May the seventh will soon be with you.

[cee-dee]

We've had May the fourth.....

Not long to go now and it'll all be over............ but will it?

The horse trading is likely to begin BUT, you can stop it. How?:-

First, go out and VOTE. Secondly vote for one of the two "main parties".

All these minor parties are going to do is to disrupt things and cause trouble.

OK, you're going to say "We live in a democracy". Sure, we do....

Now if there's no strong Government (with one or other of the two main parties) running the show, these minor troublemakers will attempt to blackmail the main party of their choice in order to gain ministerial jobs and influence any proposed changes in legislation for their own ends.

That's hardly democratic? A minority comprised of disaffected turncoats having far more influence than they deserve is not the way things ought to be.

Soooooo, do the right thing, get out there and vote, vote, vote for one of the main parties.

[cee-dee]

Well now, the Eighth is with us, it's all over and as far as England's concerned and surprise surprise, it seems people certainly heeded the warnings about minor parties holding the balance of power and voted strongly instead.

There had been calls for the scrapping of the £500 deposit required to stand in a Parliamentary election but I think it should be raised to at least £5,000 to deter idiotic "candidates" who, although adding humour but presenting no threat to "major" Parties, nevertheless cause disruption and expense to the proceedings.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Well now, the Eighth is with us, it's all over and as far as England's concerned and surprise surprise, it seems people certainly heeded the warnings about minor parties holding the balance of power and voted strongly instead.

There had been calls for the scrapping of the £500 deposit required to stand in a Parliamentary election but I think it should be raised to at least £5,000 to deter idiotic "candidates" who, although adding humour but presenting no threat to "major" Parties, nevertheless cause disruption and expense to the proceedings.

---

How would raising the deposit help democracy? - Simple answer is it wouldn't.  We would be very unlikely to ever see an independent candidate again!

In my opinion we should be encouraging a departure from the "Party System" not preventing it. 

It's not only independent candidates that would be affected though - how many fewer Lib Dem candidates would there have been if instead of losing £170,000 in lost deposits that figure was raised to £1,700,000?

http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/clegg-quits-as-party-faces-170k-hit-on-lost-deposits/a8136...

[tommy.irene]

http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/niallodowd/The-end-of-the-United-Kingdom-foretold-after-Scottish...

The end of the United Kingdom foretold after Scottish vote

[cee-dee]

Take a look at the list of the various factions here:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results

If the deposits were higher, they might think twice (or more) about standing where they've no hope.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Take a look at the list of the various factions here:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results

If the deposits were higher, they might think twice (or more) about standing where they've no hope.

---

If 'no hope' of being elected were the criteria for whether or not a potential candidate should be financially disuaded from standing then we'd only have a single candidate in over 400 seats!

History shows that the vast majority of independent candidates have 'no hope' of winning - that is not an argument to limit the choice of the electorate to candidates chosen by the big parties.

If we are going to limit candidates to either those who are members of one of the big parties or to those who can personally afford to lose £5,000 the loser will be democracy - much better in my opinion if each candidate should have to present a list of 100 registered voters, in the ward/constituency they are standing in, who are willing to nominate them - although personally I prefer the current system as it stands.

[cee-dee]

Look at it like this, if it was the democratic right of every horse owner with no prospects to enter the Grand National unrestricted and for free, the field would be crammed with any old neglected nag. So it would be with a parliamentary election.

Time to thrash out the chaff and ensure that prospective candidates put their money where their mouth is.

[joe_bloggs*]

Best i think to change the system so only the landed gentry can vote,thereby eradicating all these piddling little troublesome minor political parties,surely our betters will keep our interests at heart

Gawd bless yer guv'nor

[artwisemills]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Well now, the Eighth is with us, it's all over and as far as England's concerned and surprise surprise, it seems people certainly heeded the warnings about minor parties holding the balance of power and voted strongly instead.

There had been calls for the scrapping of the £500 deposit required to stand in a Parliamentary election but I think it should be raised to at least £5,000 to deter idiotic "candidates" who, although adding humour but presenting no threat to "major" Parties, nevertheless cause disruption and expense to the proceedings.

