Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Voting is as you point out a thoroughly good

> thing. However, as I understand the complicated

> and ridiculous 2nd preference vote scheme any 2nd

> vote for any candidate that is not in the run off

> (which practically means either Ken or Boris) just

> won't be physically counted - and therefore

> becomes just waste paper. Personally as I'm voting

> for one of the big two, i'll ignore the 2nd

> preference slot.


I agree it may not count, but it will still be counted.

Unimportant (in the major scheme of things) as such stuff is, it will be recorded, examined and interpreted by someone, somewhere - and will mean something someday. Maybe. Or not. Who knows?


I think I just talked myself out of it.

Ant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you allowed to vote for the same candidate as

> both your first and second preference?



This would be a spoiled vote and neither would be counted.


The explanation of this system has been poor and it would be interesting to know how many spoilt ballot papers there are as a result of general confusion.

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The explanation of this system has been poor and

> it would be interesting to know how many spoilt

> ballot papers there are as a result of general

> confusion.


Explanation? Read the ballot paper, then put an X in the box(es). It really isn't that hard. It certainly doesn't require some sort of nationwide educational campaign that would no doubt be accused of treating voters like idiots and wasting tax payers money.

Brendan, they may be counted but I'm still not sure that they're ever reported.


I can't see a mention of them in the results of the last general election, for instance:

http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/templates/search/document.cfm/13893


(Link is to an excel spreadsheet from the electoral commission.)

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Brendan Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I've been tempted to spoil mine in the past.

>

> I've been tempted to soil mine.


What you choose to do in the privacy of the polling booth is your business *Bob*

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Marmora Man Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > The explanation of this system has been poor

> and

> > it would be interesting to know how many spoilt

> > ballot papers there are as a result of general

> > confusion.

>

> Explanation? Read the ballot paper, then put an X

> in the box(es). It really isn't that hard. It

> certainly doesn't require some sort of nationwide

> educational campaign that would no doubt be

> accused of treating voters like idiots and wasting

> tax payers money.



I think he meant an explanation of how the 2 chosen votes are counted, not how to cast the actual votes.

Ant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Brendan, they may be counted but I'm still not

> sure that they're ever reported.

>

> I can't see a mention of them in the results of

> the last general election, for instance:

> http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/templates/search/document.cfm/13893

>

> (Link is to an excel spreadsheet from the

> electoral commission.)


Erm, you don't get a second choice vote in a General Election, which is why you won't find them in those results.


Everything you could ever need to know about the London election including how to vote and results from last time (with second choice vote tallies and spoiled ballots) is on this site: London Elects


Basically you get a first and second choice vote for Mayor. Then one constituency vote for a candidate (first past the post) and then one London-wide vote to select candidates from party lists to make it all more proportional.


There are three, colour coded, ballot papers - one for each section. If you're not sure on the day, staff at the polling stations will help.

Sorry I just realised I went and did that seffrikan thing of starting a positive answer with the word, no.


Anyway back on topic. Borris has little sympathy for any but his own upper class ilk and Ken is labour leader so therefore knows not how to do anything other than, spend, spend, spend and pass the cost on to the tax payers.


Some of the others have better intentions but do they have the backup in place to run the city?



If that were stricly true then why are business leaders so keen for Ken to be re-elected (this is according to Andy Gilligan, Ken's prosecutor in chief at the Standard)


When Labour were actually tax-and-spending in the 70s, they weren't too popular with business then

well, he is opposed to PFI/PPP - hence his decision to fight the tube going down that route. Heavily criticised at the time, his fight was described as a waste of taxpayers money - but he was right and it was a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of the PPP deal

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...