Post: #201

I'm northern. Any idiot who cries for Labour and I hear them I point out several key facts to them and they become dumbstruck to the point that they always revert to Thatcher.

The same Thatcher who fought a bunch of rich Union barons who were using the useful idiots to cushion their lifestyles? Those Union bosses? Yeah..

The Tories were hamstrung by the Lib Dems. They needed to be brought in check by UKIP because of the EU and lib dems love the EU.

In the coming months this immigrant fiasco from Italy will rear its ugly head. Tens of thousands of fresh faced immigrants are coming to Western Europe and we still haven't rid ourselves of easy benefits. They will impact labour supporters far more than those who vote Tory.

Post: #202

Today's front pages:

Post: #203

Saw on twitter a picture of how the seats would be allocated if we switched to proportional representation. UKIP would have 84 seats, Tories around 270, which combined is easily enough to create a good right wing voting bloc.

I can only hope.

Post: #204

How would proportional voting work in practice? If UKIP and Greens are getting 10% of the vote each, where do their members ultimately sit or do you frame it so no MP represents any specific geographical / demographic area? If so, does that diminish local accountability or improve it?

Post: #205

(05-05-2015 04:19 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 03:55 PM)Akula Wrote:  I still can't believe how many Britons would STILL vote for Labour.

Don't get me started on that. Loads, I mean loads of people that I know personally vote tribally. "Anyone but the Conservatives" kind of attitude. Just because they're Northern and think Thatcher was the cause of everything bad that happened to their parents etc. (Note: Labour also closed mines, factories etc - but nobody points that out). It's bullshit.

I think our voting system is shit anyway, I want proportional representation like they have in other Euro countries. You get 30% of the vote? Well, you get 30% of the seats. If we had that, then parties like UKIP and even fringe parties would have a voice. Plus, it would end the insufferable "I'd love to vote for X, but if we don't vote for Y then Z will get in". Just vote for who you actually support! I think more people are doing that to be fair, in spite of our system.

Last but not least, I want the voting age upped to 25 minimum, even 30! Most SJWs grow out of silly student identity politics within a few years post-university, I've seen full-on turnarounds before. I always take pride in the fact that when I was at Uni, I never became even 1% SJW - probably because I did a proper subject and/or didn't socialise with freaks.

Article I read today said that Labour draws a very large part of its strength now from minority immigrants (who have flooded the UK since Tony Blair welcomed them in starting in the 90s)....they vote almost completely Left. The 'traditional' Labour constituencies may not be as significant any more.

This is exactly what the Left is doing here.....massive Hispanic immigration, fast-track 'citizenship,' and BOOM - instant, permanent Lefty political dominance in the US.

What was it that Longshanks said...."if we can't smoke them out....we'll breed them out."

Post: #206

Answered my own question on what a UK proportional representative democracy would look like if it were to replace the current and now outdated FPTP system.

Proportional representation would work well achieving national proportionality and local representation in equal measure

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monk...sentation/

Post: #207

(05-06-2015 05:37 PM)Que enspastic Wrote:  Answered my own question on what a UK proportional representative democracy would look like if it were to replace the current and now outdated FPTP system.

Proportional representation would work well achieving national proportionality and local representation in equal measure

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monk...sentation/

I like PR but the fact PR seats would be filled by unelected representatives would open it up to cronyism, patronage appointments and more political b.s.

Single transferable vote is really the best system and should replace FPTP everywhere - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
Maybe a combination STV with PR like the bottom of the washington post article... that'd be nice.

Post: #208

Seems like the SNP is going to sweep Scotland, anyone here an SNP supporter? I read a wonderful article here, surprisingly from politico.

http://www.politico.eu/article/scotland-the-grave/

"I meet the SNP handing out leaflets at a stall on the side of a busy road. They also give away “YES” badges and little fluffy stick-on animals.

The scene is nothing like Crawley.

The activists are all having a good time. Their energy feels like a historical moment — or an emotional bubble.

“It’s easy to love it when you’re winning,” says Stephen Ramsay, one volunteer.