---

Sorry CD, I've not responded sooner, as you can tell by the limited number of postings I make my life does not centre around these boards.

I rarely comment but when I read such utter rubbish - and I reiterate to expect everyone to vote only for the two main parties in the interest of 'not causing disruption' is the maddest thing I have ever read on here!

This election has proved nothing more than the vast majority of voters were afraid of the SNP having a direct influence on government in the UK - and this was very cleverly used by the Conservatives to obtain a winning majority. The problem with this whole thing is that the voters were not voting for what they wanted, so much as voting for 'what they didn't want'.

This result means there are now even more disenfanchised voters today than there were at the last election - and their voices will grow ever louder. There will be more disatisfied voters than ever!!

CD believes that in order to continue to maintain the status quo the British public should just vote for the two main parties. The minor parties should have no say - like the 3.9 million UKIP voters (twice the amount who voted for the SNP. However UKIP have only 1 seat, - 'minor party????) Wait until this Summers influx of Mediterranean tourists arrive here later this year for a dose of our NHS! UKIP will be back with louder voices

As for anyone considering change or being brave enough to stand up and be counted - CD would now stamp that out by making it financially impossible for them to stand. What utter drivel !!! So much for democracy, Wait.... ..... Russell Brand could afford to stand so we're OK? God help me!!!!!

CD - I suppose your next idea is everyone should get an 'auto fill' on the ballot paper! You know the sort where the boxes are already ticked for them for their convenience!

[merehazle]

---

@artwisemills wrote:

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Well now, the Eighth is with us, it's all over and as far as England's concerned and surprise surprise, it seems people certainly heeded the warnings about minor parties holding the balance of power and voted strongly instead.

There had been calls for the scrapping of the £500 deposit required to stand in a Parliamentary election but I think it should be raised to at least £5,000 to deter idiotic "candidates" who, although adding humour but presenting no threat to "major" Parties, nevertheless cause disruption and expense to the proceedings.

---

Sorry CD, I've not responded sooner, as you can tell by the limited number of postings I make my life does not centre around these boards.

I rarely comment but when I read such utter rubbish - and I reiterate to expect everyone to vote only for the two main parties in the interest of 'not causing disruption' is the maddest thing I have ever read on here!

This election has proved nothing more than the vast majority of voters were afraid of the SNP having a direct influence on government in the UK - and this was very cleverly used by the Conservatives to obtain a winning majority. The problem with this whole thing is that the voters were not voting for what they wanted, so much as voting for 'what they didn't want'.

This result means there are now even more disenfanchised voters today than there were at the last election - and their voices will grow ever louder. There will be more disatisfied voters than ever!!

CD believes that in order to continue to maintain the status quo the British public should just vote for the two main parties. The minor parties should have no say - like the 3.9 million UKIP voters (twice the amount who voted for the SNP. However UKIP have only 1 seat, - 'minor party????) Wait until this Summers influx of Mediterranean tourists arrive here later this year for a dose of our NHS! UKIP will be back with louder voices

As for anyone considering change or being brave enough to stand up and be counted - CD would now stamp that out by making it financially impossible for them to stand. What utter drivel !!! So much for democracy, Wait.... ..... Russell Brand could afford to stand so we're OK? God help me!!!!!

CD - I suppose your next idea is everyone should get an 'auto fill' on the ballot paper! You know the sort where the boxes are already ticked for them for their convenience!

---

Well said.

Well wasn't Ukip on 12% of the national vote? Which pro rata should give them 70 seats. Yes, they have only one seat.  Democracy?  I think not.

Alex Salmond ''warned'' that Mr Cameron will have ''no legitmacy whatsoever in Scotland'' after he became one of 56 MPs in Scotland.  And what about your ''ligitmacy'' Mr Salmond?  Only 4 million votes and 56 MPs. Ukip nearly 4 million votes and only 1 MP. 

