Yesterdays elections
 

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

The count doesn't start until 9.30 this morning.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Cheers for that Bernard

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

According to HBC twitter, Tony Dobson held his seat. Some Labour gains elsewhere and apparently a bit of agro at the count :rolleyes:

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Accrington Observer | Accrington Observer - menmedia.co.uk
Looks like labour gained four

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

And one of those was my Ward. Glad i made the effort.:)

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Seems like having party politics at the local level does have the advantage of revealing the mood of the voters. I don't know if I'm correct, but I see them acting in the same way that the US mid term elections do ... as a comment on how well the ruling party (current administration) is doing. I was bored last nite, and a little stoned; so I followed the elections on the "Guardian" web site. Some things I found significant, foremost among them the size of the vote for the UKIP, even tho' it didn't translate into many seats. This seems to have goaded some tories in proposing that the party move further to the right.:rolleyes: This will probably not sit well with their coalition partners. Labour did well; however, it does appear that lots of voters voiced their displeasure by voting for a move to the right, rather than to (slightly) left of centre. The low voter turn out is also surprising, given the economic mess the country is in.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

I think most people are just fed-up and that translates into apathy, Eric.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Eric, voter turnout is falling all the time I would say - terminal apathy rules. Folks don't seem to understand that they need to get out there and make their voice heard. By the way I didn't vote - there was no election in my ward!

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Well it doesn't give the turnout but looking at the figures it seems to have been very low, lower than usual less than 1000 voting in St Andrews ward, its usually 50%+ in that ward

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

It's becoming more and more apparent, even at local level, that it no longer matters who is elected, as Europe are pulling all the strings when it comes to the governing of this once great country. Sad . . . but so very true.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Ya but I bet there would be a great turnout if it was for a referendum on whether we stayed in the European Union or pulled out, but our elected member stabbed us in the back in that issue

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

I looked at the twitter feed earlier in the day and recall reading 'the police have allowed a conservative councillor to re-enter the hall'. That entry is no longer there but there appears to have been some hassle.

EV Tel -
"10:56
Twitter
StuartPike78:
Drama at the #hyndburn count as pushing and shoving near a big group of men at front of hall. Disgraceful scenes. [via Twitter]"

and

"1:09
Twitter
StuartPike78:
Temperatures seem to have calmed down now after scuffle at the #hyndburn [via Twitter]"

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

I think the apathy is down to people feeling that whatever they vote won't influence what the political parties do(or perhap more relevently, don't do).
People feel that their vote makes no difference at all.

Their is very little difference between the three main parties. The electorate needs to be able to shake them up, out of their complacency...but I won't hold my breath waiting.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

No. I can't accept that. All generalizations are flawed;) Let's say we are talking about 70% of eligible voters who did not show up at the polls. To say that apathy ... terminal apathy ... is the sole cause just doesn't make sense to me. Assigning one, single cause is to ignore what might be a complex of reasons. One can counter that single generalization with a set of them. And come to a different conclusion which may or may not, in the opinion of a few, or maybe more than a few, explain the low turnout. The wealthy tend to vote, they have lots to protect; so, they vote for the party of the right which will best serve their interests. The educated tend to vote because they are aware not only of the issues, but also of the importance of voting. The middle classes will quite often vote because, although not as secure as the wealthy, they still have something to protect. The ones that don't vote are the ill- or under-educated, and the poor who are too busy struggling to get by to have any time to inform themselves about what is going on in politics. It seems that this large ... and becoming ever larger ... non-voting underclass may form, along with the truly apathetic and lazy, the non-voting mass. The policies of right-wing governments tend to push more and more people into this class. I'm not about to argue whether this is by accident or by design; but I do see that poverty and ignorance can combine with, perhaps even create, what seems to be an apathetic bloc.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Eric, in the last general election I didn't vote..or perhaps to be more precise I spoiled my paper. I did this because, in all conscience, there wasn't anyone I felt reflected my core values.
I wasn't too idle to go to the polling station...I had appraised myself of the various candidates who were up for election.......and found them all wanting.
I have many political discussions with my daughter - who tried her very best to get me to vote for someone rather than spoil my paper.
I felt that my vote would count for nothing, it would make no difference.

I have no political affiliation and support no party. At each election I try to weigh the candidates against my own values. I cannot see me putting a cross against any of them any time soon. But I might write 'none of the above'.
We need some major changes to shake the parties out of their complacency.
They need to start listening to the electorate, they need to start telling us(the electorate) the truth(rather than what they think we want to hear), they need to start living in the real world.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Indeed ... and this is a group I didn't mention ... it adds weight to the argument that there is more than apathy at the root of the low voter turnout.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

36.8% across the borough I think I saw

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Hmmm.. I think apathy is the root cause, the majority of people realise that local and national politics are seperate entities. However, it's ingrained in the English psyche, reinforced by the media, that local elections are a yardstick of public opinion on the incumbent government, and, lets be honest, more people read the redtops than the broadsheets.

Local politics is thus tied to National politics, and so most of the time the majority of the voting public vote for the party and not the best person for the job.