Cars drive past honking the SNP in support. Unimaginable in England for any political party."

Post: #209

(05-06-2015 04:33 PM)LeeEnfield303 Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 04:19 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

(05-05-2015 03:55 PM)Akula Wrote:  I still can't believe how many Britons would STILL vote for Labour.

Don't get me started on that. Loads, I mean loads of people that I know personally vote tribally. "Anyone but the Conservatives" kind of attitude. Just because they're Northern and think Thatcher was the cause of everything bad that happened to their parents etc. (Note: Labour also closed mines, factories etc - but nobody points that out). It's bullshit.

I think our voting system is shit anyway, I want proportional representation like they have in other Euro countries. You get 30% of the vote? Well, you get 30% of the seats. If we had that, then parties like UKIP and even fringe parties would have a voice. Plus, it would end the insufferable "I'd love to vote for X, but if we don't vote for Y then Z will get in". Just vote for who you actually support! I think more people are doing that to be fair, in spite of our system.

Last but not least, I want the voting age upped to 25 minimum, even 30! Most SJWs grow out of silly student identity politics within a few years post-university, I've seen full-on turnarounds before. I always take pride in the fact that when I was at Uni, I never became even 1% SJW - probably because I did a proper subject and/or didn't socialise with freaks.

Article I read today said that Labour draws a very large part of its strength now from minority immigrants (who have flooded the UK since Tony Blair welcomed them in starting in the 90s)....they vote almost completely Left. The 'traditional' Labour constituencies may not be as significant any more.

This is exactly what the Left is doing here.....massive Hispanic immigration, fast-track 'citizenship,' and BOOM - instant, permanent Lefty political dominance in the US.

What was it that Longshanks said...."if we can't smoke them out....we'll breed them out."

Labour are very popular among the affluent middle class.

I think it is a form of SJW-ism. They believe they have a duty to make the world a better place, and they believe Labour will do this(despite some of the terrible things Labour have done in recent years). They are nearly all white and have no direct contact with ethnic minorities. They gain a self righteous satisfaction by voting Labour and feeling that their vote will rid the world of evil.

That is how I see it in my area. I live in one of the better areas of my city, and there are Labour posters and signs everywhere. Most of the white middle class in my area will vote for them. Conservative have no chance in my constituency, many will be voting Green to try to keep Labour out, a terrible choice to make in my opinion.

Post: #210

(05-06-2015 02:58 PM)Novatore Wrote:  Today's front pages:

So the biggest newspaper is advises it's readership to vote for conservatives (implied) based on front page. The second biggest newspaper is also advising for advising it's readership to vote for conservatives (again implied). If they do manage to form an overall majority government I most certainly will have a celebratory drink Friday evening.

Post: #211

IT'S POLLING DAY!

Hopefully everyone here on the RVF will be heading down to their local polling station to vote.
I know that as neomasculine men we're not wholly represented or may be discontented with the available options. But even so I like to think we'll exercise the democratic process. After all, people have fought and died so that we could enjoy the right.

Though I suspect this adequately describes the voting patterns here on the forum:
   

Post: #212

I am on my way.

Post: #213

Outcomes that would piss the most number of people off: a Conservative - SNP coalition or a Conservative - Labour national unity government.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree...a-sturgeon

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/lette...Union.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...92329.html

I don't know why people here are so surprised that people still vote Labour, not everyone in the UK is right wing. And the idea that minorities are propping up their vote is way off the mark, outside of London there aren't enough minorities to do that.

And no, I've never voted Labour...

(05-07-2015 01:33 AM)JordanH Wrote:  So the biggest newspaper is advises it's readership to vote for conservatives (implied) based on front page. The second biggest newspaper is also advising for advising it's readership to vote for conservatives (again implied). If they do manage to form an overall majority government I most certainly will have a celebratory drink Friday evening.

Why the surprise? Most of the major newspapers have been attacking "Red Ed" for months. The Daily Mail always backs the Conservatives, and the only time The Sun didn't was when Tony Blair was sucking up to Murdoch.



