UK election televised debate!

I apologize for my ignorance of UK politics, but could someone briefly sum up the different platforms of the parties? I have a feeling that you don't mean words like "Conservative," "Liberal" and "Labour" in the same way we do acros the pond.

Dean wrote: All our political parties would be considered "Right" in Romania since none of them are truly socialist, however none of the the three main parties are strictly right-wing either.

The Labour Party would definitely not be thought as a Right-oriented party in Eastern Europe. We do perceive the Centre-Left (Social Democracy), the Left (Socialism) and the extreme Left(s) all as Left. The shift towards (neo?)liberalism of many parties of the Left in Western Europe was indeed felt in the East too, but still we were educated to be partisans of the "true" Right

Margaret Thatcher is one of my political heroes, but since I didn't live in the UK while she was in office, I suppose it's not my place to contradict your death-wishing.

Syzygy wrote: I'm seriously contemplating a vote for the lib dems this time round. Our constituency is a real Tory stronghold, but it looks like the Lib Dems could have a real chance if enough people switch allegiance - Labour have no chance but Clegg's mob could just squeeze through (any other residents of Bishops Stortford thinking similarly?)

I know what you mean Chris - Stevenage is a pretty safe Labour seat (despite Barbara Follett's part in the expenses debacle last year) & although I don't think the LD's have any real chance of election, if there was to be a hung parliament, it may just go more smoothly if it were Con/LibDem rather than Con/Lab (at least until the second general election which would probably follow within a year

Chris S wrote: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.........sorry if you vote for 3 dimwits you deserve what you get...........seek out a bigger picture folks.

Is this mere trolling or are you actually trying to make a point here? A lot of people in this country don't want the choice to be between "3 dimwits" as you put it, but our f**ked up electoral system leaves us with little choice. How is it the british public's fault that we have an inherently flawed system which benefits the two major (both centre-right) parties to the exclusion of everyone else?

Oh, and as for a "bigger picture", what would that be, exactly?

Precisely.  People forget it's a party we're voting for, rather than just an individual.

Labour do still have excellent politicians too.  Like Steve Pound (who I have met and was a friend of my late grandfather).

Trouserpress wrote: Chris S wrote: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.........sorry if you vote for 3 dimwits you deserve what you get...........seek out a bigger picture folks. Is this mere trolling or are you actually trying to make a point here? A lot of people in this country don't want the choice to be between "3 dimwits" as you put it, but our f**ked up electoral system leaves us with little choice. How is it the british public's fault that we have an inherently flawed system which benefits the two major (both centre-right) parties to the exclusion of everyone else? Oh, and as for a "bigger picture", what would that be, exactly?

No not trolling but I guess British Politicians have become the laughing stock of politics of late. Yes I understand you should/have to vote for a party but you/we get what we vote for. I think it is very sad that the electoral system leaves you with so little choice. I personally do not think any of these leaders will make any difference. I am British but I would be very hard pushed or motivated to vote for any of these guys. Don't you have a Green party?

Syzygy wrote: I'm seriously contemplating a vote for the lib dems this time round. Our constituency is a real Tory stronghold, but it looks like the Lib Dems could have a real chance if enough people switch allegiance - Labour have no chance but Clegg's mob could just squeeze through (any other residents of Bishops Stortford thinking similarly?)

I'm in Wales now, but I did see Bishops Stortford win the Amateur Cup in 1974 (last ever of that competition) - I used to live in Harlow, so it was quite close.

I would ALWAYS encourage tactical voting to keep the Tories out. My constituency is a three way marginal between Labour (present incumbant), Tories, and Plaid. As a member of Plaid I will be voting for them, but there are a lot of areas where tactical voting is the only option.

Best thing about this election is that we might, at last, get PR as a result of the Clegg/LibDem love ion - so that EVERY vote will count, no matter where you live. There is a huge progressive majority in the UK, and never again should the Tory regressives hold power with an iron grip with a minority of the votes (and I include New Labour in that).

Trouserpress wrote: Yes, there is a Green Party candidate standing in my constituency but under FPTP a vote for him would sadly be utterly wasted.

This is an argument I've had with myself many times - do you vote for a candidate/party just to keep the other candidate/party out even though you may not necessarily agree with the policies, or do you vote for a candidate/party where you do agree with the policies but have to acknowledge they have no chance of being elected?

Dean wrote: I've always been of the opinion that you should vote for the local candidate who would be best suited to represent your views and will do the best for your local constituency in that big house up there in that there London place. More often that not that will mean voting for the candidate that also just happens to be a member of the party you prefer, but not always.

Although Barbara Follett was involved in the expenses shenanigans last year, I have to grudgingly admit she's not done too bad a job so far as Stevenage is concerned; having said that, she has now stepped down in favour of a newbie, Sharon Taylor... so (to return to my previous post) do I vote for Labour as they've done as well as could be expected since 1997, or LibDem as I think they'd form a better coalition with the Cons???

This is very interesting: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/clegg-media-elite-murdoch-lib-dem

Lizzy wrote: We only started to think in terms of left and right only in the past few years

I don't agree with that. The public space was much more ideologically vibrant in the 90s, when the society was very divided by traumatic experiences of government (and lack of it), of heritage, etc. It was necessary for one to define him/herself ideologically. Are you with the Right, the historical parties, the monarchy, the right to own private property, the free society etc. and again dictatorship, or are with the (ex)communists, the old regime, the "social silence" way of thinking, the etatist government, etc? Now it's all down to much more practical policies... and I think it's better that way. The old kind of debates were just smoke curtains made to divert people for caring about actual, practical reform.