Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Are we stuck with tactical voting?

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:34 / 04.05.05

Is a Lib Dem vote a step up for the Vampire?

I fucking hate Michael Howard with a vengeance. You want to know the worst thing, I mean never mind the policies, the past, all that, you want to know what I really loathe about that Nosferatu clone?

The way he pronounces his 'L's. Every time he has to use the letter 'L' in a sentence, I cringe so hard it's giving me back trouble.

On the other hand, Tony Blair has to go. My Labour councillor (Glenda Jackson) is quite rebellious within the party though, and votes in line with my thinking on lots of issues.

I think Charles Kennedy is a bit of a soggy mop, though Lib Dem policy seems pretty up my street on lots of issues.

But, the real question : are we actually stuck with a two-party vote this time round? If lots of Labour voters sway over to Lib Dem, is it paving the way for a Vampire Government with nassssssty 'L's?

Help a voter out, here.

lord henry strikes back

08:52 / 04.05.05

I've just had a look at the figures for Hampstead and Highgate. Glenda Jackson has a 7,800 vote lead and the Tories/Lib Dems are all but neck and neck. I can't really see a lead that big being overcome. Unless you've heard anything about a sizeable Tory swing in your area I would say that you could safely cast a vote for the Lib Dems tomorrow, and not be to pissed off when Labour sail back in with a few thousand votes clear.*

*This is not legally binding. If I'm wrong you do not have the right to come round to my place, wave this post in my face, and beat the crap out of me.

10:44 / 04.05.05

couple of points;

1. Obviously Howard is a cunt whichever way you cut the cake, but can we please drop all this 'vampire' business? It's weird, unnecessary and faintly racist.

2.This "letting the tories in through the back door" crap is the most blatant load of desperate Labour vote-grabbing yet seen, and it annoys me to see people falling for it. The Tories still have absolutely zero chance of winning this election, and I don't think any sensible person has any excuse for not registering their dissatisfaction with Labour by voting for someone better. The end.

10:56 / 04.05.05

Lib Dem. It'll be the first time I haven't voted Labour, and my local Labour MP, Kate Hoey is sensible and able, but the war - and its much, much wider implications - is too big for me to forgive Blair. Since the laws of our land do not allow me the option of specifically voting against the party's leader, the only avenue through which I can communicate my anger/unhappiness is to vote against the party as a whole.

To be quite frank, the widespread 'vote Lib Dem and Howard gets in' thing (along with Blunkett's characterising of a Lib Dem anti-war vote as "self-indulgent") has really pissed me off. I see it as not dissimilar to the dissembling tactics employed to convince Parliament and the electorate at large that Saddam Hussein might shit anthrax on us in the next 40 minutes. I now tend to distrust 'fear the bogeyman' as a reason for following Blair.

11:08 / 04.05.05

Much as I dislike Howard, I have to agree that criticising his pronounciation and supposed bloodline seems a little creepy to me.

Also, I'm a little surprised that people really don't believe the tories have a chance. That isn't the way I am reading the election at all. I think the Tories would win if enough labour voters decided not to vote at all - something that Blair's reputation makes quite plausible.

Which isn't to say that voting libdem is a bad choice, especially when anti-tory tactical concerns are really a constituency based rather than a national issue. But I do think the election is potentially very close.

11:24 / 04.05.05

It's also almost exactly the same tactic as the Tories used to use to prevent their supporters from moving over to the third party - vote Lib Dem and you'll let Labour in.

The 1 in 10 thing is bullshit, and it's *obviously* bullshit. For one thing it only applies to certain seats and isn't the nationwide issue that Labour are trying to paint it as. For another, it entirely ignores the question of how many people who voted Tory last time are going Lib Dem this time. Same with new voters or those who didn't use their vote at all four years ago.

Is it really not obvious that these are desperate scare tactics from Labour? Then I'd be tempted to say that you deserve everything you get, if it wasn't also damning the rest of us to the same fate.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

11:49 / 04.05.05

OK, it never occurred to me that accusing Michael Howard of vampirism was anything to do with his, er, bloodline (are you saying he wasn't made by a bite, then?) or ethnicity. I see your point though, and will restrict my commentary hereon to non-specific revulsion at every single aspect of his actual manifestation on the physical plane of existence. There. I didn't even mention his 'L's. Which really are creepy.

To be honest, it's not so much the Labour campaign that even started me thinking this way, as how many old Labour votes and people who've never previously bothered but are going to vote this time round are all saying its got to be Lib Dem...Admittedly this is rather anecdotal and limited to my circle of acquaintances / hangouts, but there you go, and nothing would ruin my week more than seeing the Tories take up power at the end of it.

This is in spite of the fact that CK-One himself reckons that even if everyone who's thinking of voting Lib Dem actually does so, they would still be at least 100 seats short of a majority...in this scenario, how would Howard fare?

It makes me shudder to think about it. Still, I might go Lib Dem, which at least represents a vaguely more focused protest than writing 'Bollocks' on my polling card.

12:02 / 04.05.05

Is it really not obvious that these are desperate scare tactics from Labour?

No, really not. Or at least, while it is clear that Labour are taking advantage of it to push a centre right agenda that is pretty unpopular with its core vote, I don't think they've just made it up either. By its nature, I think that New Labour's support is far from solid.

12:27 / 04.05.05

I think I just resent being told 'work with us on this, or a big scary monster will get you', particularly when this was the major falsehood underpinning Blair's rush to war with Iraq. I think Labour will return to power easily enough, but I'd like it to be with a much reduced majority - ideally (although this is very unlikely) a hung parliament. Opposition's what's needed.

12:36 / 04.05.05

I think its pretty despicable that even though it has been proven that their math's is well off with their 1 in 10 claim New Labour continue to promote it.

At what point does the repetition of a proven misrepresentation actually become a lie?

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

12:43 / 04.05.05

I'm rather pleased to note that I have a candidate standing from these loonies, who may actually sway me.

Same crew who managed to elect a monkey for Mayor of Hartlepool.

For a good laugh check out No Politicians with their catchy notions that countries should be run like 'Large companies'.

Can't wait.

lord henry strikes back

13:23 / 04.05.05

This is in spite of the fact that CK-One himself reckons that even if everyone who's thinking of voting Lib Dem actually does so, they would still be at least 100 seats short of a majority...in this scenario, how would Howard fare?

Top-of-the-head maths, so point out if I'm wrong here. If the Lib Dems came in 100 seats short that would give them a total of around 130 (230 odd being the winning post I belive). That would be an extra 75 seats on top of those that they hold already. Even if all of these were taken from Labour, and all other things remained the same from 2001, Blair would be back for a third term with an 80+ majority.

I'm with Spatula on this one. Labour is terrified of losing its democracy-warping majority, not the election. The polls show that the Tories have failed to make in roads since 2001 (some actually put them behind where they were four years ago). The best we can hope for is that the Labour majority takes a massive beating. If it drops below 40 (and it won't) the party's at my place on May 6.

lord henry strikes back

13:25 / 04.05.05

Wow, something went a bit off-kilter there. I didn't mean to post twice, sorry.

lord henry strikes back

14:30 / 04.05.05

Ah yes. My maths was a little off. The actual winning post is 320, meaning that the Lib Dems would have to take 165 new seats. That would (just) wipe out Labour's lead, though only three seats would have to come from the Tories for Blair to get back in (and leave the Lib Dems as the official opposition).

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

15:26 / 04.05.05

I'm with Ganesh on this one... whether it's a deliberate scare tactic or not, I really don't like the idea of being bullied into voting for someone- or, indeed, anyone. It seems to... how shall I put this? oh yes... defeat the whole fucking point. And it offers no hope at all for a future in which we may eventually get out of this ludicrous two-party system.

So yeah, it's LibDem for me. (Not that it makes much difference, other than bumping up the numbers, in Hackney- Diane Abbot ain't going anywhere as far as I can see. And to be fair, she was opposed to the war.)

Tabitha Tickletooth

20:43 / 04.05.05

I've jumped on that Lib Dem bandwagon, but with a slightly disturbing twist. What started out as a decision to vote against Labour (for much the same reasons as Ganesh and Stoatie) seems to be changing into genuine likin' for the Lib Dems. Maybe I'm overcompensating for my disaffection with Labour, I just don't know, but more and more I believe that while the Lib Dems can't win, it would be very cool if they did.

20:45 / 04.05.05

Much as I dislike Howard, I have to agree that criticising his pronounciation and supposed bloodline seems a little creepy to me.

The vampire stuff's a little tired, for sure, but I'm afraid his pronounciation continues to grate with me too; I just can't seem to get myself habituated enough that it doesn't make me wince every time he courts the grey vote by appealing to the 'eauld peepl'. It annoys me at the same near-visceral level as Blair's hammy, paused, look, delivery annoys me.

Gaaaaahh!

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

21:16 / 04.05.05

Fuck it, it is childish and silly. But, hey, it really makes me wince. And gag. I can't actually help it. If I really liked him, it would be something I'd have to admit. It wouldn't make me not vote for him. But it's really, really, nasty.

As is Blair. Those two are like Shakespearean caricatures, the inner self manifesting in the outer and all that. Or something from the Canterbury Tales. Very British, Blackadder and retch-causing.

Really though, can you vote for Kennedy? I so want to like the Lib Dems, but imagining him being sized up by Bush and Co makes me want a hot water bottle. Leader? 7.5 hours + to decide.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

21:20 / 04.05.05

And since I am feeling twisted, and you are learned people, its pronunciation. No 'o'. GAAAAHHHHHHH!

21:28 / 04.05.05

I kneauw I'd speld it wronglee.

21:30 / 04.05.05

Really though, can you vote for Kennedy? I so want to like the Lib Dems, but imagining him being sized up by Bush and Co makes me want a hot water bottle. Leader?

Why not? He's more immoveable object than unstoppable force, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing...

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

22:49 / 04.05.05

One thing I'm glad of: I'm actually definitely going to vote - a first for me, I'm ashamed to say, having been enfranchised for over a decade. But I'm off my arse and engaged at last, and so are a lot of people, so good.

And, for me at least, anything can happen still. I ain't made up my mind, and probably wont until I'm there. Not that I'm a rabid pundit or anything, but I'm aware of the issues and while voting Tory would be less likely than swallowing a hand grenade tomorrow, I'm still open to persuasion from the morning news, someone I meet, or my own little meanderings.

Jack The Bodiless

07:01 / 05.05.05

Lib Dem. For pretty much the same reasons that everyone else has mentioned in this thread. Me and the other forty-seven people in my house voted last week by post.

10:39 / 05.05.05

I'm actually definitely going to vote - a first for me.

Yeah, same here. Lib Dem, pretty much because of the whole 'Tories through the back door, keep the faith with Labour, etc, etc' argument. To a fairly large extent, we've already had eight or so years of de facto Conservative government, so that line in itself ( and that's without even considering the maths as regards the electoral boundaries - I don't have the figures to hand unfortunately, but basically, as I understand it there is no realistic way the Conservatives are going to come out ahead, ) seems like the work of a party led by a man who's so far gone he doesn't even realise he left the last of his integrity in a wine bar somewhere back in 1998.

Also, speaking as 'a self-indulgent' Hampstead ( well or near enough anyway, it's only about a ten minute walk, honest, ) liberal, to hell with you, D Blunkett, you and your 'little lad,' you cunt.

And then after I've voted, I dare say I'm going to swing by the bookies and put a tenner on Labour to win, by a majority of over 140 seats - I'm guessing my winnings and £2.50 will get me a 2 litre bottle of Merrydown cider, courtesy of which I'll be able to shout at the telly in a befuddled manner, as the bright new third term dawns.

10:45 / 05.05.05

I'm voting Green because they've got a chance in Brighton and I really want to see the environment brought to the top of the political agenda.

Not in the Face

10:46 / 05.05.05

It requires a bit of fiddling but the BBC swingometer allows you to figure out what the benefits of tactical voting would be and shows how ludicrous Labour's claims are.

Bascially it would require a 10% swing to the Tories today from Labour to give them a chance of government which from what I know of the voting proportions is such a ludicrous number as to make it nonsensical. And even then some constituencies would have to desert the second plance candidate and opt for the Tories.

And even if loads of Labour voters switch to the Lib Dems it needs something like 11.5% swing to get a hung Parliament and 18.5% before the Tories get more seats than any other party, but still not more than any combined.

So yeah, I say go and vote Lib Dem because at least it might wipe out some of the Tony's lackeys who, AFAIK tend to be in a lot of marginal seats.

11:44 / 05.05.05

Remember to get in some beers and stay up for Letwin tonight...

15:21 / 05.05.05

Oooh, is Ollie a marginal?

15:55 / 05.05.05

Letwin has a majority of less than 2,000 and is the target of a concerted lib-dem push - the polls and more importantly the bookies point to him losing his seat... Alan Davis on the other hand looks set to retain his seat...

Tryphena Absent

19:56 / 05.05.05

Michael Howard's voice... I can kind of hear it in my head but I'm still surprised every single time he speaks.

I'm about to settle down in front of Dimbleby. David Dimbleby.

20:28 / 05.05.05

Just switched on and hearing exit polls predict a reduced majority of 66 or so. Sounds good.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:44 / 06.05.05

Pretty much a perfect result I reckon. I went Lib Dem, not that it made any difference at all in H&H, where Glenda still reigns supreme.

12:49 / 06.05.05

i am glad to have played my small part in a something like 10% swing to the LibDems in my area; both Cons and Labour were down, so locally at least, it was a faintly pleasing result. But as someone said above, it wasn't so much a protest vote; fuck, you should pay 50% tax on anything you earn over £100,000; it's called Socialism. (Well actually no one should earn over 100,000k p/a but that's i think a little too idealistic for General Elections.)