National News Official 2019 General Election Thread

[Essexyellows]

Living in area where the Tories have a 40000 majority, anyone let me know what the point of voting is?

Voting is the point of voting.
I live in an area where Labour can field a monkey in a suit and it would get elected.
I still vote because I then have engagement with the process and the right to moan, whinge and mumble!

 

[m]

...having lived longer than others, the potential to have experienced more grows exponentially.

Of course age does bring the opportunity for greater experience - no-one should argue with that.

But exponentially more? How do you justify that statement?!

 

[Peterdev]

Voting is the point of voting.
I live in an area where Labour can field a monkey in a suit and it would get elected.
I still vote because I then have engagement with the process and the right to moan, whinge and mumble!

My point is though unless you live in marginal constituencies your vote is counted but serves no useful purpose

 

[Manorlounger]

Of course age does bring the opportunity for greater experience - no-one should argue with that.

But exponentially more? How do you justify that statement?!

Quite simple, really. The longer one has lived, the greater the exposure, ergo the more you have experienced, the more you will experience related to those past experiences.

No rocket science there.

 

[m]

Quite simple, really. The longer one has lived, the greater the exposure, ergo the more you have experienced, the more you will experience related to those past experiences.

No rocket science there.

Sorry, I don't buy that for a second.

You can (and should) accumulate more experience, but your capacity to do this will not grow larger each year.

 

[Manorlounger]

Sorry, I don't buy that for a second.

You can (and should) accumulate more experience, but your capacity to do this will not grow larger each year.

Why not?

 

[m]

Why not?

Because the brain does not become x times larger. Because the days do not become x times longer.

 

[Peterdev]

I’ve always done that Pete, except when I was abroad in 2001. It was a huge majority for the Tories last time and you are right it was around 28000, one of the largest in the country.
From memory I voted Green before. UKIP had a discredited candidate called Robert Blay who made the headlines because he threatened the Conservative candidate because he was Sri Lankan I understand. Having met them both before the Tory was the decent one.
The Liberal had done a lot of work locally but he was never destined to win.
The Monster Raving Looney candidate who stood was probably the most sensible one.
i think the voting system is blatantly unfair but it won’t be changed while the two main parties hold sway.
Whilst I will most likely vote it just seems a wasted effort as it will just be a statistic in Whittaker’s Almanack

 

[Peterdev]

Just seen an editorial letter.All politicians are good for is kicking cans down the road.

 

[Gary Baldi]

How do we ensure 50 year old know what they're voting for?

I know... Such a fuss has been made about people knowing what they voted for in the referendum, it's almost a sarcastic point as unless you physically sit every person in a room, you can't be sure who knows what. And then you need to decide what information they are given and what slant it has. Until we can educate the current voting pool, do we need to add to it? And how long do we educate people for?

 

[Essexyellows]

It would be good if the Conservatives could return a healthy 330+ seats.

As long as their vote doesn`t get split/fragmented by a one trick pony of a party its the only risk I can see.

I can`t see the Conservative voter being put off by a bit of rain or cold, unlike the "yooff" vote.

The prospect of another hung parliament with indecisive alliances of Lab/Libdem/Green/et al forming a majority won`t change the stagnation.

 

[Manorlounger]

Because the brain does not become x times larger. Because the days do not become x times longer.

Both statements factually incorrect but don't worry, I've given up on explaining a simple post on here. Move on.

 

[Gary Baldi]

It would be good if the Conservatives could return a healthy 330+ seats.

As long as their vote doesn`t get split/fragmented by a one trick pony of a party its the only risk I can see.

I can`t see the Conservative voter being put off by a bit of rain or cold, unlike the "yooff" vote.

The prospect of another hung parliament with indecisive alliances of Lab/Libdem/Green/et al forming a majority won`t change the stagnation.

And with the yoof vote, it's where they will be living if they are students and if they will get out in the numbers like they did last time.

I see Farage is playing his only gambit, but how many people will it convert?

Until the manifestos come out, no one will have a feel for what people's thoughts and feelings are. The Tories can't run a more incompetent campaign than they did last time, and did Corbynism reach it's peak in 2017?

 

[m]

Both statements factually incorrect but don't worry, I've given up on explaining a simple post on here. Move on.

Sorry, no!

You're going to have to explain how days get longer and the brain multiplies in size!


Do you even know what exponential means?

 

[Manorlounger]

Sorry, no!

You're going to have to explain how days get longer and the brain multiplies in size!


Do you even know what exponential means?

Good grief.
A 24 hour period is applied to the time it takes the planet to orbit the sun. As both are slowing down, days are getting longer. Don't worry, you won't notice.

Brain activity and development increases upwards until around the mid thirties although that has not been set as a limit, just a guide. If you want to refer to the physical size of the brain as an indication of the amount of knowledge stored, then that is a different matter, and you would be wrong. The capacity of the brain is far greater than most, if not all of us, would ever need or use. And, actually, it has been shown that the size of the human brain has increased through evolution driven by, as one factor at least, the increase in available knowledge.

The phrase "multiply in size" may not fit with what you are trying argue but, that is not what I said in the first place and, is irrelevant to my original argument so, I don't feel any compulsion to discuss it further.

And, yes, I do know what exponential means. That's why I used it.

 

[IsleofWightYellow]

Very good thread this.
i don’t trust the Tories as they had a major part in increasing the retirement age. Usually the male partner is older and may well struggle to even retire at 66 and support his wife. The cut off was done in such a way that you were unfortunate if you were just a bit younger than your school friends enjoying Retirement benefits before you...at least I can enjoy OUFC ticket prices cheaper from March.
Unfortunately Labour have made their intentions pretty clear. Nationalise the utilities at great cost etc etc all at great cost and not fully budgeted. Many potential voters, including myself see McDonnell waiting in the wings and I’m sure that, pardon the pun, terrorises voters.
Meanwhile Jo Swinson has all the attributes of a new primary school teacher whose sole intention is to repeal A50 and attract the anti brexit vote. Describing herself as the next prime minister, the mind boggles.
For the first time I’m seriously considering spoiling my ballot paper.
Living in area where the Tories have a 40000 majority, anyone let me know what the point of voting is?

I agree with you - it’s the problem with the ridiculous, outdated first past the post system. Plus, if you live in one of the largest constituencies, like the IOW, your vote counts for less and you are less represented than someone in one of the smallest.

What would be better is a system where we have two votes - one for a local council who can decide on local issues, and then a ‘General’ election done on a proportional representation system where you vote for a party rather than a specific MP (as most people do anyway when they vote) and then depending on the % of votes, that party gets that amount of seats. They can then choose the candidates they want to put in those seats.

 

[m]

Good grief.
A 24 hour period is applied to the time it takes the planet to orbit the sun. As both are slowing down, days are getting longer. Don't worry, you won't notice.

Brain activity and development increases upwards until around the mid thirties although that has not been set as a limit, just a guide. If you want to refer to the physical size of the brain as an indication of the amount of knowledge stored, then that is a different matter, and you would be wrong. The capacity of the brain is far greater than most, if not all of us, would ever need or use. And, actually, it has been shown that the size of the human brain has increased through evolution driven by, as one factor at least, the increase in available knowledge.

The phrase "multiply in size" may not fit with what you are trying argue but, that is not what I said in the first place and, is irrelevant to my original argument so, I don't feel any compulsion to discuss it further.

And, yes, I do know what exponential means. That's why I used it.

24 hours is actually the time it takes the Earth to rotate on it's axis but never mind. This is indeed slowing.

Wouldn't argue with your other paragraph - not my area of expertise.

Neither of the above are exponential functions however.

I've attempted to give reasons why human experience can't be assumed to grow exponentially.

You have given no reasons why it can, other than repeating your original statement using slightly more words.

For the sake of the rest of humanity I too am willing to draw a line under this.

 

[Navegante]

Quite simple, really. The longer one has lived, the greater the exposure, ergo the more you have experienced, the more you will experience related to those past experiences.

No rocket science there.

Surely more of a bell curve growth, rather than exponential?

 

[chuckbert]

If this election ends up with a messily split vote (tory, ukip, labour, libdems+) and a bit of a random result, maybe it will actually end in electoral reform. I've always been a bit critical of the Aussie single-transferable-vote as a kind of PR that turns into FPTP, but looking at the UK now I can see the value: it actually helps make sense of split votes. I'm too lazy to do any analysis, but I guess that the tories would have struggled a fair bit in recent years because Labour/Lib Dem preferences would have probably put Labour into power. Right now it would probably stop people worrying about whether the Brexit party might split the vote or the Remain party (aka Lib Dems) might split the vote.
Why's Britain scared of trying electoral reform given the shocking state of parliament for the last 3 years?

 

[Sarge]

apparently English Heritage have published a handy guide for ex PMs? .......