The gang of how many?

[al_yrpal]

I went to the first meeting of the SDP when it was formed. The meeting was full of windbag nutters, I never joined. In the grand scheme of things it eventually disappeared without trace which is what will happen to the sideshow now emerging. Unfortunately a Labour Party with a huge membership of Trots is now unelectable so we are stuck with unstable incompetent Tories. Without doubt the worse political mess of my lifetime.

Al

[bovlomov]

The Tory members jumping to join the Labour ones tells me all I need to know about the values of both. They were all elected on party manifestos, if they no longer believe in them they should stand for election on what they do believe.

Ken Clark answered that a couple of weeks ago. To paraphrase: the manifesto was a load of rubbish that was produced by some backroom spads a couple of weeks before the election. He was never sent a copy. The government junked large parts of it within days.

Ken Clarke seems affable enough but he's never been a big influence on my political thinking.

Nor mine, but that was his answer. He has a point.

[Spinners]

Rightly or wrongly, there's no requirement in our current system to do so and it seems entirely consistent with their reasons for breaking away that they would prefer to deal with issues of the day that they feel their former parties are failing to address correctly, instead of wasting time fighting unnecessary elections - we had one unnecessary timewasting election recently and it feels like another may be along shortly.

That'll be wrongly then. The only thing consistent is their own vanity and utter contempt for the people who elected them. They might all want to reflect on that... between soundbites to the eager media of course.

Surely these brave MPs are staying sincere to what they said to the people who elected them when they feel that their party isn't?

Accusations of them being vain and contemptful are libellous unless you've evidence for each and every one of them. Have you?

I'll ignore the last part as AFAIK I am allowed to express an opinion on anyone and anything. (Forum going downhill? There's a good example of why).

I really don't consider them brave but accept your right to hero worship them.

[Cunobelin]

The Tory members jumping to join the Labour ones tells me all I need to know about the values of both. They were all elected on party manifestos, if they no longer believe in them they should stand for election on what they do believe.

Massive assumption.

There is a large proportion of voters who vote for an individual reason rather than a Party.

It is naive to suggest otherwise and disrespects those who vote in that way

[mercalia]

The Tory members jumping to join the Labour ones tells me all I need to know about the values of both. They were all elected on party manifestos, if they no longer believe in them they should stand for election on what they do believe.

Massive assumption.

There is a large proportion of voters who vote for an individual reason rather than a Party.

It is naive to suggest otherwise and disrespects those who vote in that way

Maybe but I bet many vote for the party. or dont vote for the other one. My MP is Helen Hayes, dont know much about her she is new I think

[dodger]

I wish my local MP, Sherrell Murray, would resign. So much for MPs representing all of their constituents. She is a prime example of the far right of the Tory Party. Her voting record is shameful on the rights of ordinary voters.
But, she must be pleasing a fair number, since she got in with a large majority. Come back Colin Breed, our previous and excellent Lib Dem MP. A man who voted with his conscience for the benefit of all constituents.
There's bound to be some egos at work with these 11, but in the main they seem to be acting with regret and only doing so in order to get their leaders to listen.
Wouldn't it be amazingly good to see a large group of MPs actually considering the needs of the peoples of Britain and fighting to get the best for all, not just their chosen mates, be they far right or far left.
It's pointless voting for parties based on their manifestos (Lib Dems on tuition fees for example). They just use these as way of getting in to power then do what they want.
Let's have more Sarah Wollastons. A clear, compassionate thinker with a conscience. If the voters of Totnes push her out she's very welcome here.

[bovlomov]

Maybe but I bet many vote for the party. or dont vote for the other one.

Many (most?) people vote for the party, in that they would vote for a monkey if the rosette is the correct colour. That's their choice, and usually the successful candidate goes on to dutifully vote along party lines for as long as they are in Parliament. It's exactly how the party managers like it.

It doesn't have to be like that though, and it isn't how our electoral system is designed. The occasional rogue MP reminds us that we are actually voting for an individual, for better or for worse, loyal or disloyal to the party.

[Tangled Metal]

Well it seems I'm wrong. There's people voting for individuals up and down the countries. I personally can't see that being productive.

We have a political system where to get things done in parliament you need a majority of MPs from one of the parties. Since the system is set up with a whipping in procedure among the parties. This has a series of levels from free vote to three line whip. It is the way the parties get laws and policies through.

This also means individual MPs block vote. Except for the few rebels which are usually long standing MPs who get voted in for who they are a much as which party.

So where does voting for the individual gets you. Could you get a member of the awkward squad? Could you get 5 a toe the line mp? Whatever the case does your decision making process matter? One side wins and they get 5 years of pushing their policies whether in their manifestos or not. Or they used to do.

BTW if I voted for the mp of have the choice of a few nondescript individuals who are too vanilla to do anything but present party lines. Tory nice but dim who generally toes party lines. So he voted against tory lines when he voted against investigations into Iraq war. Against party lines when he voted against same sex marriage. Just two examples.

Labour candidate is a Councillor from some distance away who has a 44% attendance at meetings she was expected at. Of those she attended it seems she had to declare an interest in the topic of the meeting, rather too many prejudicial interests too. Sounds a great potential labour mp right?

LibDems candidate was a Councillor in the neighbouring council. At least he's a local ish representative and he has a very high attendance when expected. He also had very few registered interests. Basically his only interest was his employment as a manager of a Christian bookstore for a Christian charity. That's interesting because he mp for his home constituency is the well known (joke) former leader of his party and known / committed Christian. The LibDems in South lakes seem to be full of Christians.

Whatever the case if I was to vote for an individual I think I would abstain. If you have better candidates then lucky you.

I guess that's a factor. Good candidates you can vote for then you might choose on that basis. Without any candidates that can grab your vote then you'll look nationally to party policies.

[Cugel]

Get real! You vote for the politics of a party. The candidate stands under the policies of their party. Always has had that at its heart of it didn't then why don't you get a candidate's manifesto. You get summaries of the party one often with your candidate's mugshot added to it.

...(snip).

This is the case. Back benchers rarely have or exert any power whatsoever, on their own behalf or those they supposedly represent.

Logic, then, informs us that if there is no political party that has a manifesto or policy document containing policies we as individuals wish for, it becomes difficult to decide who to vote for. If all parties have policies that are actively against those an individual would wish for, the decision about who to vote for is even harder. In practice, one ends up voting against the worst party by voting for the not-quite-so-worse party.

For these reasons, I've rarely voted. In practice, all political parties in Britain of recent decades have had policies that, from my point of view, are equally as bad. They all promote mad "growth", consumerism and planet-rape. They all support property laws that give huge advantages to those already enjoying them whilst making paupers and peasants of those unlucky enough to be born un-propertied. What happened to Attlee, eh? My generation were very lucky to have him give us all a leg up. Subsequent generations have not had that advantage and are now being actively impoverished and demeaned in large numbers.

But I digress.

When I have voted it's always been in the hope that voting for X will prevent an awful Y from getting in (or rather, the awful party of Y). For example, I did vote for New Labour in the hope that the dreadful Tories of the time would lose power. (They did, only for New Labour to prove a Thatcherism clone. Doh!).

I voted against leaving the EU only because I fear the fragmentation of Europe and a return to the international conditions of the first half of the C20th - rabid nationalism only this time with nuclear arms. I didn't feel it was a vote for all the poor behaviours of the EU but only a vote against the very likely worse behaviours of a lot of crazed Jingoists, nationalists and populists.

Cugel

[Tangled Metal]

Negative voting? Vote against something not for something. As valid as any other way.

[PH]

The Tory members jumping to join the Labour ones tells me all I need to know about the values of both. They were all elected on party manifestos, if they no longer believe in them they should stand for election on what they do believe.

Massive assumption.

There is a large proportion of voters who vote for an individual reason rather than a Party.

It is naive to suggest otherwise and disrespects those who vote in that way

Zero assumption. I never claimed every voter voted that way because of a manifesto, but it's a simple matter of fact that every candidate presented their party's manifesto to the electorate.

[Debs]

Negative voting? Vote against something not for something...

This was quoted by Chuka Umunna who said far too many of us feel the need to do.

Apparently it's a symptom of our broken political system

[bovlomov]

... but it's a simple matter of fact that every candidate presented their party's manifesto to the electorate.

And I don't suppose a single MP agrees with everything written in the manifesto, especially if some of the pledges are mutually incompatible. For example, the Tory manifesto makes a big deal out of economic strength. Now that has been abandoned, I'm not sure how an MP could both support the party's Brexit strategy and the honour the manifesto.

Anyway, in this case the election was called at the last minute and the manifesto was published long after the candidates were selected. It was a done deal by the time they saw it.

It would be nice to think that manifestos were respected documents, but they aren't. It's reasonable for the individual voter to feel aggrieved about that, but it is utter hypocrisy for the party leaders to complain, given their own attitude to manifesto pledges.

[Tangled Metal]

Manifestos never get followed once in power. I always thought it was a rough guideline for what they would like to do. Often they get into government (if first term) not really knowing the whole situation. Hence the labour treasury guy leaving that note about no more money. So how can they really get Everything in their manifesto right before getting their foot in the door?

Office of budget responsibly has probably helped the information to the opposition parties but I'd still treat manifestos as a guideline. It's possibly the best guideline we have to decide who to vote?

[merseymouth]

Hi Boviomov, "A monkey getting voted in if the rosette is the right clour"? Certainly, but not in Hartlepool!
As for being stuck with a waste of space member? Mine is Luciana "One Issue" Berger! Even when speaking about Brexit she manages to drag Anti-Semitism into the debate?
I've known a fair few of our local M.P.'s over the years, some I may disagree with but still respected, but most sadly do it to avoid work.
The ceasless boundary changes have managed to manipulate the electorial voting patterns, especially in cities such as Liverpool.
Even worse must be "Brand Theft"? New Labour .
Few travel under real colours. TTFN MM