damerell: NetHack. (Default)
damerell ([personal profile] damerell) wrote2015-05-07 02:17 pm

On a cusp of indecision

So, I haven't voted yet, having three options that are each, in their own way, plausible. I will vote, I always do (although I think the "if you don't vote you can't complain" argument is entirely fatuous), but one of two of these three options is going to win anyway - if I can't decide between them, there isn't an argument for picking at random just to avoid getting the stinking Tory or the 'kipper.

I might vote for Julian Huppert, the incumbent, a Lib Dem; for Daniel Zeichner, Labour, who also might win; for Rupert Read, a Green.

Considered as individuals, Huppert is comfortably ahead: he's an excellent constituency MP, he's been about as bolshie as a Lib Dem MP in this dire coalition can be, he actually understands science, he's opposed to the erosion of civil liberties, he asks serious questions in Parliament and doesn't behave like a chimpanzee, he's one of the few candidates who won't hide if I wear an Open Rights Group t-shirt and assume an earnest expression. Plus, he rides a bicycle (and doesn't wear a magic plastic hat).

Zeichner is a bit of a cipher but basically appears to toe the party line.

Read has a habit of coming out with actively awful things.

Considered in terms of the overall election outcome, Zeichner is ahead. He'd, obviously, support Miliband as PM, and Miliband's not a stinking Tory.

Read won't win so voting for him is somewhere between Zeichner and Huppert.

Huppert's behind, since he might support Cameron as PM and almost certainly would not support Miliband. Ironically, it's a Lib Dem leaflet (a false-flag blue one for Tory voters) that put me on this cusp of indecision rather than voting for Huppert because he's personally good.

Considered in terms of parties, I prefer the Green Party - indeed, I'm _in_ the Green Party - and thanks to our insane electoral system, to get a Green MP in the future we probably have to vote for one now just to signal to each other that we exist.

The Lib Dems are generally OK, notwithstanding the Faustian pact with the Tories; strong on civil liberties, and also want to change the insane electoral system.

Labour are... well, New Labour were practically crypto-Thatcherites and Old Labour aren't on the ballot. I don't expect them to be any better on civil liberties, and in the runup to the election they've been coming out with a lot of sub-Tory crap about immigration and "hard-working families". They're bottom of this list - they're better than the Tories, but that's a pretty low bar.

Maybe I'll take a d12 into the booth... and if you can get to it before I'm there, I'm actively soliciting anything that might tip the balance.
ptc24: (Default)

[personal profile] ptc24 2015-05-07 02:01 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, that leaflet. I'll see if I still feel pissed off about it when I have the ballot paper in my hand.
wildeabandon: photo of me with wavy hair and gold lipstick (Default)

[personal profile] wildeabandon 2015-05-07 02:14 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm not convinced by the idea that the LDs would be unlikely to support Miliband. It might just be that because my social circle skews left, so do the rest of the LDs I know, but certainly my impression there is that a coalition/other kind of deal with Labour would be preferable to the party members than another one with the Tories.

The electoral maths also suggests that it's very unlikely that Tories & Lib Dems will be able to command a majority between the two parties, and I really can't see us going into any kind of deal involving UKIP or the DUP.
wildeabandon: photo of me with wavy hair and gold lipstick (Default)

[personal profile] wildeabandon 2015-05-07 02:55 pm (UTC)(link)
Enthusiastic no, but quite a lot of them supported it in a "least bad option" kind of way. I guess the question is whether there's been an actual shift rightwards since then, or if it just looks that way because of what's needed to be done to keep the coalition stable.
rmc28: Rachel smiling against background of trees, with newly-cut short hair (Default)

[personal profile] rmc28 2015-05-07 03:29 pm (UTC)(link)
It depends what gets offered, bearing in mind any coalition deal involving libdems has to get past the voting reps in the party conference (pretty much the activist base - I've been a voting rep but am not currently).

Jennie Rigg summarises it well here: http://miss-s-b.dreamwidth.org/1629094.html

There's no intrinsic reason for LDs to prefer Cameron to Miliband - it depends on the numbers and the offer. Five years ago the Conservatives put effort into making an offer LDs could support and Labour didn't.

Having gone through the full five years of that deal, a new one would have to be considerably better for Julian to be "propping up" anyone.

rmc28: Rachel smiling against background of trees, with newly-cut short hair (Default)

[personal profile] rmc28 2015-05-07 03:31 pm (UTC)(link)
Assuming J gets elected, which I don't.
kaberett: Overlaid Mars & Venus symbols, with Swiss Army knife tools at other positions around the central circle. (Default)

[personal profile] kaberett 2015-05-07 02:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Keeping Julian in Parliament is actively positive for me; he's vigourously supported trans* & particularly non-binary rights & representation, with every indication that he's going to keep doing it.
liv: cast iron sign showing etiolated couple drinking tea together (argument)

[personal profile] liv 2015-05-07 02:37 pm (UTC)(link)
Much sympathy. It really is hard to decide between the three options. I do wish that Huppert's campaign team hadn't stooped to active dishonesty, and I fear they'll lose more votes from principled pro-Julian voters than they'll gain from natural Tories voting tactically. It's both evil and a really foolish gamble to campaign like that. Bah.
jack: (Default)

[personal profile] jack 2015-05-07 02:52 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I felt in about the same place, and found it really hard to decide.