Conservatives increase council majority but UKIP take votes

This Is Wiltshire: The count taking place at the Oasis The count taking place at the Oasis

THE overall make-up of the council may not have changed too much following Thursday’s local election, but the political scene in Swindon may have changed forever.


The Conservatives increased their majority in the council by one and were the party celebrating at the end of the count.


Following the election the Conservatives have 30 seats, Labour have 23 and the Liberal Democrats have four.


However, in a result described as unprecedented, UKIP made huge gains across the town. While not taking any seats, they took votes from all parties and in many wards finished second.


It was a dramatic arrival for the party which had only a fraction of the votes at the last local election in 2012 and mimics the growing popularity of UKIP around the country.


Many seasoned veterans of politics in Swindon, described the sudden emergence of UKIP as unprecedented.


Those most disappointed at the end of the night were the Labour Party. They were hoping to take a number of wards to cut into the Tory majority but in the end it didn’t materialise.


It could have been even worse for Labour after the Liberal Democrats ran them close in the Central ward.


In the end though, the Liberal Democrats had to settle for holding the one seat they were defending in Eastcott.


Elsewhere, there were a number of key battlegrounds which overall led to the Tory victory.


The one real Labour success was they managed to increase their majority by 285 in Old Town, a seat which Nadine Watts won with a margin of just seven last time out.


But in the east of the Town the shadow cabinet member Julian Price lost his Covingham and Dorcan seat to Conservative Kevin Parry.


Another key target for the Labour party was the ward of St Margaret and South Marston but they were unable to kick Tory Peter Lovell out.


The Conservatives also increased their portion of vote in all North Swindon wards, but the Labour Party can take comfort at closing the gap in a number of West Swindon wards.


Traditionally, UKIP have been seen as the party which takes votes from the Conservative Party but yesterday saw them take support from all over.


It has left the party in a very strong position and confident ahead European results night which will take place on Sunday.


Overall turnout across the town has yet to be announced but in many of the wards it was higher than in 2012 despite reports of quiet polling stations throughout the day.

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:45am Fri 23 May 14

ChannelX says...

A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :) ChannelX
  • Score: 18

6:55am Fri 23 May 14

house on the hill says...

ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then. house on the hill
  • Score: 14

7:10am Fri 23 May 14

BigBarry says...

ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Would be an even better day for Swindon if you would get off your **** and get a job, lazy slob
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Would be an even better day for Swindon if you would get off your **** and get a job, lazy slob BigBarry
  • Score: -12

7:26am Fri 23 May 14

ChannelX says...

According to Labour types over at The Guardian, Swindon was viewed as a key area for Labour as they only needed to gain one seat to take control of the council.

Not looking good for the lefties.

Still, it was good of BigBarry to prove my point about them being nasty, bitter and envious people
According to Labour types over at The Guardian, Swindon was viewed as a key area for Labour as they only needed to gain one seat to take control of the council. Not looking good for the lefties. Still, it was good of BigBarry to prove my point about them being nasty, bitter and envious people ChannelX
  • Score: 2

7:36am Fri 23 May 14

madred says...

Yawn!
Yawn! madred
  • Score: -7

7:43am Fri 23 May 14

ChannelX says...

madred wrote:
Yawn!
Interesting enough for you to take the time to comment though...
[quote][p][bold]madred[/bold] wrote: Yawn![/p][/quote]Interesting enough for you to take the time to comment though... ChannelX
  • Score: -7

7:44am Fri 23 May 14

Wildwestener says...

house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers Wildwestener
  • Score: 10

7:48am Fri 23 May 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
I think that holding referendums on local issues would be the only way to get better engagement in local politics and voting.

There is plenty of scope to hold referendums in line with local elections and national ones for that matter.
[quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]I think that holding referendums on local issues would be the only way to get better engagement in local politics and voting. There is plenty of scope to hold referendums in line with local elections and national ones for that matter. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 2

7:49am Fri 23 May 14

Oakhurst Homeowner says...

UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...

What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party!
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party! Oakhurst Homeowner
  • Score: 21

7:51am Fri 23 May 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Oakhurst Homeowner wrote:
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...

What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party!
I seem to recall people saying the same about the greens some 20 years ago.....!
[quote][p][bold]Oakhurst Homeowner[/bold] wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party![/p][/quote]I seem to recall people saying the same about the greens some 20 years ago.....! LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: -3

7:53am Fri 23 May 14

ChannelX says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
I think that holding referendums on local issues would be the only way to get better engagement in local politics and voting.

There is plenty of scope to hold referendums in line with local elections and national ones for that matter.
@Lord - I could not agree more.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]I think that holding referendums on local issues would be the only way to get better engagement in local politics and voting. There is plenty of scope to hold referendums in line with local elections and national ones for that matter.[/p][/quote]@Lord - I could not agree more. ChannelX
  • Score: 3

7:54am Fri 23 May 14

ChannelX says...

Oakhurst Homeowner wrote:
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...

What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party!
What is interesting, certainly in Swindon, is that UKIP seem to be gaining most ground in areas traditionally known as Labour strongholds.

Seems the last Labour governments policies have ended up alienating their own supporters... although it comes as little surprise.
[quote][p][bold]Oakhurst Homeowner[/bold] wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party![/p][/quote]What is interesting, certainly in Swindon, is that UKIP seem to be gaining most ground in areas traditionally known as Labour strongholds. Seems the last Labour governments policies have ended up alienating their own supporters... although it comes as little surprise. ChannelX
  • Score: 8

7:58am Fri 23 May 14

Wildwestener says...

ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
The last Labour government was anything but left wing. It championed the free market and deregulated everything: The City/Banking (carrying on the work of the previous 18 years of Conservative govts), Drinking laws, gambling laws, immigration etc. That Government may be to blame for a lot (and I agree it is)but it sure wasn't left wing policies they were implementing. I'll think you find most on the left despise the last Labour government even more than you appear to.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]The last Labour government was anything but left wing. It championed the free market and deregulated everything: The City/Banking (carrying on the work of the previous 18 years of Conservative govts), Drinking laws, gambling laws, immigration etc. That Government may be to blame for a lot (and I agree it is)but it sure wasn't left wing policies they were implementing. I'll think you find most on the left despise the last Labour government even more than you appear to. Wildwestener
  • Score: 10

8:10am Fri 23 May 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

This was not a surprise, most people are still too scared to trust Labour when it comes to running a council.
Labour in charge means increased taxation and personally I have not appetite for my council tax to increase 20-50%
Unless Labour promises to keep taxes low, I will never vote for them, most people (those who work and earn a living) are thinking the same.
Overall, a good day for Swindon, the liberals are now a political spent force in Swindon and in the country, and UKIP is taking hold in Labour areas, this was certainly not the dreaded result for the Conservatives, roll on 2015:-)
This was not a surprise, most people are still too scared to trust Labour when it comes to running a council. Labour in charge means increased taxation and personally I have not appetite for my council tax to increase 20-50% Unless Labour promises to keep taxes low, I will never vote for them, most people (those who work and earn a living) are thinking the same. Overall, a good day for Swindon, the liberals are now a political spent force in Swindon and in the country, and UKIP is taking hold in Labour areas, this was certainly not the dreaded result for the Conservatives, roll on 2015:-) A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: 3

9:08am Fri 23 May 14

Mukkin says...

Oakhurst Homeowner wrote:
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...



Spot on Sir,

The media and the 3 party politicians are so out of touch with the publics feelings regarding Immigration, the EU and real fallout of the financial crisis, listening to the out of touch bunch on Radio 4 last night makes one realise that these self serving muppets will not change until it's too late, bring on the earthquake ;-)
Oakhurst Homeowner wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... Spot on Sir, The media and the 3 party politicians are so out of touch with the publics feelings regarding Immigration, the EU and real fallout of the financial crisis, listening to the out of touch bunch on Radio 4 last night makes one realise that these self serving muppets will not change until it's too late, bring on the earthquake ;-) Mukkin
  • Score: 17

9:10am Fri 23 May 14

Davey Gravey says...

The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do.
Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?
The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do. Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ? Davey Gravey
  • Score: 4

9:29am Fri 23 May 14

NorthernWarrior says...

Labour might have pledged (NB: not promised!) to repeal the £40 p/a green bin fee but no doubt at the eventual cost of £400 a year on the council tax. I wasn't living in Swindon under the last Labour council, but read enough horror stories about their massive council tax rises to take a very wary view of putting them back in.

Next years GE shaping up to be very interesting, the main theme emerging so far is that the LibDem's might as well get their coats and hope the door doesn't get them on the way out.
Labour might have pledged (NB: not promised!) to repeal the £40 p/a green bin fee but no doubt at the eventual cost of £400 a year on the council tax. I wasn't living in Swindon under the last Labour council, but read enough horror stories about their massive council tax rises to take a very wary view of putting them back in. Next years GE shaping up to be very interesting, the main theme emerging so far is that the LibDem's might as well get their coats and hope the door doesn't get them on the way out. NorthernWarrior
  • Score: 4

10:24am Fri 23 May 14

Dosomethingmutley says...

Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers? Dosomethingmutley
  • Score: 8

10:28am Fri 23 May 14

candid friend says...

It seems that the voters prefer to continue with the authors of the wi-fi corruption,and not risk a return to the vicious labour
Version.
It seems that the voters prefer to continue with the authors of the wi-fi corruption,and not risk a return to the vicious labour Version. candid friend
  • Score: 4

10:32am Fri 23 May 14

scottwichall says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do.
Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?
Can you explain what a protest vote is?

Or would you like me to explain it to you. A "protest vote" is the way the 3 main stream parties very arrogantly describe someone's choice not to vote for them.

If I wanted to make a protest vote I would spoil my ballot paper.
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do. Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?[/p][/quote]Can you explain what a protest vote is? Or would you like me to explain it to you. A "protest vote" is the way the 3 main stream parties very arrogantly describe someone's choice not to vote for them. If I wanted to make a protest vote I would spoil my ballot paper. scottwichall
  • Score: 6

10:32am Fri 23 May 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

Dosomethingmutley wrote:
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters.
It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.
[quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?[/p][/quote]I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters. It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round. A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: 1

10:33am Fri 23 May 14

Davidsyrett says...

Oakhurst Homeowner wrote:
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...

What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party!
As the turnout is expected to be around 30% (roughly the same as previous county council elections) why has "UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them.", it doesn't make sense. I think its mostly the same people who vote each time, but this time they have voted UIP rather than their normal party allegiance. Unfortunately local politicians fail to engage the local community.
[quote][p][bold]Oakhurst Homeowner[/bold] wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party![/p][/quote]As the turnout is expected to be around 30% (roughly the same as previous county council elections) why has "UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them.", it doesn't make sense. I think its mostly the same people who vote each time, but this time they have voted UIP rather than their normal party allegiance. Unfortunately local politicians fail to engage the local community. Davidsyrett
  • Score: 3

11:06am Fri 23 May 14

Davey Gravey says...

scottwichall wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do.
Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?
Can you explain what a protest vote is?

Or would you like me to explain it to you. A "protest vote" is the way the 3 main stream parties very arrogantly describe someone's choice not to vote for them.

If I wanted to make a protest vote I would spoil my ballot paper.
Why ask a loaded question you wish to answer yourself?
It is quite clear that many are voting for UKIP in protest against the other 3 parties.
You are only speaking for yourself.
[quote][p][bold]scottwichall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do. Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?[/p][/quote]Can you explain what a protest vote is? Or would you like me to explain it to you. A "protest vote" is the way the 3 main stream parties very arrogantly describe someone's choice not to vote for them. If I wanted to make a protest vote I would spoil my ballot paper.[/p][/quote]Why ask a loaded question you wish to answer yourself? It is quite clear that many are voting for UKIP in protest against the other 3 parties. You are only speaking for yourself. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -3

11:09am Fri 23 May 14

Dosomethingmutley says...

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
Dosomethingmutley wrote:
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters.
It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.
I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.
[quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?[/p][/quote]I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters. It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.[/p][/quote]I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues. Dosomethingmutley
  • Score: 2

11:19am Fri 23 May 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

Dosomethingmutley wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
Dosomethingmutley wrote:
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters.
It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.
I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.
Politicians have become complacent, it is absolutely not good enough to put a leaflet through the door to gain a vote, a lot more is expected from politicians.
[quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?[/p][/quote]I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters. It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.[/p][/quote]I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.[/p][/quote]Politicians have become complacent, it is absolutely not good enough to put a leaflet through the door to gain a vote, a lot more is expected from politicians. A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: 3

11:23am Fri 23 May 14

Oakhurst Homeowner says...

Davidsyrett wrote:
Oakhurst Homeowner wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party!
As the turnout is expected to be around 30% (roughly the same as previous county council elections) why has "UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them.", it doesn't make sense. I think its mostly the same people who vote each time, but this time they have voted UIP rather than their normal party allegiance. Unfortunately local politicians fail to engage the local community.
I said "when" UKIP start to get people who don't normally vote, out to vote for them. I didn't say they did this time.
[quote][p][bold]Davidsyrett[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Oakhurst Homeowner[/bold] wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party![/p][/quote]As the turnout is expected to be around 30% (roughly the same as previous county council elections) why has "UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them.", it doesn't make sense. I think its mostly the same people who vote each time, but this time they have voted UIP rather than their normal party allegiance. Unfortunately local politicians fail to engage the local community.[/p][/quote]I said "when" UKIP start to get people who don't normally vote, out to vote for them. I didn't say they did this time. Oakhurst Homeowner
  • Score: 4

11:24am Fri 23 May 14

twasadawf says...

Dosomethingmutley wrote:
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
Couldn't agree more people should be made to vote even if only to spoil there voting form at least they would be making a statement ,to many moan in this country about how things are being ran but cannot get off there backsides to vote, the only reason the tories have done well in this elections is the protest vote of many took votes away from labour as may labour voters cannot put up with the muppet Ed miliband and some of there crazy policies
[quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?[/p][/quote]Couldn't agree more people should be made to vote even if only to spoil there voting form at least they would be making a statement ,to many moan in this country about how things are being ran but cannot get off there backsides to vote, the only reason the tories have done well in this elections is the protest vote of many took votes away from labour as may labour voters cannot put up with the muppet Ed miliband and some of there crazy policies twasadawf
  • Score: 0

11:24am Fri 23 May 14

Wildwestener says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
I think that holding referendums on local issues would be the only way to get better engagement in local politics and voting.

There is plenty of scope to hold referendums in line with local elections and national ones for that matter.
Good point; people want to choose their policies maybe and don't trust any party to be totally in line with what they want.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]I think that holding referendums on local issues would be the only way to get better engagement in local politics and voting. There is plenty of scope to hold referendums in line with local elections and national ones for that matter.[/p][/quote]Good point; people want to choose their policies maybe and don't trust any party to be totally in line with what they want. Wildwestener
  • Score: 2

11:49am Fri 23 May 14

scottwichall says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
scottwichall wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do.
Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?
Can you explain what a protest vote is?

Or would you like me to explain it to you. A "protest vote" is the way the 3 main stream parties very arrogantly describe someone's choice not to vote for them.

If I wanted to make a protest vote I would spoil my ballot paper.
Why ask a loaded question you wish to answer yourself?
It is quite clear that many are voting for UKIP in protest against the other 3 parties.
You are only speaking for yourself.
You do make me laugh sometimes Davey. Why do you assume it is clear that people voting for UKIP are protesting about the other 3 cheeks of the same arse?

Perhaps they do hear "the message" from LibLabCon and they do not like what they are hearing so they have elected to cast their democratic vote towards a party they feel will listen to them, and is in line with their views.

Further more do you consider that the votes "belong" to LibLabCon then? By your logic they do, and anything selected that is not on the menu the political bubble wishes us to follow is variously a fruitcake, loony, or closet racist.
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scottwichall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: The people who bothered to vote have spoken. Democracy allows this and we should be thankful that we live where we do. Plenty of protest votes which has seen ukip's rise. I wonder what people would think if they actually gained some power ?[/p][/quote]Can you explain what a protest vote is? Or would you like me to explain it to you. A "protest vote" is the way the 3 main stream parties very arrogantly describe someone's choice not to vote for them. If I wanted to make a protest vote I would spoil my ballot paper.[/p][/quote]Why ask a loaded question you wish to answer yourself? It is quite clear that many are voting for UKIP in protest against the other 3 parties. You are only speaking for yourself.[/p][/quote]You do make me laugh sometimes Davey. Why do you assume it is clear that people voting for UKIP are protesting about the other 3 cheeks of the same arse? Perhaps they do hear "the message" from LibLabCon and they do not like what they are hearing so they have elected to cast their democratic vote towards a party they feel will listen to them, and is in line with their views. Further more do you consider that the votes "belong" to LibLabCon then? By your logic they do, and anything selected that is not on the menu the political bubble wishes us to follow is variously a fruitcake, loony, or closet racist. scottwichall
  • Score: 3

12:33pm Fri 23 May 14

house on the hill says...

Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
That's a very hard question. How do you turn around mass apathy? It would be like trying to turn a supertanker around, very slowly!

I guess because history has shown that this is how it goes, to one side, they do ok for a while, then mess it up so we vote in the other lot because we think they cant possibly be worse only to find out there are and the cycle continues. Add to that all the scandals, lies and deceit and eventually people just wonder why they bother when basically nothing changes whether they vote or not.

Also very few people look at the bigger picture, they tend to latch on to just one small thing that really concerns them (look at all the endless uproar about green waste costs and people saying that would influence their vote but that is a drop in the ocean in the overall budget and problems we face).

