If Music Could Talk

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:22am

Heston wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:10am

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:03am

Question: Do UK elections suffer from structural impediments to voting—stuff that makes it harder for the poor and non-white to vote—as in the US (and, to a lesser degree, Canada)? Just curious whether the Tories (and even Nu Labour) introduced election legislation in the last couple decades to hinder turnout by "undesirables."

Yes

Details?

Obviously a lot of people stay below the radar due to housing issues etc, and it's tough for them to get a polling card. I think for something like a general election there should be an amnesty on these cases, there's too much red tape to get through.

Heston wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 3:47pm

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:22am

Heston wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:10am

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:03am

Question: Do UK elections suffer from structural impediments to voting—stuff that makes it harder for the poor and non-white to vote—as in the US (and, to a lesser degree, Canada)? Just curious whether the Tories (and even Nu Labour) introduced election legislation in the last couple decades to hinder turnout by "undesirables."

Yes

Details?

Obviously a lot of people stay below the radar due to housing issues etc, and it's tough for them to get a polling card. I think for something like a general election there should be an amnesty on these cases, there's too much red tape to get through.

Right, but I'm curious whether any government from the last couple decades or so has passed legislation that has made it harder for people (of course they'll say it's about protecting the integrity of the process, preventing fraud, etc., but the purpose is to shrink the electorate).

Huuuuuuuuung! Hoping exit polls are accurate

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 3:57pm

Heston wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 3:47pm

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:22am

Heston wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:10am

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 11:03am

Question: Do UK elections suffer from structural impediments to voting—stuff that makes it harder for the poor and non-white to vote—as in the US (and, to a lesser degree, Canada)? Just curious whether the Tories (and even Nu Labour) introduced election legislation in the last couple decades to hinder turnout by "undesirables."

Yes

Details?

Obviously a lot of people stay below the radar due to housing issues etc, and it's tough for them to get a polling card. I think for something like a general election there should be an amnesty on these cases, there's too much red tape to get through.

Right, but I'm curious whether any government from the last couple decades or so has passed legislation that has made it harder for people (of course they'll say it's about protecting the integrity of the process, preventing fraud, etc., but the purpose is to shrink the electorate).

Well I'm no expert but it feels like the Tories have done it through stealth over the last few years. I just wonder how the vote of the underclass would change things if they were in an easier position to participate.

Heston wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 5:28pm

Well I'm no expert but it feels like the Tories have done it through stealth over the last few years. I just wonder how the vote of the underclass would change things if they were in an easier position to participate.

That's the part that nags at me on the question of mandatory voting. I come down on the side of the freedom to choose not to participate without penalty/punishment, but would we have been plagued by governments so devoted to the rich and authoritarian leanings if the marginalized were regular participants at the polls? No guarantees, of course, that they don't vote against their interests, but it would be better overall.

Holy shit, this may actually be happening.

eumaas wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 5:20pm

Huuuuuuuuung! Hoping exit polls are accurate

If so, does May get knifed? (I gotta say, I like UK and Australian party politics for those kinds of palace coups. The rules in Canada are set up to prevent that. There's something very satisfying about a leader not being too comfortable around his/her peers.)

No chance May survives if they don't retain a majority. This would be a botch of epic proportions.

I'm pretty sure May is going down.

There's also an outside chance that Sinn Fein will actually break with abstentionism since the most likely avenue for a coalition on the Tory side is with the Unionists.

So it's possible a Labour coalition may happen.

The idea of winning a plurality of seats yet being forced out by one's party—assuming the Tories could cobble a coalition—is so utterly foreign. Canadian political culture would go apeshit that a PM right after an election would be someone who wasn't party leader during the campaign.

In conclusion: Conservative PM's are really pathetically bad at gambling all their political capital at the craps table.

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 5:51pm

The idea of winning a plurality of seats yet being forced out by one's party—assuming the Tories could cobble a coalition—is so utterly foreign. Canadian political culture would go apeshit that a PM right after an election would be someone who wasn't party leader during the campaign.

Yeah, I dunno. I mean, I don't buy the "this had nothing to do with Corbyn/Labour" narrative, but even if the exit polls are off a bit and the Tories squeak this out, this was a colossal fuck-up from May. Totally unforced loss of power driven by May.

It would be like the Democratic Party continuing to loyally support Abuela Clinton and the DNC apparatchiks that decimated the party nationwide. Which would be insane.

Osborne's already Twitter-called upon May to resign even if they squeak it out because she fucked this up so badly, so the knives are already being buried before the vote-counting is even close to over.

Nevertheless, I'm looking forward to the Blairites spinning this as proof of Corbyn being a disaster for Labour.

Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2017, 6:08pm

Nevertheless, I'm looking forward to the Blairites spinning this as proof of Corbyn being a disaster for Labour.

On the American side (everything has to be about America, after all) I'm already getting excited for all the Voxites finding narratives for how this has nothing to do with support for socialist policies and how meaningless exciting the youth vote is.