The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
That is, if you're legally entitled to.
If you don't vote, then you can't really complain when promises are inevitably broken.
If you don't vote you can't swear whenever they come on the TV or radio.
If you don't vote you're saying they can do what the heck they like.
Whilst it may seem entirely futile, if you don't vote you haven't even tried to do anything about it.
This morning I figured that the Government is a little like Top Cat. They'll place a shiny coin in your hand, and tell you how great they are, but just before your fingers close around it they'll snatch it away with that little bit of string attached to it that you never noticed.
Mind you, when the choice is between a smug, lying, patronising sycophant, a man that looks like a particularly greasy sexual pervert, and a ginger, alcoholic gnone (and face facts, ginger is an issue, that's why Labour never got in under Kinnock), then I can see why you'd be tempted not to...
If you don't vote, then you can't really complain when promises are inevitably broken.
If you don't vote you can't swear whenever they come on the TV or radio.
If you don't vote you're saying they can do what the heck they like.
Whilst it may seem entirely futile, if you don't vote you haven't even tried to do anything about it.
This morning I figured that the Government is a little like Top Cat. They'll place a shiny coin in your hand, and tell you how great they are, but just before your fingers close around it they'll snatch it away with that little bit of string attached to it that you never noticed.
Mind you, when the choice is between a smug, lying, patronising sycophant, a man that looks like a particularly greasy sexual pervert, and a ginger, alcoholic gnone (and face facts, ginger is an issue, that's why Labour never got in under Kinnock), then I can see why you'd be tempted not to...
Page:
Light wrote:
> The only reason we "know"
> they're going to win is because of apathetic cowards refusing to
> vote.
>
Were you looking at the other two main parties with rose-tinted spectacles then?
> The only reason we "know"
> they're going to win is because of apathetic cowards refusing to
> vote.
>
Were you looking at the other two main parties with rose-tinted spectacles then?
Hedfix wrote:
> However, if you don't vote because your party is bound to get in with
> 1000's of votes then I don't see much of a problem. If it's
> inevitable they'll get in with or without your vote then that seems
> generally fair, ok I realise if everyone did that then they'd lose
> but that's hypothetical and we know in places where such a party
> always wins big such a thing isn't likely to happen.
And if the 40% of the public who hadn't bothered to vote for this reason had turned out and voted? Bearing in mind that the Labour party only got 36% of the vote? The only reason we "know" they're going to win is because of apathetic cowards refusing to vote.
>
> However because manifesto promises can be broken and we cannot see
> into the future (Anyone think Desert Storm 2 likely when they voted
> in Blair?) I think people do have a right to complain.
If we know he was likely to lie, then we as a group should have bothered ourselves to make the effort to oust him. As many people didn't, they can't exactly complain about it.
>
> We cannot forsee what is going to happen in the future, we can only
> do what we think is best at the time and you are telling us that if
> we make the wrong choice we shouldn't stand-up and try to atone for
> out mistakes by complaining but that we should just let it happen
> because that's how 'democracy works'?
No, but we can make judgements based on what has happened in the past; Labour lied to take us to war in the past, they have also lied about tax increases, and have lied about public spending. Yet not one of the 40% of non-voters tried to make a difference to Labour being returned as government. They can complain all they want; do you really think a government will pay the least attention to them? If they didn't vote last time, who's to say they will again? After all, if they can't be bothered to vote out a government who lied to them on numerous occasions, there aren't going to be many new indignities that they could come up with to make that person vote. And even if they did, the apathetic group will almost certainly fall back on their "I won't make a difference" refrain to justify their non participation.
>
> No system is perfect, and no ideology is unchallengeable.
No, no system is perfect. But when a supposed dissenter can't even muster the energy to turn up and spoil their ballot paper, then no political ideaology in the country will pay the blindest bit of notice to them.
> However, if you don't vote because your party is bound to get in with
> 1000's of votes then I don't see much of a problem. If it's
> inevitable they'll get in with or without your vote then that seems
> generally fair, ok I realise if everyone did that then they'd lose
> but that's hypothetical and we know in places where such a party
> always wins big such a thing isn't likely to happen.
And if the 40% of the public who hadn't bothered to vote for this reason had turned out and voted? Bearing in mind that the Labour party only got 36% of the vote? The only reason we "know" they're going to win is because of apathetic cowards refusing to vote.
>
> However because manifesto promises can be broken and we cannot see
> into the future (Anyone think Desert Storm 2 likely when they voted
> in Blair?) I think people do have a right to complain.
If we know he was likely to lie, then we as a group should have bothered ourselves to make the effort to oust him. As many people didn't, they can't exactly complain about it.
>
> We cannot forsee what is going to happen in the future, we can only
> do what we think is best at the time and you are telling us that if
> we make the wrong choice we shouldn't stand-up and try to atone for
> out mistakes by complaining but that we should just let it happen
> because that's how 'democracy works'?
No, but we can make judgements based on what has happened in the past; Labour lied to take us to war in the past, they have also lied about tax increases, and have lied about public spending. Yet not one of the 40% of non-voters tried to make a difference to Labour being returned as government. They can complain all they want; do you really think a government will pay the least attention to them? If they didn't vote last time, who's to say they will again? After all, if they can't be bothered to vote out a government who lied to them on numerous occasions, there aren't going to be many new indignities that they could come up with to make that person vote. And even if they did, the apathetic group will almost certainly fall back on their "I won't make a difference" refrain to justify their non participation.
>
> No system is perfect, and no ideology is unchallengeable.
No, no system is perfect. But when a supposed dissenter can't even muster the energy to turn up and spoil their ballot paper, then no political ideaology in the country will pay the blindest bit of notice to them.
Light wrote:
> kevstar wrote:
> Listen, every legal person in this Country has a say in the way the
> Country is run, if someone wants to show there discontent towards a
> party by not voting, then thats fine, as long as theres a reason
> behind it. What your saying is not exactly democratic is it.
>
>
> Democracy = Every person having their say
>
>
> You didn't bother yourself to have your say, so you're not taking
> part in the democracy.
Ohh but I am, i'm saying that i'm discontent with the people who were in with a chance of running the Country. If Mr Brown was in office I would have been there in a flash.
The ONLY say one has in the way the country is
> being run (officially at least) is by voting.
No it's not. If Labour had a majority od 10,000 and in the next election it was reduced to say 1,000, and the turnout was 10% down on last time, the people who didn't vote for them this time shows that thier no vote certainly did matter. To say that a no vote doesn't have a say is very wrong indeed.
If you want to register
> discontent, then turn up and spoil your paper. Otherwise the only
> thing you register is your ass-groove in the sofa.
Why? Why do you wan't people spoiling the paper for?
> kevstar wrote:
> Listen, every legal person in this Country has a say in the way the
> Country is run, if someone wants to show there discontent towards a
> party by not voting, then thats fine, as long as theres a reason
> behind it. What your saying is not exactly democratic is it.
>
>
> Democracy = Every person having their say
>
>
> You didn't bother yourself to have your say, so you're not taking
> part in the democracy.
Ohh but I am, i'm saying that i'm discontent with the people who were in with a chance of running the Country. If Mr Brown was in office I would have been there in a flash.
The ONLY say one has in the way the country is
> being run (officially at least) is by voting.
No it's not. If Labour had a majority od 10,000 and in the next election it was reduced to say 1,000, and the turnout was 10% down on last time, the people who didn't vote for them this time shows that thier no vote certainly did matter. To say that a no vote doesn't have a say is very wrong indeed.
If you want to register
> discontent, then turn up and spoil your paper. Otherwise the only
> thing you register is your ass-groove in the sofa.
Why? Why do you wan't people spoiling the paper for?
However, if you don't vote because your party is bound to get in with 1000's of votes then I don't see much of a problem. If it's inevitable they'll get in with or without your vote then that seems generally fair, ok I realise if everyone did that then they'd lose but that's hypothetical and we know in places where such a party always wins big such a thing isn't likely to happen.
However because manifesto promises can be broken and we cannot see into the future (Anyone think Desert Storm 2 likely when they voted in Blair?) I think people do have a right to complain.
We cannot forsee what is going to happen in the future, we can only do what we think is best at the time and you are telling us that if we make the wrong choice we shouldn't stand-up and try to atone for out mistakes by complaining but that we should just let it happen because that's how 'democracy works'?
No system is perfect, and no ideology is unchallengeable.
However because manifesto promises can be broken and we cannot see into the future (Anyone think Desert Storm 2 likely when they voted in Blair?) I think people do have a right to complain.
We cannot forsee what is going to happen in the future, we can only do what we think is best at the time and you are telling us that if we make the wrong choice we shouldn't stand-up and try to atone for out mistakes by complaining but that we should just let it happen because that's how 'democracy works'?
No system is perfect, and no ideology is unchallengeable.
kevstar wrote:
> Listen, every legal person in this Country has a say in the way the
> Country is run, if someone wants to show there discontent towards a
> party by not voting, then thats fine, as long as theres a reason
> behind it. What your saying is not exactly democratic is it.
Democracy = Every person having their say
You didn't bother yourself to have your say, so you're not taking part in the democracy. The ONLY say one has in the way the country is being run (officially at least) is by voting. If you want to register discontent, then turn up and spoil your paper. Otherwise the only thing you register is your ass-groove in the sofa.
> Listen, every legal person in this Country has a say in the way the
> Country is run, if someone wants to show there discontent towards a
> party by not voting, then thats fine, as long as theres a reason
> behind it. What your saying is not exactly democratic is it.
Democracy = Every person having their say
You didn't bother yourself to have your say, so you're not taking part in the democracy. The ONLY say one has in the way the country is being run (officially at least) is by voting. If you want to register discontent, then turn up and spoil your paper. Otherwise the only thing you register is your ass-groove in the sofa.
Listen, every legal person in this Country has a say in the way the Country is run, if someone wants to show there discontent towards a party by not voting, then thats fine, as long as theres a reason behind it. What your saying is not exactly democratic is it. And what if you wern't on the electrol role? Or if you were homeless? What if you were in hospital or in prison for something you didn't do? Or like me, if you didn't like any of the leaders on offer? I could sit here for the next hour and think of many reasons why people don't or won't vote. Just because they don't vote doesn't mean they shouldn't have a say in the running of the Country, does it.
kevstar wrote:
>
> What a pathetic idiot your turning out to be, maybee if you would
> like to explain why someone who didn't vote has no right to have a
> say about voting or anything regarding the country.
Certainly; You made absolutely no effort to change the government, no effort to register your dissatisfaction, no effort to engage in the one and only method we the public actually have of making some sort of difference to the political landscape. If every one of the 40% of the voting public who came up with reasons to kid themselves that voting doesn't matter HAD actually voted, then we would have had a wildy different result to the one we got.
If a person can't even make the token effort to engage the political process, then why should the political process make any effort to sort out their concerns?
> Hey, I guess all
> the people who voted for the party's that didn't win hasn't a say in
> it either according to your logic.
You would guess that thought, wouldn't you? But as they all made the effort to take part in the only method we have of making any changes at all, anyone who bothered to vote has every right to complain.
You however, have none. Because as you've proved you can't even be bothered to vote, a government can easily discount whatever you say.
[edit] insults removed; no need really.
>
> What a pathetic idiot your turning out to be, maybee if you would
> like to explain why someone who didn't vote has no right to have a
> say about voting or anything regarding the country.
Certainly; You made absolutely no effort to change the government, no effort to register your dissatisfaction, no effort to engage in the one and only method we the public actually have of making some sort of difference to the political landscape. If every one of the 40% of the voting public who came up with reasons to kid themselves that voting doesn't matter HAD actually voted, then we would have had a wildy different result to the one we got.
If a person can't even make the token effort to engage the political process, then why should the political process make any effort to sort out their concerns?
> Hey, I guess all
> the people who voted for the party's that didn't win hasn't a say in
> it either according to your logic.
You would guess that thought, wouldn't you? But as they all made the effort to take part in the only method we have of making any changes at all, anyone who bothered to vote has every right to complain.
You however, have none. Because as you've proved you can't even be bothered to vote, a government can easily discount whatever you say.
[edit] insults removed; no need really.
Hedfix wrote:
> Ah but, what if you're happy with the government, knew they'd get back
> in where you lived and so didn't bother to vote, then two years down
> the line the PM kills your dog with a spoon and starts world war 3
> despite neither of these things being in the manifesto and the other
> parties being even worse?
>
> Surely you have a right to complain then?
Under THOSE circumstances...yeah, you can definitely complain about that. But even then, you can probably only complain about the dog killing...
> Ah but, what if you're happy with the government, knew they'd get back
> in where you lived and so didn't bother to vote, then two years down
> the line the PM kills your dog with a spoon and starts world war 3
> despite neither of these things being in the manifesto and the other
> parties being even worse?
>
> Surely you have a right to complain then?
Under THOSE circumstances...yeah, you can definitely complain about that. But even then, you can probably only complain about the dog killing...
Ah but, what if you're happy with the government, knew they'd get back in where you lived and so didn't bother to vote, then two years down the line the PM kills your dog with a spoon and starts world war 3 despite neither of these things being in the manifesto and the other parties being even worse?
Surely you have a right to complain then?
Surely you have a right to complain then?
Light wrote:
> kevstar wrote:
>
> Well then stop going on as if your someone special just because you
> happened to vote, and stop criticizing the people who actually had
> reasons not to vote.
>
>
> I'm sorry kevstar; you have no right to complain about voting, cos
> you didn't vote, or even spoil the ballot paper.
>
> Next please.
What a pathetic idiot your turning out to be, maybee if you would like to explain why someone who didn't vote has no right to have a say about voting or anything regarding the country. Hey, I guess all the people who voted for the party's that didn't win hasn't a say in it either according to your logic.
> kevstar wrote:
>
> Well then stop going on as if your someone special just because you
> happened to vote, and stop criticizing the people who actually had
> reasons not to vote.
>
>
> I'm sorry kevstar; you have no right to complain about voting, cos
> you didn't vote, or even spoil the ballot paper.
>
> Next please.
What a pathetic idiot your turning out to be, maybee if you would like to explain why someone who didn't vote has no right to have a say about voting or anything regarding the country. Hey, I guess all the people who voted for the party's that didn't win hasn't a say in it either according to your logic.
Page: