the price of democracy

B

basilrobbie3

Well-known member
We had a Mayoral by-election in Lewisham yesterday. As expected Labour won comfortably, but turnout was just 20.7%. This means that our new Mayor won the backing of just over 10% of the total electorate, and the total cost of the exercise was estimated to be £635,000.

Two of the candidates actually campaigned on the basis that the post should be abolished altogether ; it will now cause a further Council by-election as the winner is a local Councillor.

So, is it a failed exercise in democracy ? Or is it our fault because enough of us fail to go along and cast a vote? Over to you.
 
Failure to take part means you have no right to then moan about decisions being taken.

I don't agree with forcing people to vote though. Turnouts like that reflects the disillusionment most have with the third rate people we have in politics at all levels.

Not sure I know the answer though. Paying them more is often suggested, but for me, that would lead to even more going into it for the wrong reasons.
 
Were constituents properly aware of the Mayoral role? Did parties leaflet or knock on doors? If the public is not aware of the relevance of the position being voted for then they are much less likely to turn out and vote. I'm on poll clerk duties on 2nd May where the only vote being taken (as yet!) is that for the Police & Crime Commissioner. I have never seen any party activity for that election and I am expecting it to be a very slow day. For democracy to work the electorate must need a reason to get involved.
 
Last edited:
1966_and_all_that said:
Were constituents properly aware of the Mayoral role? Di parties leaflet or knock on doors? If the public is not aware of the relevance of the position being voted for then they are much less likely to turn out and vote. I'm on poll clerk duties on 2nd May where the only vote being taken (as yet!) is that for the Police & Crime Commissioner. I have never seen any party activity for that election and I am expecting it to be a very slow day. For democracy to work the electorate must need a reason to get involved.
Click to expand...

Don’t worry about 2nd May being quiet. Must be a fair chance the Tories will call a general election for that day…
 
I'm not against compulsory voting as such but there would have to be a none of the above option. One of my favourite boasts is that I never voted for Thatcher or Blair. I just vote for the most bizzare candidate or draw a willy on the ballot paper because I am a mature grown up.
 
Possibly the need for photo ID may have affected turnout as well, this is the biggest barrier to voting borrowed out of the trump/ republican play book and disproportionately affects potential labour voters who are more unlikely to have the ID come voting time.
 
bill40 said:
I'm not against compulsory voting as such but there would have to be a none of the above option. One of my favourite boasts is that I never voted for Thatcher or Blair. I just vote for the most bizzare candidate or draw a willy on the ballot paper because I am a mature grown up.
Click to expand...
But compulsory voting in a democratic process undermines the democracy of the process.

'None of the above' would probably win anyway leading to a massively fun constitutional crisis.
 
Wizaard said:
Don't be silly. There hasn't been a more corrupt Government than the last few years since the 17th century.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but this shower who will be probably voted in will vie for the most inept.

I await to be proved wrong. Can't wait for the Holy Quadrumvirate of Starmer, Miliband, Rayner and Lammy to strut their stuff.

The one saving grace for me is Wes Streeting who I rate as competent and potentially a much better leader than Starmer.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
Maybe, but this shower who will be probably voted in will vie for the most inept.

I await to be proved wrong. Can't wait for the Holy Quadrumvifrate of Starmer, Miliband, Rayner and Lammy to strut their stuff.

The one saving grace for me is Wes Streeting who I rate as competent and potentially a much better leader than Starmer.
Click to expand...
Starmer is far from incompetent, he is a traitorous knob though.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
But compulsory voting in a democratic process undermines the democracy of the process.

'None of the above' would probably win anyway leading to a massively fun constitutional crisis.
Click to expand...
It would be a wonderful crisis to have and I'm looking forward to it.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
Starmer is far from incompetent, he is a traitorous knob though.
Click to expand...
Didn't say he was Lytham. I actually think Starmer is an intelligent man, but as a political leader and the gravitas associated with one, especially if he becomes PM, I think he is inept.

60+ U-Turns in policy during his tenure sort of proves my point.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
Didn't say he was Lytham. I actually think Starmer is an intelligent man, but as a political leader and the gravitas associated with one, especially if he becomes PM, I think he is inept.

