![Challenge Entry: General election: Photoshop Labour [challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif)
From the General election: Photoshop Labour challenge. See all 346 entries (closed)
( , Fri 9 Apr 2010, 11:36, archived)

Gah! I'm annoyed that I have absolutely nothing to vote for - there is no working class alternative, The Greens are all pretty middle-class and quite mad, The Lib-Dems are New Labour/Tory Wannabes, The Monster Raving Loony Party don't even stand around here and you can't vote for the Anarchists... grrrr. politics what a fucking waste of a vote!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 11:48,
archived)

..and whoever wins the British public will still bend over and let the ruling party shaft us with the sandpaper glove as we ask for more.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 11:54,
archived)

is the people who tell you that if you don't vote you don't have an opinion or a right to voice an opinion - really? Because I'm pretty damn sure I have an opinion and I have a right to express my opinion regardless of my lack of voting choices. I'm just not quite so upfront about shoving my views and leaflets down other people's throats come election time!
Oh well I will just have to make do with the inevitable gloom of whatever party decides to tell me what to do for the next 4 years.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 11:59,
archived)
Oh well I will just have to make do with the inevitable gloom of whatever party decides to tell me what to do for the next 4 years.


voter apathy keeps the old boys network intact
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:03,
archived)

if you do vote you end up voting for the very 'old boys networks' they claim that your apathy is keeping intact!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:05,
archived)

of the country voted last time, so this government represents around a sixth of the people it governs. most people will say that voting for the main opposition is the only alternative, and their policies are virtually identical in that they advocate maintaing the status quo. the other candidates are written off because they'll never get in. while I don't believe that the lib dems or greens aren't part of the old boys, if more people would vote for a fringe party it would at least challenge the establishment to have to think a bit differently.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:17,
archived)

but they don't have a big enough support to stand more than 1 or 2 even with a Green/Socialist Alliance no more than 4 people throughout Sheffield and none of those stand in my Area. I will vote for the nearest to a Socialist agenda that I can else I won't even use my vote not even for Labour.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:23,
archived)

I won't vote for any party or candidate I don't want to see win. Even when voting strategically. Realistically, this means that I won't vote for anyone. But I bet I've spent more time researching the issues than the people who just vote for the same people they've always voted for, and often who their parents voted for as well, without putting in any thought whatsoever.
So at that point who is the apathetic one? :(
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:31,
archived)
So at that point who is the apathetic one? :(

you're basically saying "I don't want them to win, but I don't want the main alternative to win even more"
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:38,
archived)

Isn't that a worst waste of a vote than not voting?
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:45,
archived)

Voting for something/someone you don't agree with is pretty absurd
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:49,
archived)

spoil your ballot, vote for a fringe, stand yourself, blow up the polling office, anything else is better
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:50,
archived)

if a socialist alliance stands here I will vote for them if not then I have no vote.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:52,
archived)

as its recorded as a protest. not turning up at all just lumps you in statistically with those too stupid/lazy to have an opinion (when clearly you do)
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:54,
archived)

a good percentage of spoilt ballot papers are done by people who are just simply stupid - so in order to spoil mine I would have to do it with wit and intelligence "FUCK YOU CAMERONBROWN SHITE MONKEYS!" or something like that :D
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:59,
archived)

and can't be bothered Googling it.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 13:25,
archived)

Surely what you want is a party with no class. Er, you know what I mean.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:09,
archived)

The Normans, that's who. And I don't mean Barry.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:13,
archived)

for the Film reviews!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:18,
archived)

everybody else votes for their interests first so why should it be wrong for working-class people to put their interests first? The workers have had their rights stripped right to the bone and that causes the tensions that lead to strike actions erupting all over the UK. Give us decent pay and decent working conditions and we will be content.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:16,
archived)

...you try getting job in China for a year or two. Then come back and tell use what having "rights stripped right to the bone" really means.
There's much to be angry about in UK politics (digital economy bill, broadcast flag, ID cards/database, RIPA, EVCS/ISA etc), but I don't feel employees' rights is one of them.
As for putting ones one's interests (or one's principals) first; that's fine IMHO. That's how it is supposed to work isn't it? The elected body is an "average" of what the populace think? (Hopefully with some kind of protection for minority views). I know I will be voting for whomever I think will serve me best and has the closest match with my world-view.
[Which will b the least-bad candidate as always, and certainly not the twat-badger who got by name and address by abusing the electoral roll. Reminds me...snotty letter time]
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:30,
archived)
There's much to be angry about in UK politics (digital economy bill, broadcast flag, ID cards/database, RIPA, EVCS/ISA etc), but I don't feel employees' rights is one of them.
As for putting ones one's interests (or one's principals) first; that's fine IMHO. That's how it is supposed to work isn't it? The elected body is an "average" of what the populace think? (Hopefully with some kind of protection for minority views). I know I will be voting for whomever I think will serve me best and has the closest match with my world-view.
[Which will b the least-bad candidate as always, and certainly not the twat-badger who got by name and address by abusing the electoral roll. Reminds me...snotty letter time]

you do well standing heckling Trade Union Marches - if you're quick you can heckle some tomorrow in London!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:33,
archived)