[cee-dee]

The last thing this country needs is Proportional Representation. All that would lead to is political turmoil and weak government with unending argument while sorting out shaky coalitions. Why should losers gain? As soon as things don't go their way, they want to change the rules. See what PR would have done to the distribution of seats here:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32601281

Why should the largest number of voters who wanted a particular person as their MP have some loser imposed on them to satisfy the rules of PR?

Anyway, anyone fathom out the difference between the BBC and Sky on the number of Tory seats? :-

http://news.sky.com/

[merehazle]

And ''agreeing to disagree'' might be the FIRST thing.

Anyway, thank you.

[bookhunter2007]

---

merehazle wrote

Well wasn't Ukip on 12% of the national vote? Which pro rata should give them 70 seats. Yes, they have only one seat.  Democracy?  I think not.

---

Didn't we have a referendum on changing the electoral system to AV?  How did you vote in that referendum btw?

Also, it would appear the Daily UKIP & their former spin-doctor didn't think much of electoral reform back in 2011 - apparently it's only sought-after by "bearded lefties":

http://www.express.co.uk/expressyourself/244786/AV-referendum-Why-we-must-vote-NO

[papko]

Well...it's all over bar the post-mortems. Quite a surprise result. I just need someone to explain to me why those fickle capricious Scots turned the down the chance of Independence in their referendum last year, but now, just months later, have suddenly come over all patriotic and Nationalistic. Beats me.

if you look at the Scottish results in voters terms 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Scotland

1.54 mil voted SNP 

707 k voted Lab 

434k voted Tory 

219k voted Liberal 

47k UKIP 

39k Greens 

 So 50% of those that voted , voted for SNP , and their platform was anti austerity , increased borrowing 

 the other 48% voted for Parties committed to austerity of various speeds 

 You have to give the SNP credit for their "Yes " campaign , which basicly centered on "End of Tories " , "use Scotland resources to benefit Scotland alone " "No Trident " , and a large dollop of idealistic dreaming , mixed with a dash of Braveheart romance .

 Whatever it was , it was a political solution to a constituitianl problem , and did undoubtedly galvanise the whole country , as can be testified by the massive 85% turnout (in some rural areas 90+% , in the YES cities only 75% ) 

 as we know it all ended in tears , but the "Yes " Army was not beaten in the field , they were beaten by Gordon Brown and the "Vow " , in the last week of the vote , when Scotland 's cities were filled with Yes supporting crowds , out trundled , the old , one eyed , war horse , Gordon Brown , , son of the manse , and pure bred Fifer , and he did give the speech of his life , with his last strength he rallied the Union , and the "blip " in the polls , was never repeated , indeed the size of the NO vote was quite high .

since 45% voted YES , and you really only need 35=40% to win a constituecy as the largets party , the SNP have retained their cohesion .

 Indeed a great many "No " voters must have voted for them , as their appeal of a wondrous land where Govt can borrow vast sums and generate , well paid secure jobs , for all , is an intoxicating vision .

 yet wiith all that , its still a close run thing .

 The SNP have been in Govt in Holyrood for 8 years , in which time they have botched some laws on Sectarianism , been unable to implemnt minimum alcohol pricing , and had to u turn on Corrobation , (a key principle of Scots LAw ) , they were going to introduce local income tax (to replace council tax ) and famously wanted " a penny for Scotland " a !% increase in income tax to go on "Scottish spending " .

 all those laws have never got off the ground , save the 5 p charge on plastic bags in Supermarkets , , and now they want full fiscal autonomy .

 Fair play to them , one day they will have to say to their army of supporters , , " We cant have low tax and high public spending , without some of you misisng out " 

 Alex Salmond will be retired in the Bahamsa with Sean Connery , by that  time 😉

[astrologica]

Thank you Papko.....that does help a little.😊

[******lynda******]

Indeed a great many "No " voters must have voted for them , as their appeal of a wondrous land where Govt can borrow vast sums and generate , well paid secure jobs , for all , is an intoxicating vision .



