7Apr/05Off
Yes To Labour, No To Blair?
Over on Millarworld Mark Millar is highlighting a useful solution for those who would like to see another Labour Government, but who believe that Tony Blair should not be at the head of the new government because he's a lying, arrogant bastard (who, me? opinionated?).
That solution is to vote Labour locally, but send some money to support the campaign of Reg Keys.
Reg Keys' son was killed in Iraq, as part of a war that his parents clearly believe was based on lies. Mr Keys is therefore standing against Blair in his own constituency. The hope would be that something like Tatton in 97 happens, with the other parties standing aside.
It's an interesting proposition, to say the least.
Mr Keys' Election Letter (in PDF format) is here.
April 7th, 2005 - 15:06
well yes, asides from the fact that the majority of Labour MPs voted for the war, and slavishly follow the party whip all the time anyway. So I would suggest looking more closely at your individual MPs history before deciding that it is okay to support them.
Frankly Oona King can kma, I can’t wait to vote against her ….
April 7th, 2005 - 18:13
And the alternatives are all so appealing.
EDIT: Also, note that a bunch of other MPs also supported the war, and mostly did so on the basis of being told the lies from Blair that Reg Keys is most exercised by.
I’m not saying it’s a great solution, but it’s an interesting approach, and I also believe that some MPs who supported the war did so in good faith based on what Blair and co told them.
It’s a different argument that you, I, and several million other people managed to find the whole thing fishy all along and saw through it more than our highly-dependable elected leaders of course
April 8th, 2005 - 14:17
of course, I am now starting to get scared that the tories might get in if too many people protest vote. Arrgghhh.
I don’t want another labour government, but I’d rather that than tory. *shudder*
why didn’t they just sack blair last year?! It would make it sooo much easier if you felt that they had actually taken responsibility for their errors.
April 8th, 2005 - 15:57
There’s no conceivable way for Labour to lose as a whole – to overturn that majority would take a swing the like of which has never been seen before; bigger than that in 97 by a long way.
April 8th, 2005 - 17:07
I’ve heard that too.
but.
I don’t really believe it, in my guts.
Elections always seem to spring suprises, and every now and then, huge and unsuspected ones.
The pundits and polls regularly get it wrong, they poll odd samples of people, small numbers of people, and people often lie.
What does seem to happen, is that you dont seem to get the overall swings that the media talk about, but odd switches of alliegance in unexpected constituencys, and sudden enthusiams amongst party workers that lead to busy drives to get their voters out.
And with the low overall numbers of people who vote these days, it takes a small overall percentage of the whole population to make a large swing amongst the voting population.
I always expect to be suprised, but hope I wont’ be horrified.!
April 8th, 2005 - 17:07
I’ve heard that too.
but.
I don’t really believe it, in my guts.
Elections always seem to spring suprises, and every now and then, huge and unsuspected ones.
The pundits and polls regularly get it wrong, they poll odd samples of people, small numbers of people, and people often lie.
What does seem to happen, is that you dont seem to get the overall swings that the media talk about, but odd switches of alliegance in unexpected constituencys, and sudden enthusiams amongst party workers that lead to busy drives to get their voters out.
And with the low overall numbers of people who vote these days, it takes a small overall percentage of the whole population to make a large swing amongst the voting population.
I always expect to be suprised, but hope I wont’ be horrified.!