Having the local MP knocking on doors in an allegedly hotly contested ward (by party, not by personality) shows this to be true.

Logic also dictates that if this were not true then more independents would be voted in, and there would not have been such a backlash countrywide against the Libdems in these 'local' elections.

Therefore, some 65% of the local population cannot be 'arsed' (apathy), because some minority elected oik will eventually claim that 95% of the people agree with him.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

I think that party politicians like to make mileage out of the results of the local elections, despite the fact that the two animals are only very lightly yoked together.
It is just another excuse to employ media hype and sling insults at one another - it benefits no-one...and certainly not the electorate.
It is generally the case, that at the midterm of a government, local elections will show that the opposition party are favoured. This is often regardless of the policies implemented by the governing party.

Many people vote blindly for a political party in both local and general elections......regardless of who can best do the job...and who can best do the job has as much relevance in local elections (probably more relevance when I think about it) as it does in general elections.

If by some chance we could take party politics out of local elections then I think (just maybe) more would get done locally...there would be none of this 'walking out' of meetings because a party didn't agree with what the ruling party were proposing.
More work would get done, more results would be achieved...there would be less mud slinging and in-fighting.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

And that is precisely my point, you and I Margaret, are part of the 65% that see this, yet we either spoil or don't vote....apathy?

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

in my considered opinion, it isn't apathy.

I think the political parties fail to recognise how disaffected we are with their antics.
Or am I generalising here? I certainly feel disaffected.
I feel like the political parties do not recognise that I can see for myself, think for myself and make choices(provided that I am given something to make a choice on).
Currently the political parties are so similar, that in reality, there is no choice.

Career politicians are not out to improve the lot of the electorate...they are only in the job to line their own pockets, and ensure their own financial security for the future.
Many of them have never done a proper job of work. They know (and care) little about the struggles which are faced daily by the 'common man'(and I mean that in the most respectful way).

If voting really had any impact in changing things, they would stop us from doing it.
They promise much but deliver little.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

You are dead right ... It isn't apathy. And the argument that Guiness puts foreward is flawed, right from its beginning. Anyone who is aware of the issues, the difference between municipal and national politcs, and, in general, what's happening politicaly is most certainly not apathetic, as he or she has taken the time to assess the issues. In other words, we have an informed voter who chooses not to vote. Apathy is "I don't give a flying you-know-what as long as the beer is cold and the tv works".

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

That's poor really, but when only just over 60% voted in the GE its only to be expected, the only thing is if you don't register a vote you can't really complain, the best way to protest is to go and spoil your ballot paper

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Towns like Accrington are dying, not entirely due to the economy, but more to the lack of leadership from the succession of self-interested parties that past elections have spawned. 'None of the above' has been my electoral mantra at both local and national level for some years past and, until given an affirmative response to the electorate's need for a referendum on our continued membership of the EU., I see no reason to alter my stance - however negative that may seem to some. The current Tory party is none but a shadow compared with it's historical counterparts; The Lib-Dems hardly rate a mention, and Labour is a leopard that changes it's spots to suit whatever opportunity falls into it's lap - and now we hear that the mass murderer Blair is chancing his arm again. Lord help us all!!!

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

There must be some money in it for Blair to rear his head again, he only goes to the highest bidder

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

There's only one place for Blairs head, Jaysay, apart from his own backside - unfortunately the block at the Tower of London was reduced to a museum piece a long time ago

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Tony Blair couldn't even lie straight in bed. The contemptible man!

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

I doubt that anyone could lie straight in any bed that was occupied by his equally contemptible wife. The sight of the leeching bitch sends shivers down my spine.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Yes, I'm sure she would look at you like a crocodile anticipating a tasty lunch...a caricature of a woman - they are well matched and would each spoil another couple.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Came across her once with her father in Clitheroe. Had nightmares about it for weeks after.

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Ya Stumped, but she still considers herself as a socialist:eek:

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Oh you mean that scouse git:D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Alf Garnet had the right idea about him!

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

DinG will think you are talking about some of his players:D:D:D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Won't be many though will it?:D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

There's only two, and one of them was a Everton Supporter:D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Bluddy 'ell ! It's the 3 Amigos ! :rolleyes: :D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Ya Dave, Hear All, See All, and say nout:rolleyes::D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Since when did Amigo mean grumpy old man? :rolleyes:

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Hoy we're not grumpy we're mature, ya cheeky young whipper snapper:D

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Semantics my friend..apathy, informed apathy, assessed apathy, whatever....I don't give a flying you-know-what because my vote don't matter, they're all cut from the same cloth so I'll just pour another cold one and not bother braving the Lancashire rain...apathy

Re: Yesterdays elections
 

Some years ago I was talking to a chap who had only just got involved in local politics and he couldn't understand why people were saying on the doorstep that they weren't voting for anyone, the reason is I told him they're just not interested, that was in the days of around 50% turnouts at the locals, what they're saying now:confused:, I'm glad I'm well out of it especially when you get threatening PMs from MPs:rolleyes: