London Banter - View Single Post

Robin May · September 12th 03, 09:17 AM posted to uk.transport.london

(Mait001) wrote the following in:

Ah, so even if they express themselves by being good little girls
and boys and casting a useless vote you think badly of them.

Don't be so peurile: if their vote is "useless" that is because
hardly anyone else agrees with them - that is hardly my fault.

No, their vote is useless not because hardly anyone else agrees with
them but because the people who do agree with them are spread out
across the country. That means there's never a single constituency with
enough people agreeing with them to elect an MP. It seems a bit unfair
to let geography and the first past the post system dictate whether you
get an MP elected.

This problem doesn't just affect very small parties. There's the well
known case of the Lib Dems where their share of the vote isn't really
reflected by their share of the seats. In the 1992 election they got 3%
of the seats and 17.85% of the votes.

There are also constituencies where it doesn't matter who you vote for,
the (insert political party) here candidate will always win. I live in
a constituency where Labour will always win, so I might as well not
vote because whoever I vote for the outcome will be the same. People
wonder about voter apathy but when there are so many people for whom
voting will make no difference, it seems more like voter sensibility.

--
message by Robin May, founder of International Boyism
"Would Inspector Sands please go to the Operations Room immediately."

Unofficially immune to hangovers.