They'll be fourth against the wall come the revolution.
They served a purpose once (maybe some still do), but most are simply fiefdoms for those in charge, they have really served their members well, haven't they? Look at the twonk they helped put in power!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:38,
archived)
They served a purpose once (maybe some still do), but most are simply fiefdoms for those in charge, they have really served their members well, haven't they? Look at the twonk they helped put in power!

if you don't cross a picket line and you're in the Union you are covered by their lawyers against getting the sack - if you're not in a Union and don;t cross a Picket-Line you have no cover at all. The Union beaucracy is corrupt but that doesn't mean the structure is unsound it just mean we have to work hard about changing the leadership. Unlike the Labour Party the structure is now throughly un-sound from to top to the bottom.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:51,
archived)

I'd cross the picket line quite happily. If my employer pisses me off enough (not that they do) then I'll simply go somewhere else. I am not in a union as you can probably guess.
I am confused by your last comment. The Labour Party is un-sound IMO, and I would say that unions are equally un-sound.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 13:02,
archived)
I am confused by your last comment. The Labour Party is un-sound IMO, and I would say that unions are equally un-sound.

the bureaucracy of the Union are un-sound no doubt as they are the same people who support the Labour party - we have to turn that around by seizing control of the Unions and bringing it back into democratic control. The Labour Party is too far gone for that ever to happen. The Unions need to stop supporting Labour and fund a working-class alternative.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 13:12,
archived)

( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 13:27,
archived)

or you're a selfish goit.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 13:20,
archived)

...if you waste it. Rather than moaning why not go and do something. As the saying goes:
"Those who can, do
Those who can't be arsed, moan about it on teh interwebs"
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:19,
archived)
"Those who can, do
Those who can't be arsed, moan about it on teh interwebs"

most of what that Martin Luther King did was just advanced moaning.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:25,
archived)

...he could moan in style.
Hmm...there may be a (weak) joke in there somewhere.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:31,
archived)
Hmm...there may be a (weak) joke in there somewhere.

a non-vote is no less effective than a vote - regardless of the way you vote. Sooner or later people will have to sit up and take note of why so many people are not using their votes, or do you really believe that it will get to a stage where Political Parties are gaining seats based on a very small fraction of the overall vote?
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:28,
archived)

...is IMHO more effective than a non-vote. You are saying "I have the will and wherewithal to vote, but there is no candidate for me".
Even better (assuming there genuinely is no one you feel you can vote for) would be to start your own campaign (or join an action/lobby group or whatever).
Moaning and not voting isn't really anything IMHO.
You are of course free to do as you wish (until some ass-hat makes that illegal 'n all)
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:34,
archived)
Even better (assuming there genuinely is no one you feel you can vote for) would be to start your own campaign (or join an action/lobby group or whatever).
Moaning and not voting isn't really anything IMHO.
You are of course free to do as you wish (until some ass-hat makes that illegal 'n all)

...is a fucking excellent idea!
Who can write the worst swear on a ballot paper and not get gaoled?
Or who can fill out their ballot in the most amusing manner and not get sectioned?
Now there is a compo!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:40,
archived)
Who can write the worst swear on a ballot paper and not get gaoled?
Or who can fill out their ballot in the most amusing manner and not get sectioned?
Now there is a compo!

changed the names to Betty Arsebiscuit and Norman Shit-Norman and drew a CDC on the bottom
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:43,
archived)

in advance and only if you achieve over 5% of the vote will you get your Deposit back. So there is a very real and tangible barrier to standing in elections which is why Socialist Groups find it so difficult to put up cnadidates - this isn't the land of the free!
And spoiling the ballot paper? - what does that actually prove? I've stood in local elections all the spolit papers are sorted in a pile of about a few dozen and the parties argue about what the "voter" was actually voting for so a percent of "spolit" papers are actually mis-used as votes under the idea the voter was too stupid to know how to put an X in a box!
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:43,
archived)
And spoiling the ballot paper? - what does that actually prove? I've stood in local elections all the spolit papers are sorted in a pile of about a few dozen and the parties argue about what the "voter" was actually voting for so a percent of "spolit" papers are actually mis-used as votes under the idea the voter was too stupid to know how to put an X in a box!

And I can see I will have to be very careful where I curl one out should I decide spoil my ballot.
Even if you can't stand yourself (or your group can't), then making your case to the other candidates is surely better than nothing. ("MLK advanced moaning" if you will)
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:48,
archived)
Even if you can't stand yourself (or your group can't), then making your case to the other candidates is surely better than nothing. ("MLK advanced moaning" if you will)

one person put "X" in every box but 1 and they took it that it was a vote for the one without the X - whether the voter actually intended that or was expressing some form of Proportional Representation will never be known - but it was decided what the vote was by a totally unelected group of people speculating on it's meaning. Probably better to smear poo on the ballot sheet they wouldn;t touch it then or they would assume it was a vote for Brown :D
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:57,
archived)

a few votes matter, and increase the chance of it ultimately becoming a relevant party... decades later. Except by the sound of it you don't even have a small, irrelevant party standing that's in any way attractive.
( ,
Fri 9 Apr 2010, 12:40,
archived)