And:

Post: #214

Minorities don't prop up Labour?

I should think you need to look at the councils with large immigrant populations, 1st, 2nd especially. 3rd generations tend to vote for parties who want to stem immigration.

Look up Birmingham and Bradford, Rotherham included. All Labour run councils. All of these places have significant 1st and 2nd generation born from migrant families or newcomers.

The difference in voting styles is very telling. They vote like a clan, they're exactly the same as the Irish in their fervor for banding together to get something they want and it creates a rigged election.

Post: #215

(05-07-2015 07:46 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Minorities don't prop up Labour?

I should think you need to look at the councils with large immigrant populations, 1st, 2nd especially. 3rd generations tend to vote for parties who want to stem immigration.

Look up Birmingham and Bradford, Rotherham included. All Labour run councils. All of these places have significant 1st and 2nd generation born from migrant families or newcomers.

The difference in voting styles is very telling. They vote like a clan, they're exactly the same as the Irish in their fervor for banding together to get something they want and it creates a rigged election.

Quoted for Truth. Us Irish are the fucking worst for this shit.
We want so much for people to like us, we're such an insecure nationality.
Which is why we almost always fall into line whenever the EU came knocking. Or the UCB or IMF for that matter.
And of course right now, we're falling over ourselves to redefine marriage so as to pander to 2-3% of the population.
A sad and sorry state of affairs.
Anyway, rant over, as you were, back to the UK elections!

Post: #216

(05-07-2015 07:46 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Minorities don't prop up Labour?

I should think you need to look at the councils with large immigrant populations, 1st, 2nd especially. 3rd generations tend to vote for parties who want to stem immigration.

Look up Birmingham and Bradford, Rotherham included. All Labour run councils. All of these places have significant 1st and 2nd generation born from migrant families or newcomers.

The difference in voting styles is very telling. They vote like a clan, they're exactly the same as the Irish in their fervor for banding together to get something they want and it creates a rigged election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_gro...ed_Kingdom

Britain is 87% white. There aren't enough minorities for them to be rigging national elections.

And how exactly did Labour get elected in the 40s, 60s and 70s then?

Post: #217

(05-07-2015 07:46 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  They vote like a clan, they're exactly the same as the Irish in their fervor for banding together to get something they want and it creates a rigged election.

Actually most people of any kind tend to vote tribally unless some big happenstance shakes up the usual equilibrium. Voting isn't done based on logic, but on tribal affiliation.

Even on this forum we tend to think ourselves in terms of being on a "team" against the opposing "team."

Anyway, is there any available relevant exit data that can enlighten those of us across the pond?

Post: #218

(05-07-2015 08:13 AM)Novatore Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 07:46 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Minorities don't prop up Labour?

I should think you need to look at the councils with large immigrant populations, 1st, 2nd especially. 3rd generations tend to vote for parties who want to stem immigration.

Look up Birmingham and Bradford, Rotherham included. All Labour run councils. All of these places have significant 1st and 2nd generation born from migrant families or newcomers.

The difference in voting styles is very telling. They vote like a clan, they're exactly the same as the Irish in their fervor for banding together to get something they want and it creates a rigged election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_gro...ed_Kingdom

Britain is 87% white. There aren't enough minorities for them to be rigging national elections.

And how exactly did Labour get elected in the 40s, 60s and 70s then?

This is an incredibly fatuous argument. Minorities are not 'rigging elections' (except in Tower Hamlets, where the whole corruption thing was agreed on in the courts). What they are doing, perfectly understandably, is voting for their own best interests.

The 'trouble' with minorities is not that some of them aren't good people, or that they are all shiftless, idle wasters, or whatever other trite and poorly considered over-simplification many of the less thoughtful members of the right would like to classify them as. The problem is that vast numbers have arrived in an affluent western country from poor countries where they themselves represent the poorest of the poor, and they are looking out for themselves. How could anyone expect them to do anything other than vote for leftist parties that seek to put more money their way (in one form or another), in return for their vote (the transaction isn't this transparent, but that is what is happening)? This is a simple principle, that Adam Smith would have recognised as rational self-interest.