60+ U-Turns in policy during his tenure sort of proves my point.
Click to expand...
He's just swinging with what his marketing and PR team tells him will go well with the public, he seems obsessed with just winning the election and forgotten about things like policies and beliefs. Politically he seems aligned with Major, moderate Tory.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
Didn't say he was Lytham. I actually think Starmer is an intelligent man, but as a political leader and the gravitas associated with one, especially if he becomes PM, I think he is inept.

60+ U-Turns in policy during his tenure sort of proves my point.
Click to expand...
Starmer has someway to go before he has the gravitas of say Rishi Sunak or even Liz Truss! I'm sure he could only hope to stride upon the international stage like Johnson did, for instance do you remember when European and world leaders shunned the traitorous charlatan?
For me it would be a refreshing change to have a serious politician in charge again, even better one with experience of running a large organisation like the CPS. I think he might surprise you.

In our system winning is everything. Starmer will do what he needs to win in the face of a hostile media, that is what the u-turns are about (and the fact that there is literally no money to spend). Better to under promise and over deliver than the other way around (Brexit anybody?).
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
Starmer has someway to go before he has the gravitas of say Rishi Sunak or even Liz Truss! I'm sure he could only hope to stride upon the international stage like Johnson did, for instance do you remember when European and world leaders shunned the traitorous charlatan Johnson?
For me it would be a refreshing change to have a serious politician in charge again, even better one with experience of running a large organisation like the CPS. I think he might surprise you.

In our system winning is everything. Starmer will do what he needs to win in the face of a hostile media, that is what the u-turns are about (and the fact that there is literally no money to spend). Better to under promise and over deliver than the other way around (Brexit anybody?).
Click to expand...
Didn't back the strikes, so not Labour.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
He's just swinging with what his marketing and PR team tells him will go well with the public, he seems obsessed with just winning the election and forgotten about things like policies and beliefs. Politically he seems aligned with Major, moderate Tory.
Click to expand...
It's a healthy obsession if you are a politician
 
Interesting point made on Question Time last night that as the 2 major parties appear to be one and the same offering nothing people want to hear it is giving a voice to extremists and crackpots on the fringes as people desperately search for an alternative.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
Starmer has someway to go before he has the gravitas of say Rishi Sunak or even Liz Truss! I'm sure he could only hope to stride upon the international stage like Johnson did, for instance do you remember when European and world leaders shunned the traitorous charlatan?
For me it would be a refreshing change to have a serious politician in charge again, even better one with experience of running a large organisation like the CPS. I think he might surprise you.

In our system winning is everything. Starmer will do what he needs to win in the face of a hostile media, that is what the u-turns are about (and the fact that there is literally no money to spend). Better to under promise and over deliver than the other way around (Brexit anybody?).
Click to expand...
Kemi Badenoch is on the front of the Telegraph today saying Brexit has been marvellous and brought in hundreds of billions of pounds in trade in new markets.

Is that not right?
 
Lost Seasider said:
You are of course ignoring the completely free Voter Authority Certificate
Click to expand...
And you are ignoring - deliberately - the fact that these elaborate arrangements are designed to counter a problem that doesn't exist.

Data for the last broadly equivalent electoral year - 2019 - shows that only four people were convicted of electoral fraud **. And yet we have these restrictive requirements that are designed to make it as difficult as possible for poorer, or technologically challenged people to take part in the electoral process. I wonder why?

** before you start bleating about sources, the data is from the Electoral Commission.
 
I'm very much for having "None of the candidates" on the card. There should then be a campaign the vote for that so all the politicians can see no one actually likes any of them.
 
The price of democracy? $14.4 billion according to published figures for the last presidential election
 
Last edited:
I can't enter this conversation in case, once again, I'm accused of being a Conservative, but what would this board be like if the new incumbent had been from a far right party? It doesn't bear thinking about, and with those levels of turnout it is perfectly feasible it will happen one day.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
In our system winning is everything. Starmer will do what he needs to win in the face of a hostile media, that is what the u-turns are about (and the fact that there is literally no money to spend). Better to under promise and over deliver than the other way around (Brexit anybody?).
Click to expand...

Yep, I`m some way from being a Labour supporter (have only voted for them once), but I understand Starmer`s pragmatism at the moment, even if it is uncomfortable for him in the media. Winning is everything, and we need to shed the traditional idea - to some extent - of what we expect Labour to be. I have no problem with Labour moving closer to the centre ground.

I still believe most people are centrists in the things that really matter, and put fiscal responsibility and good governance ahead of divisive culture- war nonsense.

I really hope that Starmer is ready to meet the moment, and that we can turn the corner of this abysmal decade of political incompetence, and I struggle to understand anyone who would want any more of this snafu....
 
basilrobbie3 said:
And you are ignoring - deliberately - the fact that these elaborate arrangements are designed to counter a problem that doesn't exist.

Data for the last broadly equivalent electoral year - 2019 - shows that only four people were convicted of electoral fraud **. And yet we have these restrictive requirements that are designed to make it as difficult as possible for poorer, or technologically challenged people to take part in the electoral process. I wonder why?

** before you start bleating about sources, the data is from the Electoral Commission.
Click to expand...
Do you think that the conviction rate is a reliable indicator of the scale of the problem?

Also, if the government were trying to gerrymander the system, why would they implement a completely free and easy to access system to comply with the arrangements?
 
Lost Seasider said:
Do you think that the conviction rate is a reliable indicator of the scale of the problem? (1)

Also, if the government were trying to gerrymander the system, why would they implement a completely free and easy to access system to comply with the arrangements? (2)
Click to expand...
(1) Show me a more reliable one then. The measure I mentioned involves a complaint and a police investigation. That's the benchmark.

(2) I assume you mean the Voter Authority Certificate. I wonder how many people have heard about that? It's still a very elaborate way of making it more difficult for people to vote. And still backed by no hard evidence that fraud is happening except in a small number of cases.

You clearly don't like the four convictions statistic much. It was the result of only 600 complaints in the entire year, covering the General Election AND local elections. Around 30 million people voted in the General Election alone. So the minuscule conviction rate comes from a tiny number of complaints as well.
 
Theoneandonly said:
No it means democracy is a sham, societal parasites can carpe diem, and the rich get richer . Real democracy means you can vote none of the above.
Click to expand...
I can't see how 'none of the above' works in FPTP. If, and it's a big if, it returned the most constituencies there's no democratic solution anyway, your options are give it to second place or someone appoints the PM, neither with any mandate and both undemocratic. Option 3 is the parties choose new leaders or a new party is formed, all taking months while no government work is done.

Chances are you'd have the odd constituency here and there with no result which would mean little to the overall result and those constituencies having no representation until they work through one of the three options above.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
I can't see how 'none of the above' works in FPTP. If, and it's a big if, it returned the most constituencies there's no democratic solution anyway, your options are give it to second place or someone appoints the PM, neither with any mandate and both undemocratic. Option 3 is the parties choose new leaders or a new party is formed, all taking months while no government work is done.

Chances are you'd have the odd constituency here and there with no result which would mean little to the overall result and those constituencies having no representation until they work through one of the three options above.
Click to expand...
None of the above. It gives the power back to the electorate because it hits the party’s in the wallet. Real issues real candidates, real choice instead of you can have spam or spam. Country would be fine as government goes on no matter if it’s labour or conservative in number 10. Civil servants run the country and industrialists tell govt what to do. None of the above means new candidates and party’s would want to avoid none of the above by fielding best candidate instead of next in line.
 
bill40 said:
I'm not against compulsory voting as such but there would have to be a none of the above option. One of my favourite boasts is that I never voted for Thatcher or Blair. I just vote for the most bizzare candidate or draw a willy on the ballot paper because I am a mature grown up.
Click to expand...
Excellent reply. That's exactly what I want. A 'none of the above' option, so that no-one has an excuse not to turn out.
 
basilrobbie3 said:
And you are ignoring - deliberately - the fact that these elaborate arrangements are designed to counter a problem that doesn't exist.

Data for the last broadly equivalent electoral year - 2019 - shows that only four people were convicted of electoral fraud **. And yet we have these restrictive requirements that are designed to make it as difficult as possible for poorer, or technologically challenged people to take part in the electoral process. I wonder why?

** before you start bleating about sources, the data is from the Electoral Commission.
Click to expand...
It took Rochdale police about 20 years to acknowledge the grooming in their patch too. Can you see a pattern?
 
gjr said:
Under the current system if you live in the Fylde and you will vote for anyone but Conservative there is no point in voting, but I might make an effort for none of the above.
Click to expand...
Exactly first past the post for the majority of areas if you vote for another party is a total waste of time.
No one gives a toss of the percentage of ellectroate vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top