For me the whole system is flawed. Once voted in, politicians can then pretty much do whatever they want (within reason) and tear up the manifesto that got them elected and there is nothing we can do about it until the next election. I dont see that as much of a democratic process personally. Also the fact that they dont have to have any sort of ability, qualification or experience to do the job even though it is one of the most important in the country (Russell Holland may be a very good barrister but what does he really know about running a town the size of Swindon and its £200million budget?).

if we could address some of those issues maybe more would vote. Speaking to people i know who didnt vote, they say that in addition to that, every politician they have seen, heard or met comes across as arrogant and self serving and in the job for what they can get out of it rather than what they can put in and they dont feel they want to waste their time voting for people like that! I dont begin to truly understand politics, as I am sure most dont, maybe it should be a compulsory subject in schools, but from the outside looking in, whatever they are doing now clearly isnt working.

Do you have any thoughts or ideas?
[quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]That's a very hard question. How do you turn around mass apathy? It would be like trying to turn a supertanker around, very slowly! I guess because history has shown that this is how it goes, to one side, they do ok for a while, then mess it up so we vote in the other lot because we think they cant possibly be worse only to find out there are and the cycle continues. Add to that all the scandals, lies and deceit and eventually people just wonder why they bother when basically nothing changes whether they vote or not. Also very few people look at the bigger picture, they tend to latch on to just one small thing that really concerns them (look at all the endless uproar about green waste costs and people saying that would influence their vote but that is a drop in the ocean in the overall budget and problems we face). For me the whole system is flawed. Once voted in, politicians can then pretty much do whatever they want (within reason) and tear up the manifesto that got them elected and there is nothing we can do about it until the next election. I dont see that as much of a democratic process personally. Also the fact that they dont have to have any sort of ability, qualification or experience to do the job even though it is one of the most important in the country (Russell Holland may be a very good barrister but what does he really know about running a town the size of Swindon and its £200million budget?). if we could address some of those issues maybe more would vote. Speaking to people i know who didnt vote, they say that in addition to that, every politician they have seen, heard or met comes across as arrogant and self serving and in the job for what they can get out of it rather than what they can put in and they dont feel they want to waste their time voting for people like that! I dont begin to truly understand politics, as I am sure most dont, maybe it should be a compulsory subject in schools, but from the outside looking in, whatever they are doing now clearly isnt working. Do you have any thoughts or ideas? house on the hill
  • Score: 9

1:16pm Fri 23 May 14

house on the hill says...

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
Dosomethingmutley wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
Dosomethingmutley wrote:
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters.
It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.
I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.
Politicians have become complacent, it is absolutely not good enough to put a leaflet through the door to gain a vote, a lot more is expected from politicians.
Completely agree with your first post.

The problem is that complacency will always set in when you have situations like that. they don't care how many vote as long as the majority that do vote, vote for them. Its the system that's at fault just as much as the politicians taking advantage of it (in very much the same way council workers become complacent because not only do they have no competition for their services, we are also forced by law to pay them whether we use them or not, so why bother to give an efficient service or go the extra mile if you dont have to). Not sure what the answer is to that one as like you i wouldn't want to be forced or paid to vote, that definitely isn't right.
[quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?[/p][/quote]I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters. It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.[/p][/quote]I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.[/p][/quote]Politicians have become complacent, it is absolutely not good enough to put a leaflet through the door to gain a vote, a lot more is expected from politicians.[/p][/quote]Completely agree with your first post. The problem is that complacency will always set in when you have situations like that. they don't care how many vote as long as the majority that do vote, vote for them. Its the system that's at fault just as much as the politicians taking advantage of it (in very much the same way council workers become complacent because not only do they have no competition for their services, we are also forced by law to pay them whether we use them or not, so why bother to give an efficient service or go the extra mile if you dont have to). Not sure what the answer is to that one as like you i wouldn't want to be forced or paid to vote, that definitely isn't right. house on the hill
  • Score: 0

1:16pm Fri 23 May 14

house on the hill says...

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
Dosomethingmutley wrote:
A.Baron-Cohen wrote:
Dosomethingmutley wrote:
Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California!
Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote.
Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?
I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters.
It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.
I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.
Politicians have become complacent, it is absolutely not good enough to put a leaflet through the door to gain a vote, a lot more is expected from politicians.
Completely agree with your first post.

The problem is that complacency will always set in when you have situations like that. they don't care how many vote as long as the majority that do vote, vote for them. Its the system that's at fault just as much as the politicians taking advantage of it (in very much the same way council workers become complacent because not only do they have no competition for their services, we are also forced by law to pay them whether we use them or not, so why bother to give an efficient service or go the extra mile if you dont have to). Not sure what the answer is to that one as like you i wouldn't want to be forced or paid to vote, that definitely isn't right.
[quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A.Baron-Cohen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dosomethingmutley[/bold] wrote: Once again the voting turnout is abysmally low. 70% of voters either couldn't be bothered, forgot or were unable to cast a vote. Many ideas have been suggested to try and increase turnout, from making it compulsory in law, as in Australia, to actually paying people to vote, as in California! Perhaps changing the day of the vote could help? Some of my friends and family suggest voting on a workday, usually a Thursday, does either make them forget or after a long day at work not bother to vote. Perhaps changing the day to a Saturday or Sunday may increase voter numbers?[/p][/quote]I do not believe it is right to force or trick people to vote, at the end of the day it is up to politicians to give us a good show, the fact that turnout is low proves that politicians are simply not good enough at their job, just like a pop star unable to sell enough gig tickets, it is too easy to blame voters. It is the job of politicians to make politics interesting and to connect with voters, not the other way round.[/p][/quote]I agree that it certainly is the responsibility of politicians to engage voters, compulsion or coercion should not be the answer. I had plenty of leaflets through the post from 5 different candidates, but never saw any of them out canvassing. The leaflets mainly concentrated on the usual national rhetoric, but had very little content regarding local issues.[/p][/quote]Politicians have become complacent, it is absolutely not good enough to put a leaflet through the door to gain a vote, a lot more is expected from politicians.[/p][/quote]Completely agree with your first post. The problem is that complacency will always set in when you have situations like that. they don't care how many vote as long as the majority that do vote, vote for them. Its the system that's at fault just as much as the politicians taking advantage of it (in very much the same way council workers become complacent because not only do they have no competition for their services, we are also forced by law to pay them whether we use them or not, so why bother to give an efficient service or go the extra mile if you dont have to). Not sure what the answer is to that one as like you i wouldn't want to be forced or paid to vote, that definitely isn't right. house on the hill
  • Score: 0

2:47pm Fri 23 May 14

Oliver_Donachie says...

Whichever way they voted I am happy for those that took the time.
Whichever way they voted I am happy for those that took the time. Oliver_Donachie
  • Score: 2

4:13pm Fri 23 May 14

adsinibiza says...

Mukkin wrote:
Oakhurst Homeowner wrote:
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...



Spot on Sir,

The media and the 3 party politicians are so out of touch with the publics feelings regarding Immigration, the EU and real fallout of the financial crisis, listening to the out of touch bunch on Radio 4 last night makes one realise that these self serving muppets will not change until it's too late, bring on the earthquake ;-)
problem is though UKIP are no better than any of the other parties - and I'm not just talking about their casual racism or homophobia or even the slightly weird characters that often turn out to be UKIP officials - I'm talking about Farage only giving half the story and twisting things to suit himself.

For example when was the last time Farage mentioned that 2 and a half million Brits live in other EU countries meaning that this country has the highest percentage of it's nationals living in other EU countries? He doesn't mention that as it would prove how hypocritical he is. And neither does he address the issue of what would happen to those 2 and a half million Brits if he got his way and we left the EU and kicked out all the immigrants in this country.

The fact is that Farage and UKIP are just as bad if not worse than the rest of them and Farage represents possibly a bigger threat to the continuing prosperity of this country than the other party leaders put together
[quote][p][bold]Mukkin[/bold] wrote: Oakhurst Homeowner wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... Spot on Sir, The media and the 3 party politicians are so out of touch with the publics feelings regarding Immigration, the EU and real fallout of the financial crisis, listening to the out of touch bunch on Radio 4 last night makes one realise that these self serving muppets will not change until it's too late, bring on the earthquake ;-)[/p][/quote]problem is though UKIP are no better than any of the other parties - and I'm not just talking about their casual racism or homophobia or even the slightly weird characters that often turn out to be UKIP officials - I'm talking about Farage only giving half the story and twisting things to suit himself. For example when was the last time Farage mentioned that 2 and a half million Brits live in other EU countries meaning that this country has the highest percentage of it's nationals living in other EU countries? He doesn't mention that as it would prove how hypocritical he is. And neither does he address the issue of what would happen to those 2 and a half million Brits if he got his way and we left the EU and kicked out all the immigrants in this country. The fact is that Farage and UKIP are just as bad if not worse than the rest of them and Farage represents possibly a bigger threat to the continuing prosperity of this country than the other party leaders put together adsinibiza
  • Score: -2

4:37pm Fri 23 May 14

ChannelX says...

