enough to go (slightly) out of your way to physically communicate it.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32141412
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-04-01/miliband-vows-zero-hours-crackdown-amid-fresh-business-attack/
Option Two: I write what I want on my ballot paper, lambasting the system and including a fictitious or real character, of my choosing. William Blake. Or Robin Hood. Insert your choice.
Option three: Labour / Tory.... Same old story.
Your choice. Hasn't been too clever thus far, has it?
"A Ukip parliamentary candidate has been replaced after he called for Barack Obama to be kidnapped.
Jeremy Zeid, who was standing in Hendon, said the President should be treated in the same way as a Nazi war criminal after the U.S. declassified documents about Israel’s nuclear capability.
He wrote on Facebook: ‘Once Obama is out of office, the Israelis should move to extradite the b*****d or “do an Eichmann” on him, and lock him up for leaking state secrets. After all what's sauce for the Pollard goose is sauce for the Obama gander, don't you think?"
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3020038/Ukip-candidate-replaced-called-President-Barack-Obama-KIDNAPPED-like-Nazi-war-criminal.html#ixzz3W2WHamUD
Heard so far: Chukka Umunna this morning on Breakfast and Shabana Mahmood last night in a debate between finance spokespeople. She was dreadful; as well as "looking" all over the place, she was also "ummimg", "erring", and "you knowing" - no wonder she gave up being a barrister!
Her opponent on the other hand Priti Patel was very impressive.
So can we find some more "lookers"?
In other news, the unions would prefer a Labour government and the Pope remains a Catholic.
I'm guessing Seth would prefer the disgusting murderous and communist Chinese empire.
If Seth wants to give more money to the third world, rather than it coming from the tax payer, Seth should put his hand in his own pocket.
A good way to start would be to cancel your broadband and give that saving to the third world. This has two advantages; it appeases Seths conscience and secondly it saves the rest of us from reading his left wing, pretending to offended at everything nonsense.
Who did they colonise again?
1 bring back all blood sports
2 hunt convicted child sex offenders Use the money saved in jailing them and creating new id into the NHS
3 Anyone claiming benefits to facilitate helping on the hunt, cleaning stables feeding spare body parts left from hunt to the dogs
4 tax vegetarians
5 the culling of all non season vegetables to be outlawed no eating spring veg in winter and winter veg in spring
Apart from number 2 what a wanky manifesto. Sadly though, I can see some donuts going for it.
I also put lower the voting age to 16 and change immigration controls so only those posing a security risk be barred entry.
Probably as flaky as the manifesto above. :-)
https://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz
Personally I have always voted and during the count have always enjoyed the many spoilt papers I have had to collate, but I think it's a justified question.
Non-voters usually get vilified but people spoiling don't - is there really any difference other than the exercise (less now due to postals of course)?
Actually spoiling shows you care enough to go (slightly) out of your way to physically communicate it.
75% UKIP
73% Labour