Indeed, many no voters voted SNP. They voted tactically to vote Labour out. Most have no illusions about the SNP. There is a lot of anti SNP feeling and awareness of the lack of sense to their vision of Utopia. It will be interesting to see what happens in the Holyrood elections. There are many people calling for DC to stop pussyfooting around Sturgeon. To tell her, preferably 3 months before the election, publicly, to choose the Barnett formula or FFA. Either way she would lose. It is her Achilles heel. Choose the Barnett formula, she loses credibility with her cult because the road to independence is the raison d'être. Choose FFA and the ensuing necessary cuts and austerity, because of the 7.9 billion black hole, shortfall, will expose the fish people as the liars they are. RUK must not underwrite any borrowings. Either way, SNP WILL be dead in the water. If DC tries the negotiation stance he appears to have started, his nightmare will never end...Sturgeon and co will whinge on forever, blaming the English for everything.

[******lynda******]

At the moment, Sturgeon is trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, because she lost. She went into politics due to a pathological hatred of Tories. She honestly expected to be kingmaker in a coalition, to be able to make demands in exchange for her support of Labour and to be able to disrupt anything she did not like. Yet winning all those Scottish seats means nothing because the hated Tories won. Now many of you will also hate Conservatives, but they are the lesser evil when the alternative was the fish people calling shots of Labour.

[merehazle]

---

@artwisemills wrote:

---

@cee-dee wrote:

I see some weird opinions on here. Just as well they're only a microscopic point of view.

They sound like proposals for some sort of rabble-rousing revolution and in the end, those sort of things always end up with violence.

As for everyone else on Thursday, go out and vote for a strong Government because weak Governments comprised of "coalitions" never get anywhere and eventually lead to yet more break-away factions to further disrupt everything.

---

CD - You clearly have not spotted that there has been a coalition for the last 5 years - one that they said would not last and it did!

Microscopic points of view - hmmm, not quite sure how you can justify that when its quite likely more people will vote for UKIP than the liberal democrats? These small parties are growing and yes the two governments do indeed have something to fear - true democracy! The right to vote for who you want and not be told who to vote for!

As for violence - remember the petrol blockade, there was very little violence but it resulted in holding back John Prescotts fuel duty for a while and momentarily gave the public the upper hand stopping the never ending fuel rises.

---

'I  see some weird opinions on here. Just as well they're only microscopic point of view.'  Oh really? From six comments?

That sounds unnecessarily rude to me. There's at least fifty comments to follow. I hope they meet with YOUR approval? Most know what has gone on here. And most Ukip supporters feel utterly disenfranchised. And quite rightly, when it took 4-million votes to get them one MP. It took the SNP 1.4m to get 56 seats. 

I think those who have tried to kick Farage when they thought he was down, may have a surprise coming.   

[cee-dee]

" it took 4-million votes to get them one MP."

No it didn't, it took them 19,642 votes to get them their one MP. Votes cast in other constituencies for UKIP were not enough to win the seats.

[merehazle]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

" it took 4-million votes to get them one MP."

No it didn't, it took them 19,642 votes to get them their one MP. Votes cast in other constituencies for UKIP were not enough to win the seats.

---

  I once herd you say you could argue with an empty room. Du, ju, no, wot?  I agree.

Try the EXPRESS, that's about how they worded it.

Thank you.  

[lambsy_uk]

---

@artwisemills wrote:

This election has proved nothing more than the vast majority of voters were afraid of the SNP having a direct influence on government in the UK - and this was very cleverly used by the Conservatives to obtain a winning majority. The problem with this whole thing is that the voters were not voting for what they wanted, so much as voting for 'what they didn't want'.

This result means there are now even more disenfanchised voters today than there were at the last election - and their voices will grow ever louder. There will be more disatisfied voters than ever!!

---

What we actually saw was people moving away from the center, Lib Dems, and back to Tory or Labour. People were not overly worried about the SNP, they actually realised that voting Lib Dem was likely to lead to a mess.

Thankfully it all turned out well!