It's futile, therefore, to blame immigrants, or to assume they are colluding. They are simply trying to advance their own cause in a 'hostile' (being not of their own) culture, and this is a perfectly rational way to behave. And this is the real problem at the root of all gripes with 'immigrants'. To those that believe in culture and tradition, and the national value of pride in these things, it simply isn't possible to assimilate 10% or more of your population into that tradition and culture over the space of a decade or two. This is why it is important to have an extremely restrictive immigration policy, because it actually gives those who arrive here the possibility of assimilating and becoming part of the culture they left their own country for.


To go back to your point, the immigrants aren't rigging elections, but they are participating in them. There may only be 13% (no idea where your figure came from), but they are motivated to vote, both because of the freedom it represents, and the real opportunity it gives them to make a material difference to their own lives. By contrast, many of the indigenous population are not at all motivated to vote. Look at Labour's '97 victory, they won a landslide, but what is less often reported is that it was on less than 50% of the eligible electorate. When you remove 50% of the indigenous population from the voting pool, the relative effect of 13% is dramatically increased. Therefore the immigrant effect is absolutely real, in terms of how significant it can be in the outcome of an election.

Labour used to get elected on the basis that it stood up for the working man, and some of 40's Labour's principles were things that most of us would agree were positive, just social values. Labour now wins votes on the misguided assumption of an ill-informed, less well educated (than they previously were) combination of scroungers, motivated 1st generation immigrants, blue collar workers, and trendy, soft, over-indulged, middle class white people. They do this because they've failed to realise that by promoting wholesale immigration, they have allowed the increasingly globalised corporate elite to have access to a steady stream of cheap labour that has done more to disenfranchise the working man than anything any right wing government HAS EVER, OR COULD EVER, do.

Post: #219

I just put my cross next to Nigel Farage!

Post: #220

delete

Post: #221

He's already done that to Barroso, Junker et al, time for him to take on Cameron, Clegg and Milliband!

Post: #222

delete

Post: #223

Immigration and other 'socialist' values being propelled by the Labour party and other groups are benefitting the so called elites more so than the conservative policies. H1N1's post above, really articulates all of this, very well. I actually believe I have lost a few friends because I have shown support to UKIP. Interestingly enough my position on UKIP came after traveling and studying economics.

I made a comment to one of them about British people being less economical and poorer workers when compared to Eastern folk. And he reiterated by saying 'Exactly ! well then why are you voting for UKIP'. Well this was my point, you can't constantly outsource your working force, or birth replacement rate to foreigners. Without there being further repercussions down the line. As then you begin to challenge the sovereignty of the country or you are just smoothing over the cracks of a serious issue that needs to be remedied. I.e. Why aren't British people not having enough kids.

I don't know if it always has been like this. However politics as well as most other things have been dumbed down considerably. There is a lack of mature thought when it comes to these issues and rationality is cast aside because it comes out as being too harsh. I use the phrase 'immaturity' as thats what it essentially is. Young children can't be exposed to the truth as it makes them uncomfortable, so you give them toys and blankets to help them stay in that womb like state.

Tomorrow will be interesting to say the least, I am looking forward to seeing whatever happens.

Post: #224

(05-07-2015 09:39 AM)Guitarman Wrote:  I just put my cross next to Nigel Farage!

I will be voting UKIP before the day is out.

UKIP don't stand a chance in my constituency, I'm casting my vote on principle.

Post: #225

Went out before work and voted Labour.

I agree with H1N1 on immigration, it's an issue that needs to be detoxified by the left, accepted and dealt with, but fuck Farage. I have no problem with immigrants, but realistically you can't run any kind of welfare system with open door immigration, it's ridiculous. I'm all for the NHS and our welfare state, the poor and unfortunate should be taken care of. If you're fortunate enough to do well in life and make some money then you did it partly thanks to the freedoms we all enjoy, so you should pay some back to society. Hopefully those tax loopholes will be bolted shut.