1 edit
Originally posted by CrowleyThe whole notion of voting for 'anyone other than' is ridiculous. Voting should be done on who you think most capable of running London, not on some 'I don't like him, so my vote will be cast randomly elsewhere' act. But as usual in this country nobody wants to change anything, they just want to show their contempt for what currently exists.
My brother says he's voting for "anyone, as long as it's not this Livingstone chap..."
Originally posted by StarrmanNot true.
The whole notion of voting for 'anyone other than' is ridiculous. Voting should be done on who you think most capable of running London, not on some 'I don't like him, so my vote will be cast randomly elsewhere' act. But as usual in this country nobody wants to change anything, they just want to show their contempt for what currently exists.
I'd like to change the notion that voting for 'anyone other than' is ridiculous.
And I'd like to change people who tell me how voting should be done.
Originally posted by StarrmanNot necessarily. I mean, if the Germans had all said "Let's get anyone in, as long as it's not this Hitler chap", things may have been much different...
The whole notion of voting for 'anyone other than' is ridiculous.
Anyway, I don't really know the people, I just thought I'd share the thoughts of one exiled, ginger bloke.
The post that was quoted here has been removedI believe the people of Liverpool like to exercise their right not to vote!
The British electoral system is responsible for low turnouts ... safe seats do not get big turnouts for obvious reasons, if you want to take a look at the real 'apathy voters' then look at the turnout in a marginal constituency where the turnout is much higher (but still shamefully low).