I love how some people seem to actually think that racism is confined to people who vote for UKIP.

Even if that were true, yesterday's results seem to suggest a lot of people have suddenly become racist.
I love how some people seem to actually think that racism is confined to people who vote for UKIP. Even if that were true, yesterday's results seem to suggest a lot of people have suddenly become racist. ChannelX
  • Score: 2

5:48pm Fri 23 May 14

Wildwestener says...

house on the hill wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
That's a very hard question. How do you turn around mass apathy? It would be like trying to turn a supertanker around, very slowly!

I guess because history has shown that this is how it goes, to one side, they do ok for a while, then mess it up so we vote in the other lot because we think they cant possibly be worse only to find out there are and the cycle continues. Add to that all the scandals, lies and deceit and eventually people just wonder why they bother when basically nothing changes whether they vote or not.

Also very few people look at the bigger picture, they tend to latch on to just one small thing that really concerns them (look at all the endless uproar about green waste costs and people saying that would influence their vote but that is a drop in the ocean in the overall budget and problems we face).

For me the whole system is flawed. Once voted in, politicians can then pretty much do whatever they want (within reason) and tear up the manifesto that got them elected and there is nothing we can do about it until the next election. I dont see that as much of a democratic process personally. Also the fact that they dont have to have any sort of ability, qualification or experience to do the job even though it is one of the most important in the country (Russell Holland may be a very good barrister but what does he really know about running a town the size of Swindon and its £200million budget?).

if we could address some of those issues maybe more would vote. Speaking to people i know who didnt vote, they say that in addition to that, every politician they have seen, heard or met comes across as arrogant and self serving and in the job for what they can get out of it rather than what they can put in and they dont feel they want to waste their time voting for people like that! I dont begin to truly understand politics, as I am sure most dont, maybe it should be a compulsory subject in schools, but from the outside looking in, whatever they are doing now clearly isnt working.

Do you have any thoughts or ideas?
I think part of the problem is that politicians all seem to work by soundbite and just trot out the same old gugg whatever. None of them seem to come from the real world that we all inhabit and seem oblivious to the pressures on people working for a living. They all seem to be career politicians as well, never having worked in anything other than the political arena.

I do think political studies in schools might be ineteresting but I can imagine agreeing a curriculum would be a problem.

Maybe politicians should only be allowed to stand for a couple of terms so they have to get more people involved rather than lifers who normal people can't associate with.

You are right though tha the system is flawed. For most people, the electoral system simply does not give them enough control over their elected representatives. More frequent elections, powers of recall etc might help. Also maybe some form of PR where your vote actually counted might also help.

Finally though, policiians need to listen to what people want. They perhaps should ave their pay set at the average wage, that would make them think I'm sure.

It's difficult but perhaps we need a consensus on what the country wants to be: for me, employed in jobs that pay a living wage; well housed, environmentally aware and orientated, caring to those who are in genuine need, not so caring to those who can't be bothered, would be characteristics I think few would argue with.
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]That's a very hard question. How do you turn around mass apathy? It would be like trying to turn a supertanker around, very slowly! I guess because history has shown that this is how it goes, to one side, they do ok for a while, then mess it up so we vote in the other lot because we think they cant possibly be worse only to find out there are and the cycle continues. Add to that all the scandals, lies and deceit and eventually people just wonder why they bother when basically nothing changes whether they vote or not. Also very few people look at the bigger picture, they tend to latch on to just one small thing that really concerns them (look at all the endless uproar about green waste costs and people saying that would influence their vote but that is a drop in the ocean in the overall budget and problems we face). For me the whole system is flawed. Once voted in, politicians can then pretty much do whatever they want (within reason) and tear up the manifesto that got them elected and there is nothing we can do about it until the next election. I dont see that as much of a democratic process personally. Also the fact that they dont have to have any sort of ability, qualification or experience to do the job even though it is one of the most important in the country (Russell Holland may be a very good barrister but what does he really know about running a town the size of Swindon and its £200million budget?). if we could address some of those issues maybe more would vote. Speaking to people i know who didnt vote, they say that in addition to that, every politician they have seen, heard or met comes across as arrogant and self serving and in the job for what they can get out of it rather than what they can put in and they dont feel they want to waste their time voting for people like that! I dont begin to truly understand politics, as I am sure most dont, maybe it should be a compulsory subject in schools, but from the outside looking in, whatever they are doing now clearly isnt working. Do you have any thoughts or ideas?[/p][/quote]I think part of the problem is that politicians all seem to work by soundbite and just trot out the same old gugg whatever. None of them seem to come from the real world that we all inhabit and seem oblivious to the pressures on people working for a living. They all seem to be career politicians as well, never having worked in anything other than the political arena. I do think political studies in schools might be ineteresting but I can imagine agreeing a curriculum would be a problem. Maybe politicians should only be allowed to stand for a couple of terms so they have to get more people involved rather than lifers who normal people can't associate with. You are right though tha the system is flawed. For most people, the electoral system simply does not give them enough control over their elected representatives. More frequent elections, powers of recall etc might help. Also maybe some form of PR where your vote actually counted might also help. Finally though, policiians need to listen to what people want. They perhaps should ave their pay set at the average wage, that would make them think I'm sure. It's difficult but perhaps we need a consensus on what the country wants to be: for me, employed in jobs that pay a living wage; well housed, environmentally aware and orientated, caring to those who are in genuine need, not so caring to those who can't be bothered, would be characteristics I think few would argue with. Wildwestener
  • Score: 2

8:54pm Fri 23 May 14

somwal25 says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Oakhurst Homeowner wrote:
UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen...

What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party!
I seem to recall people saying the same about the greens some 20 years ago.....!
they also said the same about the famous gang of four (SDP) what happened to them. oh they joined the liberals to form the lib dems. what will we call the tory ukip coalition
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Oakhurst Homeowner[/bold] wrote: UKIP are now the rising force to be reckoned with. When a party can win in the south and in the north, unlike the other traditional parties, then at some point in the future they will hold power. It may not be tomorrow, although they will win the Euro elections, it may not be next year, but it will happen... What the surge in UKIP shows is that increasingly people don't care for the usual con - lab hegemony. When you see the comments above you can see why. Most of our councillor's are self-serving people who frankly are just not very nice. They say one thing and do another. What will be really interesting is when UKIP start to get people who don't vote out to vote for them. Let us not forget sadly most people don't vote as they think it doesn't change anything. Most people i know didn't vote for this reason. Once these people wake up to the fact that the only really change is UKIP then last nights earthquake will bring the walls tumbling down on the complacent, arrogant , lecturing traditional parties. Personally I cant wait for that election night as it will make 1997 look like an office party![/p][/quote]I seem to recall people saying the same about the greens some 20 years ago.....![/p][/quote]they also said the same about the famous gang of four (SDP) what happened to them. oh they joined the liberals to form the lib dems. what will we call the tory ukip coalition somwal25
  • Score: 1

9:17pm Fri 23 May 14

BeardyBill says...

ChannelX wrote:
I love how some people seem to actually think that racism is confined to people who vote for UKIP.

Even if that were true, yesterday's results seem to suggest a lot of people have suddenly become racist.
History has proved time and time again, that when things are tough economically, people lash out and find someone to blame. UKIP's rise is entirely down to the complacency of the main parties, traditionally Britain doesn't have much time for extremist parties, either right or left, they briefly flourish, then disappear. What could be different this time is that faith in the honesty, integrity and principles of all of the main parties has been damaged by the self serving activities of many politicians of all parties - that, and the way the party system has been effectively hijacked by an unrepresentative self selecting elite who care about nothing other than staying in power.

An interesting result last night - hardly a resounding victory for the Tories managing to gain a seat in Swindon, a disappointing night for Labour - they still haven't regained public trust after the New Labour experiment, the Liberals were well and truly punished for being power hungry whores to the point where they could be a spent force in politics, and as for UKIP hardly an earthquake, more a brief tremor. Not much of a success if you still don't have a single MP or control a single Council. They will do well in the Euro vote, as they are still effectively a single issue party.

