heckler

Beleaguered, Belaboured

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Fri, 06 May 2005 12:35:00 +0100

05/05/05 will not so much go down in history, but rather sink into its murky depths - a uniquely unremarkable election.

It was an vote that was never destined to say YES to anything, but had the potential to say an overwhelming NO to Tony Blair, New Labour and George W Bush. And in fact Labour has been returned to power on the lowest share of the vote ever, with nearly two-thirds of people voting against them.

Vote Share

And it could have been much worse for Tony if more people had voted based on their opinions rather than their fears. Personally I think Blair should be shot for frightening people away from voting for the Liberal Democrats. The Conservatives were never going to win a majority - no matter how many people voted against Labour. The absolute worst that could have happened is a hung parliament with Labour requiring Lib Dem support on issues of confidence and supply, and all bills only being passed by genuine consensus. In my opinion that would have been the absolute best outcome for this country.

It's clearly time for electoral reform in the UK. This outdated first-past-the-post, two-party, semi-democratic system is patently not giving the people of Britain the government they want.

Imagine if the pie-chart above was not only the distribution of votes, but also the distribution of seats in the Commons. Not only would Tony Blair be out on his ear, but his party would need the support of the either the Tories or more likely the Lib Dems to pass any new legislation. No more outrageous bills being passed only because too few Labour MPs were willing to rebel.

Intelligent Debate

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Wed, 04 May 2005 12:30:37 +0100

(click to enlarge)

Threshold For Fraud

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:31:40 +0100

According to this article electoral officers have been told to contact police if anyone brings more than 5 postal ballots in to a polling station.

In other words, voting 5 times is OK, but 6 times is fraud.

Why would anyone have any reason to bring postal ballots into a polling station in the first place? Isn't the point of postal voting that you vote by post? This misguided attempt to allay fears of electoral fraud is actually an indication of just how widespread the authorities expect the problem to be. So much so that they are going to be able to go after the big-time cheats who are foolish enough to show up in person to present their stash of stolen votes.

Vote Against War

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 14:10:00 +0100

Many Britons would prefer to forfeit their vote in the UK general election in exchange for a vote in the US presidential elections, because they believe the outcome of the US election has more impact on ther lives.

But people in the UK can vote against Bush. They can vote against the war in Iraq. And they must vote against possibile futures wars in Iran, Syria and North Korea by voting against Tony Blair, against Labour (and against the Tories).

Bush's "coalition of the willing" is falling apart, as one-by-one all the governments which supported the war against the wishes of the voters are being forced to withdraw their troops. The only ally that ever gave the coalition a semblance of credibility was the UK. Without British support, or should I say, Blairish support, it would have been very difficult for George to justify going into Iraq to the American people. Imagine him trying to speak of an international coalition if Poland was the second biggest contributor of troops.

By voting for an anti-war government in the UK, you have a chance to make the World a more peaceful place.

The Attorney General's Advice

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 14:01:19 +0100

(click to enlarge)

Which Devil Do You Know?

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Sun, 24 Apr 2005 14:04:33 +0100

OK, Margaret Thatcher was a cunt.

There's no point disputing that, or the damage that she and her Conservative government did to this country during the 1980s. But consider the fact that many other western countries suffered under similar rape-and-pillage, restructure-and-privatise regimes during the same period. Consider also the fact that since there's nothing left to sell at home, Tony Blair is supporting the exact same policies being imposed on developing nations, threatened with the sharp trident of US foreign policy, the World Bank and the IMF.

Now please don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating a Conservative government.

I'm just saying that if you're reluctant to vote against Labour because you don't want to risk the Tories coming into power, you should really think long and hard about what it is that you're afraid of. If it's Maggie, well obviously she's out of the picture. And Michael Howard? I mean seriously, what kind of whimpering wet blanket tyrant would he make? And anyway, what outrageous, unthinkable right-wing agenda is left for him to indulge after Tony's Three-Term Circus?

Perhaps you're thinking: "better the devil you know". But is Tony Blair really that devil? Isn't it in fact the case that Michael Howard is the devil you know? The predictable, close-minded, old-fashioned, old-school conservative? While on the other hand, doesn't Tony Blair keep surprising you? Has he not proved himself to be an unpredictable, unreliable, unaccountable puppet to big business, big bucks and baby Bush?

Why does New Labour policy smell of neo-conservatism?

I believe that if everyone who is unhappy with Hard Labour, and unwilling to revert to Tory rule were to put aside their fear of a Tory win and vote Liberal Democrat, Plaid Cymru or SNP as appropriate, we would end up with a genuinely left-wing coalition in power in this country. In turn, that might pave the way for a more representative model of government and in any case would teach Blair and his wannabes that this cavalier form of elected dictatorship is simply not acceptable to the people of the UK.

Protest Vote

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:42:58 +0100

Time for an analogy:

Democracy is like a muscle - if you don't exercise it, it'll shrivel up and fall off

So instead of thinking about the other parties (because really, what's the difference?) think of this election as a true-or-false question:
(please excuse me for presuming to know your answer)

Tony Blair is an honest and trustworthy leader who respects and obeys the will of the electorate. He has my best interests at heart, as well as those of my family and of the people of the United Kingdom.
True
False

Because face it, that's what this election is really about.

We know all campaign promises are calculated lies, so ignore them. There are only two possible outcomes on election day. Either Tony Blair gets back in with a winner-by-default mandate that encourages him to take the UK further down the totalitarian, neo-conservative trail being blazed by the US, or he gets rolled and politicians the whole world over are put on notice.

Demographic Divisions Declared

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:39:31 +0100

(click to enlarge)

Restrictive Registration

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:45:00 +0100

In many countries a person can register to vote right up until the day of the election. In the UK however, voter registration closed more than a month before the date of the election was even announced. The effect of this is that many of those people that marketers like to call "marginalised", and that bad governments know and fear as "protest voters" will not have their voices heard on election day.

If ever there was an election where protest votes could spell the difference between an indifferent re-election and an indignant de-election, it's this one, so I'm urging all registered voters to become protest voters.

Election Scare Tactics

noreply@blogspirit.com (heckler) — Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:25:02 +0100

(click to enlarge)