They're not voting because...
- A short list of why I dont like each party
I wont vote for Labour because I think Blair is an image-obsessed poorly-focused untrustworthy US lapdog, and there is a chance that Brown might become PM mid-term and he is too socialist for my liking.
I dont think I'll vote conservative because Howard unnecessarily brought abortion up for political points scoring. Its the thin end of the wedge. This isnt bible-bashing redneck america. Keep religious issues out of politics at all costs or we'll end up banning evolution, replacing the NHS with faith healing and dancing round a burning wicker man filled with scientists and teachers.
I wont vote liberal because I am not.
Any other vote is a total waste of time, but even if it wasnt,
I wont vote BNP because half my best friends are from ethnic minorities. How come the Scots can have a respectable SNP but the BNP are just a bunch of neo-nazi thugs?
I wont vote Respect because George "Saddam Hussein fanboy" Galloway may think it is OK to ignore ethnic clensing, but I dont.
I wont vote Green because I am in favour of nuclear energy.
I wont vote UKIP because I am in favour of the euro.
I wont vote Veritas because of many of the reasons above.
I wont vote Natural law because theye are a bunch of hippie wierdos who have no place in politics.
I cant think of any other parties but I expect they are all rubbish too.
Maybe I should start my own party.
Actually I'll probably vote conservative for lower taxes and screw the poor as long I dont have to have anything to do with them. Bring back te 80s!written 7th Apr 2005
isee replies: You need to learn to use won't and wont correctly. They are different words with different meanings.
You need to learn how to complain about your own country's politics without dissing America.
You need to learn how to compromise and learn about choosing the lesser of two evils. Less evil is a good thing.written 7th Apr 2005
snow replies: Is voting for the lesser of evils really a good thing?!
Isn't that a sad indictment of democracy when people vote for a party they don't like but consider "not as bad as the others".written 7th Apr 2005
Richard replies: Quite often in life one must compromise by choosing the least bad option from a variety of imperfect alternatives. I don't find that sad. It's just life.written 7th Apr 2005
Michael replies: "Its the thin end of the wedge. This isnt bible-bashing redneck america. Keep religious issues out of politics at all costs or we'll end up banning evolution, replacing the NHS with faith healing and dancing round a burning wicker man filled with scientists and teachers."
Going by the rest of your post, this sounds right up your street. I agree you should vote Tory.
"I won't vote liberal because I'm not"
No kidding!written 8th Apr 2005
mikey replies: This was probably one of the most worthwhile and respectable messages that I've read so far on this fantastic website. Not only did this person justify their actions in a specific and all encompassing manner, the proceding author pointed out that 'wont' is not just 'won't' spelt wrong, but a word in its own right. well donewritten 13th Apr 2005
Tom Cochrane replies: The original post said - "I wont vote BNP because half my best friends are from ethnic minorities. How come the Scots can have a respectable SNP but the BNP are just a bunch of neo-nazi thugs?"
I don't think this comparison works.
There is no relationship in policy, political philosophy, engagement or desires that links the SNP and the BNP.
The SNP are a left of centre political group with a 30% share of the popular Scottish vote (and have done for some considerable time).written 21st Apr 2005
Nick Fotopoulos replies: Including "this isn't bible-bashing redneck america" was probably the worst thing you could have done, since it immediately discredits anything else you say before you even say it. It only takes one ignorant comment to make you look like an idiot, and thousands of intelligent comments to prove your not. By the way, I think what you meant to say was "this isn't bible-thumping redneck america". Bashing would be an anti-Christian action, where as thumping is a reference to the preacher/reverend tapping on the Bible during impassioned sermons. Of course it could also semantic difference between UK and US English.written 21st Apr 2005
Vee replies: The idea of democracy is that you elect someone who can best represent your views. It is not everyone electing themselves because only THEY can represent their views.
'Best representing' may often mean that the person you vote for will not be a clone of yourself. We are all different. But hopefully you can find a person/party which best-fits your own poltical beliefs.written 21st Apr 2005
abaddon replies: The subject of compromise came up... there is no compromise. Was there a compromise on fox hunting? Was there a compromise on the Iraq war? Was there a compromise on school discipline?
No, no, no.
These things are absolutes, fox hunting is banned, we went to war, school teachers cannot employ any meaningful discipline.
Take one minority group, add one political majority, add the apathetic majority and you end up with "We want X banned, OK vote us and you'll get it, so what it doesn't affect me".written 22nd Apr 2005