The fact that 2/3 of voters either couldn't be bothered or feel disenfranchised and of those that did vote a quarter went for a party with no national policies, running on an anti-establishment ticket shows the system is broken. Unfortunately, there is no will or leadership to at least try to fix it.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: I love how some people seem to actually think that racism is confined to people who vote for UKIP. Even if that were true, yesterday's results seem to suggest a lot of people have suddenly become racist.[/p][/quote]History has proved time and time again, that when things are tough economically, people lash out and find someone to blame. UKIP's rise is entirely down to the complacency of the main parties, traditionally Britain doesn't have much time for extremist parties, either right or left, they briefly flourish, then disappear. What could be different this time is that faith in the honesty, integrity and principles of all of the main parties has been damaged by the self serving activities of many politicians of all parties - that, and the way the party system has been effectively hijacked by an unrepresentative self selecting elite who care about nothing other than staying in power. An interesting result last night - hardly a resounding victory for the Tories managing to gain a seat in Swindon, a disappointing night for Labour - they still haven't regained public trust after the New Labour experiment, the Liberals were well and truly punished for being power hungry whores to the point where they could be a spent force in politics, and as for UKIP hardly an earthquake, more a brief tremor. Not much of a success if you still don't have a single MP or control a single Council. They will do well in the Euro vote, as they are still effectively a single issue party. The fact that 2/3 of voters either couldn't be bothered or feel disenfranchised and of those that did vote a quarter went for a party with no national policies, running on an anti-establishment ticket shows the system is broken. Unfortunately, there is no will or leadership to at least try to fix it. BeardyBill
  • Score: 1

9:43pm Fri 23 May 14

LordCharles says...

It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.
It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy. LordCharles
  • Score: 2

12:37am Sat 24 May 14

mug? says...

ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
1. This wasn't a general election.
2. How did labour destroy the country? I thought it was a global financial crisis caused by the bankers and the collapse of the Lehman Brothers. Please explain.
3. I can't believe people vote for a party that threw away nearly half a million pounds on a hair brained vanity scheme and have gradually eaten away at public services in this town.
3. I didn't vote Labour or UKIP or Lib Dem.
4. Is there a party that represents the majority of this town? If not, did those people vote?
5. I'd like to see the break down of the age of people who voted.
6. 3,4, 5 & 6 are not really aimed at ChannelX, just general observations.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]1. This wasn't a general election. 2. How did labour destroy the country? I thought it was a global financial crisis caused by the bankers and the collapse of the Lehman Brothers. Please explain. 3. I can't believe people vote for a party that threw away nearly half a million pounds on a hair brained vanity scheme and have gradually eaten away at public services in this town. 3. I didn't vote Labour or UKIP or Lib Dem. 4. Is there a party that represents the majority of this town? If not, did those people vote? 5. I'd like to see the break down of the age of people who voted. 6. 3,4, 5 & 6 are not really aimed at ChannelX, just general observations. mug?
  • Score: 2

12:48am Sat 24 May 14

mug? says...

Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.)


You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue.

Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?
[quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.) You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue. Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU? mug?
  • Score: 1

10:59am Sat 24 May 14

Wildwestener says...

mug? wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.)


You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue.

Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?
Firstly, I would never expect to agree with everything any candidate or party stands for. There is too much variety of opinion for that to happen; however, I can vote for someone who most closely represents my views. In these local elections, I was able to find such a party and voted accordingly.

However, as I said in earlier posts, if I really couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the candidates/parties, I would do one of two things, either write "None of the Above" on the ballot form or stand myself.

I do believe an active non-vote is important as it is cannot be written off as apathy. Also, I do believe that we can all stand in we want to (certainly in local elections where there is no financial penalty for not winning a certain % of votes) and we can't expect others to do things we ourselves are not prepared for.

The alternative is not voting and letting others decide who run our institutions. I believe in those circumstances, people have lessened their right to moan about things as they have done nothing to make it better.
[quote][p][bold]mug?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.) You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue. Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?[/p][/quote]Firstly, I would never expect to agree with everything any candidate or party stands for. There is too much variety of opinion for that to happen; however, I can vote for someone who most closely represents my views. In these local elections, I was able to find such a party and voted accordingly. However, as I said in earlier posts, if I really couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the candidates/parties, I would do one of two things, either write "None of the Above" on the ballot form or stand myself. I do believe an active non-vote is important as it is cannot be written off as apathy. Also, I do believe that we can all stand in we want to (certainly in local elections where there is no financial penalty for not winning a certain % of votes) and we can't expect others to do things we ourselves are not prepared for. The alternative is not voting and letting others decide who run our institutions. I believe in those circumstances, people have lessened their right to moan about things as they have done nothing to make it better. Wildwestener
  • Score: -2

11:10am Sat 24 May 14

John Trollston says...

People have had enough of the impact of mass immigration whole towns changing and not for the good Peterborough is a prime example.

Do you invite all the poor people in your town to your house to live in and give them your wages.We do this as a nation.

immigration and cheap labor are used to drive down the wages of the indigenous worker.

Peter frost:


"In late capitalism, the elites are no longer restrained by ties of national identity and are thus freer to enrich themselves at the expense of their host society. This clash of interests lies at the heart of the globalist project: on the one hand, jobs are outsourced to low-wage countries; on the other, low-wage labor is insourced for jobs that cannot be relocated, such as in the construction and service industries.

This two-way movement redistributes wealth from owners of labor to owners of capital. Business people benefit from access to lower-paid workers and weaker labor and environmental standards. Working people are meanwhile thrown into competition with these other workers. As a result, the top 10% of society is pulling farther and farther ahead of everyone else, and this trend is taking place throughout the developed world. The rich are getting richer … not by making a better product but by making the same product with cheaper and less troublesome inputs of labor."

Controlled

"In late capitalism, the elites are no longer restrained by ties of national identity and are thus freer to enrich themselves at the expense of their host society. This clash of interests lies at the heart of the globalist project: on the one hand, jobs are outsourced to low-wage countries; on the other, low-wage labor is insourced for jobs that cannot be relocated, such as in the construction and service industries.

This two-way movement redistributes wealth from owners of labor to owners of capital. Business people benefit from access to lower-paid workers and weaker labor and environmental standards. Working people are meanwhile thrown into competition with these other workers. As a result, the top 10% of society is pulling farther and farther ahead of everyone else, and this trend is taking place throughout the developed world. The rich are getting richer … not by making a better product but by making the same product with cheaper and less troublesome inputs of labor."
People have had enough of the impact of mass immigration whole towns changing and not for the good Peterborough is a prime example. Do you invite all the poor people in your town to your house to live in and give them your wages.We do this as a nation. immigration and cheap labor are used to drive down the wages of the indigenous worker. Peter frost: "In late capitalism, the elites are no longer restrained by ties of national identity and are thus freer to enrich themselves at the expense of their host society. This clash of interests lies at the heart of the globalist project: on the one hand, jobs are outsourced to low-wage countries; on the other, low-wage labor is insourced for jobs that cannot be relocated, such as in the construction and service industries. This two-way movement redistributes wealth from owners of labor to owners of capital. Business people benefit from access to lower-paid workers and weaker labor and environmental standards. Working people are meanwhile thrown into competition with these other workers. As a result, the top 10% of society is pulling farther and farther ahead of everyone else, and this trend is taking place throughout the developed world. The rich are getting richer … not by making a better product but by making the same product with cheaper and less troublesome inputs of labor." Controlled "In late capitalism, the elites are no longer restrained by ties of national identity and are thus freer to enrich themselves at the expense of their host society. This clash of interests lies at the heart of the globalist project: on the one hand, jobs are outsourced to low-wage countries; on the other, low-wage labor is insourced for jobs that cannot be relocated, such as in the construction and service industries. This two-way movement redistributes wealth from owners of labor to owners of capital. Business people benefit from access to lower-paid workers and weaker labor and environmental standards. Working people are meanwhile thrown into competition with these other workers. As a result, the top 10% of society is pulling farther and farther ahead of everyone else, and this trend is taking place throughout the developed world. The rich are getting richer … not by making a better product but by making the same product with cheaper and less troublesome inputs of labor." John Trollston
  • Score: 4

11:15am Sat 24 May 14

icelolly says...

Good to see Conservatives keep Swindon with an increased majority at the expense of :Labour. I hope UKIP do well in the European Elections.
Good to see Conservatives keep Swindon with an increased majority at the expense of :Labour. I hope UKIP do well in the European Elections. icelolly
  • Score: 0

12:54pm Sat 24 May 14

ChannelX says...

LordCharles wrote:
It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.
Democracy is as many people voting as decide they want to vote.

When people don't get their own way, these days, they always tend to claim things aren't 'democratic'.

Democracy does not necessarily mean getting your own way.
[quote][p][bold]LordCharles[/bold] wrote: It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.[/p][/quote]Democracy is as many people voting as decide they want to vote. When people don't get their own way, these days, they always tend to claim things aren't 'democratic'. Democracy does not necessarily mean getting your own way. ChannelX
  • Score: 1

2:15pm Sat 24 May 14

ChannelX says...

mug? wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
1. This wasn't a general election.
2. How did labour destroy the country? I thought it was a global financial crisis caused by the bankers and the collapse of the Lehman Brothers. Please explain.
3. I can't believe people vote for a party that threw away nearly half a million pounds on a hair brained vanity scheme and have gradually eaten away at public services in this town.
3. I didn't vote Labour or UKIP or Lib Dem.
4. Is there a party that represents the majority of this town? If not, did those people vote?
5. I'd like to see the break down of the age of people who voted.
6. 3,4, 5 & 6 are not really aimed at ChannelX, just general observations.
1. Nobody said it was a general election, so not sure why you point out something we all already knew.

2. Labour destroyed the country economically and demographically. They even admit it, now, on the record. It's not hard to use Google. The banks were certainly part of the problem, but certainly not the whole of it.

It seems odd to have claimed to have 'abolished boom and bust' and delighted in calling yourself the 'best chancellor the UK's ever had', be in the job for 10 long years and then immediately wash your hands of ALL responsibility the minute the economy goes down the toilet.

Also, we need to redefine the term, 'global'. Plenty of countries were barely affected at all, Labour just liked to pretend it happened to everyone.

3. People vote for the representatives they believe can do the best job. We all have different views about how that should be done and what's required. If you're suggesting the local Labour group would have spent wisely and not wasted hundreds of thousands/millions of pounds, you've not been paying attention.

4. Good for you. I'm sure you delighted in seeing the candidate you voted for do so well.

5. Yes, the Tory party have been voted in, for some time now, at local level and national level at the last election. It's called democracy. More people voted for them than any other one party. The people in the town who can be bothered to vote clearly wish to have the Tories represent them in greater numbers than any other party can achieve. You may not agree, but that doesn't change the numbers.

The people who didn't vote are irrelevant. By choosing not to vote, they are effectively saying they don't care who represents them, and that's fine, it's their choice.

6. Generally speaking, older people tend to vote more regularly and reliably than younger people. I'm not sure how the law works in regards to issuing the age ranges of those who voted. It's probably against Data Protection laws or something. But, in any case, the same thing applies as above: if a certain age range doesn't bother voting, who's fault is that but their own?

It's hilarious how some people genuinely still seem to think, 'something's gone wrong' simply because the majority of people don't get fixated on things like Wi-Fi, Coate and 'developers'. Some people need to live life and realise that there really are bigger and more important things to address, manage and deal with.

People don't vote against things simply because of a wasted £400k and an un-PC quip by an ex-major. I realise that Labour types have to rely on other parties being abysmal in order to 'win' anything, but come on, how much evidence do these people need? People don't think like them and people don't care about silly little obsessions.

As the polls have demonstrated in Swindon, time and time again. But they'll never learn. They'll just hand-wring, agree with themselves and keeping hoping for a better world. Which, obviously, can only ever be the one they decide we should all live in.
[quote][p][bold]mug?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]1. This wasn't a general election. 2. How did labour destroy the country? I thought it was a global financial crisis caused by the bankers and the collapse of the Lehman Brothers. Please explain. 3. I can't believe people vote for a party that threw away nearly half a million pounds on a hair brained vanity scheme and have gradually eaten away at public services in this town. 3. I didn't vote Labour or UKIP or Lib Dem. 4. Is there a party that represents the majority of this town? If not, did those people vote? 5. I'd like to see the break down of the age of people who voted. 6. 3,4, 5 & 6 are not really aimed at ChannelX, just general observations.[/p][/quote]1. Nobody said it was a general election, so not sure why you point out something we all already knew. 2. Labour destroyed the country economically and demographically. They even admit it, now, on the record. It's not hard to use Google. The banks were certainly part of the problem, but certainly not the whole of it. It seems odd to have claimed to have 'abolished boom and bust' and delighted in calling yourself the 'best chancellor the UK's ever had', be in the job for 10 long years and then immediately wash your hands of ALL responsibility the minute the economy goes down the toilet. Also, we need to redefine the term, 'global'. Plenty of countries were barely affected at all, Labour just liked to pretend it happened to everyone. 3. People vote for the representatives they believe can do the best job. We all have different views about how that should be done and what's required. If you're suggesting the local Labour group would have spent wisely and not wasted hundreds of thousands/millions of pounds, you've not been paying attention. 4. Good for you. I'm sure you delighted in seeing the candidate you voted for do so well. 5. Yes, the Tory party have been voted in, for some time now, at local level and national level at the last election. It's called democracy. More people voted for them than any other one party. The people in the town who can be bothered to vote clearly wish to have the Tories represent them in greater numbers than any other party can achieve. You may not agree, but that doesn't change the numbers. The people who didn't vote are irrelevant. By choosing not to vote, they are effectively saying they don't care who represents them, and that's fine, it's their choice. 6. Generally speaking, older people tend to vote more regularly and reliably than younger people. I'm not sure how the law works in regards to issuing the age ranges of those who voted. It's probably against Data Protection laws or something. But, in any case, the same thing applies as above: if a certain age range doesn't bother voting, who's fault is that but their own? It's hilarious how some people genuinely still seem to think, 'something's gone wrong' simply because the majority of people don't get fixated on things like Wi-Fi, Coate and 'developers'. Some people need to live life and realise that there really are bigger and more important things to address, manage and deal with. People don't vote against things simply because of a wasted £400k and an un-PC quip by an ex-major. I realise that Labour types have to rely on other parties being abysmal in order to 'win' anything, but come on, how much evidence do these people need? People don't think like them and people don't care about silly little obsessions. As the polls have demonstrated in Swindon, time and time again. But they'll never learn. They'll just hand-wring, agree with themselves and keeping hoping for a better world. Which, obviously, can only ever be the one they decide we should all live in. ChannelX
  • Score: 0

4:33pm Sat 24 May 14

house on the hill says...

ChannelX wrote:
LordCharles wrote:
It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.
Democracy is as many people voting as decide they want to vote.

When people don't get their own way, these days, they always tend to claim things aren't 'democratic'.

Democracy does not necessarily mean getting your own way.
thats a pretty stupid comment, everyone is different so there is no way on earth everyone would get their own way. For me i dont see that a system where we vote people in who can then pretty much do whatever "they" want is a democracy, so 59 people out of an adult population of around 120,000 actually decides what happens in Swindon, sorry thats not "democracy". And as many are now saying big business rules the world now and govts just do whatever they can to keep them happy. Far to many politicians take the job for their own benefit rather than caring about those who elected them anyway. A totally flawed system and why we have this farce everytime an election comes round.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordCharles[/bold] wrote: It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.[/p][/quote]Democracy is as many people voting as decide they want to vote. When people don't get their own way, these days, they always tend to claim things aren't 'democratic'. Democracy does not necessarily mean getting your own way.[/p][/quote]thats a pretty stupid comment, everyone is different so there is no way on earth everyone would get their own way. For me i dont see that a system where we vote people in who can then pretty much do whatever "they" want is a democracy, so 59 people out of an adult population of around 120,000 actually decides what happens in Swindon, sorry thats not "democracy". And as many are now saying big business rules the world now and govts just do whatever they can to keep them happy. Far to many politicians take the job for their own benefit rather than caring about those who elected them anyway. A totally flawed system and why we have this farce everytime an election comes round. house on the hill
  • Score: 0

4:46pm Sat 24 May 14

house on the hill says...

Wildwestener wrote:
mug? wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.)


You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue.

Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?
Firstly, I would never expect to agree with everything any candidate or party stands for. There is too much variety of opinion for that to happen; however, I can vote for someone who most closely represents my views. In these local elections, I was able to find such a party and voted accordingly.

However, as I said in earlier posts, if I really couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the candidates/parties, I would do one of two things, either write "None of the Above" on the ballot form or stand myself.

I do believe an active non-vote is important as it is cannot be written off as apathy. Also, I do believe that we can all stand in we want to (certainly in local elections where there is no financial penalty for not winning a certain % of votes) and we can't expect others to do things we ourselves are not prepared for.

The alternative is not voting and letting others decide who run our institutions. I believe in those circumstances, people have lessened their right to moan about things as they have done nothing to make it better.
I think spoiling your vote is a waste of time, all it does is give those who count the votes a bit of a laugh but no one else really cares. And i wouldnt stand myself as i wouldnt want to be associated with the to55ers who do stand and one against 58 isnt going to do anything, it is the whole system that is broken and i dont have any experience of running a town or business this size.

I just get on my with my life the best i can and just accept that govt's and councils will change with the wind and adjust accordingly. Anyone who thinks they can make a difference would soon find out they cant. And would you really want to be associated with the muppet politicians who regularly post on here?????
[quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mug?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.) You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue. Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?[/p][/quote]Firstly, I would never expect to agree with everything any candidate or party stands for. There is too much variety of opinion for that to happen; however, I can vote for someone who most closely represents my views. In these local elections, I was able to find such a party and voted accordingly. However, as I said in earlier posts, if I really couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the candidates/parties, I would do one of two things, either write "None of the Above" on the ballot form or stand myself. I do believe an active non-vote is important as it is cannot be written off as apathy. Also, I do believe that we can all stand in we want to (certainly in local elections where there is no financial penalty for not winning a certain % of votes) and we can't expect others to do things we ourselves are not prepared for. The alternative is not voting and letting others decide who run our institutions. I believe in those circumstances, people have lessened their right to moan about things as they have done nothing to make it better.[/p][/quote]I think spoiling your vote is a waste of time, all it does is give those who count the votes a bit of a laugh but no one else really cares. And i wouldnt stand myself as i wouldnt want to be associated with the to55ers who do stand and one against 58 isnt going to do anything, it is the whole system that is broken and i dont have any experience of running a town or business this size. I just get on my with my life the best i can and just accept that govt's and councils will change with the wind and adjust accordingly. Anyone who thinks they can make a difference would soon find out they cant. And would you really want to be associated with the muppet politicians who regularly post on here????? house on the hill
  • Score: 2

5:53pm Sat 24 May 14

Wildwestener says...

house on the hill wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
mug? wrote:
Wildwestener wrote:
house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
A great day for Swindon as a whole.

The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though.

It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so.

Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)
Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.
Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather).
I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority.
Cheers
The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.)


You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue.

Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?
Firstly, I would never expect to agree with everything any candidate or party stands for. There is too much variety of opinion for that to happen; however, I can vote for someone who most closely represents my views. In these local elections, I was able to find such a party and voted accordingly.

However, as I said in earlier posts, if I really couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the candidates/parties, I would do one of two things, either write "None of the Above" on the ballot form or stand myself.

I do believe an active non-vote is important as it is cannot be written off as apathy. Also, I do believe that we can all stand in we want to (certainly in local elections where there is no financial penalty for not winning a certain % of votes) and we can't expect others to do things we ourselves are not prepared for.

The alternative is not voting and letting others decide who run our institutions. I believe in those circumstances, people have lessened their right to moan about things as they have done nothing to make it better.
I think spoiling your vote is a waste of time, all it does is give those who count the votes a bit of a laugh but no one else really cares. And i wouldnt stand myself as i wouldnt want to be associated with the to55ers who do stand and one against 58 isnt going to do anything, it is the whole system that is broken and i dont have any experience of running a town or business this size.

I just get on my with my life the best i can and just accept that govt's and councils will change with the wind and adjust accordingly. Anyone who thinks they can make a difference would soon find out they cant. And would you really want to be associated with the muppet politicians who regularly post on here?????
I can respect your position but personally as said, I think if is better to try than not, even if pointless. I have to say that it is sad that someone such as yourself, who obviously cares, cannot bring themselves to engage. It underlines your point that the system is broken as you are clearly not alone.
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mug?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wildwestener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: A great day for Swindon as a whole. The likes of Mary Martin and Garry Perkins very comfortably winning in their wards should give many here some pause for though. It seems people still haven't forgiven Labour for destroying this country, and rightly so. Looking forward to the comments from our left-wing comrades today :)[/p][/quote]Just better make sure the Conservatives don't mess it up over the next 12 months then before the general election as generally voters have very short memories and tend to vote protests votes rather than actually what they want. With the low turn out clearly most people don't think its worth bothering as all sides are as useless as the others and in time it will swing back the other way and then back again like the tide. More of the same then.[/p][/quote]Despite my disagreement with you yesterday, I think you appear to be right that people just don't seem to feel it is worth bothering to vote (turnout expected to be 30%ish I gather). I wonder what you feel would make a difference to this? I'm genuinely interested to know as I can't personally imagine not voting but clearly am in a minority. Cheers[/p][/quote]The problem is Wildwestener, there isn't a political party that represents the majority of the people - ie. those on low wages. Labour are no longer a representation of the working classes (I'm referring to anyone who earns less then £25k pa.) You can't imagine not voting - what if none of the politicians represent you and/or your family? At best, you'll be choosing someone because they aren't quite as bad as the others. That for me would be Labour, who seem to hold their traditional voters in contempt, didn't even have a manifesto for the Euro elections (I couldn't find one - I found one for all the other major parties albeit UKIP's one ran to about 6 pages, had two posters in it and could have been wrote by a 5 year old) Milliband is a waste of space and hasn't got a clue. Why would you vote for someone who you don't believe in? Don't believe represents you? Don't believe will do a good job of running the council / EU?[/p][/quote]Firstly, I would never expect to agree with everything any candidate or party stands for. There is too much variety of opinion for that to happen; however, I can vote for someone who most closely represents my views. In these local elections, I was able to find such a party and voted accordingly. However, as I said in earlier posts, if I really couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the candidates/parties, I would do one of two things, either write "None of the Above" on the ballot form or stand myself. I do believe an active non-vote is important as it is cannot be written off as apathy. Also, I do believe that we can all stand in we want to (certainly in local elections where there is no financial penalty for not winning a certain % of votes) and we can't expect others to do things we ourselves are not prepared for. The alternative is not voting and letting others decide who run our institutions. I believe in those circumstances, people have lessened their right to moan about things as they have done nothing to make it better.[/p][/quote]I think spoiling your vote is a waste of time, all it does is give those who count the votes a bit of a laugh but no one else really cares. And i wouldnt stand myself as i wouldnt want to be associated with the to55ers who do stand and one against 58 isnt going to do anything, it is the whole system that is broken and i dont have any experience of running a town or business this size. I just get on my with my life the best i can and just accept that govt's and councils will change with the wind and adjust accordingly. Anyone who thinks they can make a difference would soon find out they cant. And would you really want to be associated with the muppet politicians who regularly post on here?????[/p][/quote]I can respect your position but personally as said, I think if is better to try than not, even if pointless. I have to say that it is sad that someone such as yourself, who obviously cares, cannot bring themselves to engage. It underlines your point that the system is broken as you are clearly not alone. Wildwestener
  • Score: 1

9:15pm Sat 24 May 14

Russell Holland says...

It was an interesting election.

I think that the Conservatives had success because we do try to run positive campaigns and point out our achievements. I am not saying anything is perfect or that we can be complacent about improvements but since the Conservatives took over things have improved.

Swindon went from being one of the worst Councils in the country to one of the fastest improving. Some of our work has featured in national best practice guidance and we have been nationally recognised for some our good work. We have invested in the town (and yes we have borrowed to do it) the central library, pinetrees community centre, several new schools to name a few. Now the economy is picking up the town centre regeneration is picking up again. We have the UTC which adds to our education sector.

We have had to make some difficult but necessary decisions in order to balance the budget during a time of significant reductions in public sector funding but we have rightly continued to prioritise the core statutory services around adult and children social care. Swindon Council tax is £94 lower than the national average and our debt levels are within the average levels. We are also a low funded Council. So the reality is that for all the criticism given our funding levels and tax levels we do a good job.

Labour ran a largely single issue campaign around green waste (with no long term costed plan) which was also negative in many respects.

The nature of the statutory services that Councils provide and the increased demand for those services coupled with reduction in funding available has significantly changed the scope of what local government can do.
It was an interesting election. I think that the Conservatives had success because we do try to run positive campaigns and point out our achievements. I am not saying anything is perfect or that we can be complacent about improvements but since the Conservatives took over things have improved. Swindon went from being one of the worst Councils in the country to one of the fastest improving. Some of our work has featured in national best practice guidance and we have been nationally recognised for some our good work. We have invested in the town (and yes we have borrowed to do it) the central library, pinetrees community centre, several new schools to name a few. Now the economy is picking up the town centre regeneration is picking up again. We have the UTC which adds to our education sector. We have had to make some difficult but necessary decisions in order to balance the budget during a time of significant reductions in public sector funding but we have rightly continued to prioritise the core statutory services around adult and children social care. Swindon Council tax is £94 lower than the national average and our debt levels are within the average levels. We are also a low funded Council. So the reality is that for all the criticism given our funding levels and tax levels we do a good job. Labour ran a largely single issue campaign around green waste (with no long term costed plan) which was also negative in many respects. The nature of the statutory services that Councils provide and the increased demand for those services coupled with reduction in funding available has significantly changed the scope of what local government can do. Russell Holland
  • Score: 3

5:37am Sun 25 May 14

ChannelX says...

house on the hill wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
LordCharles wrote:
It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.
Democracy is as many people voting as decide they want to vote.

When people don't get their own way, these days, they always tend to claim things aren't 'democratic'.

Democracy does not necessarily mean getting your own way.
thats a pretty stupid comment, everyone is different so there is no way on earth everyone would get their own way. For me i dont see that a system where we vote people in who can then pretty much do whatever "they" want is a democracy, so 59 people out of an adult population of around 120,000 actually decides what happens in Swindon, sorry thats not "democracy". And as many are now saying big business rules the world now and govts just do whatever they can to keep them happy. Far to many politicians take the job for their own benefit rather than caring about those who elected them anyway. A totally flawed system and why we have this farce everytime an election comes round.
Interesting, you claim my comment was 'stupid' - and then agree with it - and then go on to basically claim the opposite should be true.

How many people should decide what happens? 100? 1000? 10,000?

We have representative democracy. People stand for election and we vote for the one we hope will be best represent us. It's not a perfect system, but nobody has yet managed to come up with a better one.

Big business makes money - and money buys power. It's that simple.

But, remember, all the things people seem to like are paid for by big business, not governments. Governments don't have any money, they can only spend what we give them, and what we give them comes from... yup, the businesses that pay wages.
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordCharles[/bold] wrote: It is not a democracy when only 30 per cent of voters bother to turn out. That means 70 per cent don't care. So the voted in party only represent a portion of the 30 percent which did turn out, say half. So in reality the party voted in only represents 15 per cent of people who could have voted. They can run the council with only 15 per cent of the voting population. Minority rules. Not democracy.[/p][/quote]Democracy is as many people voting as decide they want to vote. When people don't get their own way, these days, they always tend to claim things aren't 'democratic'. Democracy does not necessarily mean getting your own way.[/p][/quote]thats a pretty stupid comment, everyone is different so there is no way on earth everyone would get their own way. For me i dont see that a system where we vote people in who can then pretty much do whatever "they" want is a democracy, so 59 people out of an adult population of around 120,000 actually decides what happens in Swindon, sorry thats not "democracy". And as many are now saying big business rules the world now and govts just do whatever they can to keep them happy. Far to many politicians take the job for their own benefit rather than caring about those who elected them anyway. A totally flawed system and why we have this farce everytime an election comes round.[/p][/quote]Interesting, you claim my comment was 'stupid' - and then agree with it - and then go on to basically claim the opposite should be true. How many people should decide what happens? 100? 1000? 10,000? We have representative democracy. People stand for election and we vote for the one we hope will be best represent us. It's not a perfect system, but nobody has yet managed to come up with a better one. Big business makes money - and money buys power. It's that simple. But, remember, all the things people seem to like are paid for by big business, not governments. Governments don't have any money, they can only spend what we give them, and what we give them comes from... yup, the businesses that pay wages. ChannelX
  • Score: 2

3:58pm Mon 26 May 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Personally I am glad see some change in the political world, there has been a need for change for some 20 years the fact it has been driven by this fool Farage is irrelevant.
Watching a 20 minute interview featuring him is comedy at best the hypocrisy in almost every statement would be funny if not so sad.

Once the personalities are taken from the situation what do UKIP stand for?
Other than anti immigration and to leave the EU what are UKIP`s plans? Given the strong ties to lega norda we can only assume they will be the new trade partners (as no alternative has been mentioned). UKIP constantly tell us about "they" in Europe who is "they"?

The British parliament being our elected reps have always upheld EU treaties and conditions of membership so exactly how and what laws are being forced upon us?

As UKIP have been so successful in Swindon and judging by the comments here I hope there may be someone that can answer some questions.
MY source for these questions is the UKIP website where there points made or raised but as far as I can see little or no support.
Spending freezes across education, there had been no suggestion as to when the freeze would stop or what will come in its place other than to free up funds.
"Defense" spending??? Exactly who do we need defending from and why does the country need an aircraft carrier? (Before you start they are not scheduled to be built in UK).
UKIP on Scots independence???

The point system to enter the UK? Would this also apply to people already living here?
Personally I am glad see some change in the political world, there has been a need for change for some 20 years the fact it has been driven by this fool Farage is irrelevant. Watching a 20 minute interview featuring him is comedy at best the hypocrisy in almost every statement would be funny if not so sad. Once the personalities are taken from the situation what do UKIP stand for? Other than anti immigration and to leave the EU what are UKIP`s plans? Given the strong ties to lega norda we can only assume they will be the new trade partners (as no alternative has been mentioned). UKIP constantly tell us about "they" in Europe who is "they"? The British parliament being our elected reps have always upheld EU treaties and conditions of membership so exactly how and what laws are being forced upon us? As UKIP have been so successful in Swindon and judging by the comments here I hope there may be someone that can answer some questions. MY source for these questions is the UKIP website where there points made or raised but as far as I can see little or no support. Spending freezes across education, there had been no suggestion as to when the freeze would stop or what will come in its place other than to free up funds. "Defense" spending??? Exactly who do we need defending from and why does the country need an aircraft carrier? (Before you start they are not scheduled to be built in UK). UKIP on Scots independence??? The point system to enter the UK? Would this also apply to people already living here? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

9:00pm Mon 26 May 14

FLOGGITLAD says...

Russell, did you know about the leasehold variation document, where the Oasis was leased to a company, then released to another one, and the council kept the charges under its own wing, and then claimed the money back from the 1st leaseholder, even if the payments were late, Im told only 5 councillors actually knew??. the council have given around £300K to uk broadband to provide broadband to the town, where firms like EE and Vodafone are tripping over to give it free, can you actually say, as of today, what we have got in trerms of broandband use from the firm to make way for that payment and is it true the final payment will be in the order of around 1.6 million we have given them??
Russell, did you know about the leasehold variation document, where the Oasis was leased to a company, then released to another one, and the council kept the charges under its own wing, and then claimed the money back from the 1st leaseholder, even if the payments were late, Im told only 5 councillors actually knew??. the council have given around £300K to uk broadband to provide broadband to the town, where firms like EE and Vodafone are tripping over to give it free, can you actually say, as of today, what we have got in trerms of broandband use from the firm to make way for that payment and is it true the final payment will be in the order of around 1.6 million we have given them?? FLOGGITLAD
  • Score: 1

9:49pm Mon 26 May 14

FLOGGITLAD says...

Badger, I presume by you remarks you didnt watch any of the farage\clegg interviews, when farage showed clegg up for the fool he is,
aircarft carriers, they are being built at this moment in Scotland, after being sub assembled around the country, we don't even have enough ships to provide full support for both of them to go to sea, so why did brown order them then, yes because his voters in Scotland got to build them so plenty of jobs..
points system yes if they are right then all those who are waiting or on standby for deportation should go on the points system and get put out when their number come sup.
Yes I know we have a load of brits living overseas, but they are not on the breadline like those coming into this country and claiming everything they can get their hands on..
When farage puts out his manifesto next year please look and then ask questions..
Badger, I presume by you remarks you didnt watch any of the farage\clegg interviews, when farage showed clegg up for the fool he is, aircarft carriers, they are being built at this moment in Scotland, after being sub assembled around the country, we don't even have enough ships to provide full support for both of them to go to sea, so why did brown order them then, yes because his voters in Scotland got to build them so plenty of jobs.. points system yes if they are right then all those who are waiting or on standby for deportation should go on the points system and get put out when their number come sup. Yes I know we have a load of brits living overseas, but they are not on the breadline like those coming into this country and claiming everything they can get their hands on.. When farage puts out his manifesto next year please look and then ask questions.. FLOGGITLAD
  • Score: 0

12:14pm Tue 27 May 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

FLOGGITLAD wrote:
Badger, I presume by you remarks you didnt watch any of the farage\clegg interviews, when farage showed clegg up for the fool he is,
aircarft carriers, they are being built at this moment in Scotland, after being sub assembled around the country, we don't even have enough ships to provide full support for both of them to go to sea, so why did brown order them then, yes because his voters in Scotland got to build them so plenty of jobs..
points system yes if they are right then all those who are waiting or on standby for deportation should go on the points system and get put out when their number come sup.
Yes I know we have a load of brits living overseas, but they are not on the breadline like those coming into this country and claiming everything they can get their hands on..
When farage puts out his manifesto next year please look and then ask questions..
Are you suggesting that questions should not be asked at the moment?
Clegg was and is incapable are you suggesting Farage should be in power because he spoke articulately compared to Clegg? I have no idea why that has any relevance here.

As you see it what exactly is the point system?
You stated questions should wait until Mr Farage`s manifesto is released next year, why?
Is the UKIP web site missing information?
[quote][p][bold]FLOGGITLAD[/bold] wrote: Badger, I presume by you remarks you didnt watch any of the farage\clegg interviews, when farage showed clegg up for the fool he is, aircarft carriers, they are being built at this moment in Scotland, after being sub assembled around the country, we don't even have enough ships to provide full support for both of them to go to sea, so why did brown order them then, yes because his voters in Scotland got to build them so plenty of jobs.. points system yes if they are right then all those who are waiting or on standby for deportation should go on the points system and get put out when their number come sup. Yes I know we have a load of brits living overseas, but they are not on the breadline like those coming into this country and claiming everything they can get their hands on.. When farage puts out his manifesto next year please look and then ask questions..[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting that questions should not be asked at the moment? Clegg was and is incapable are you suggesting Farage should be in power because he spoke articulately compared to Clegg? I have no idea why that has any relevance here. As you see it what exactly is the point system? You stated questions should wait until Mr Farage`s manifesto is released next year, why? Is the UKIP web site missing information? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree