Election: What a fucking mess.

[beccatoria]

OY VEY.

I do not even, people. I do not even.

Currently I think my biggest pet peeve is that everyone is acting like it's some kind of betrayal of the voting population if Labour and the Lib Dems even consider a coalition because the Tories got more votes than either of them.

I do understand the reasons people are acting this way? But frankly, fuck them because it's ignoring the fact that a majority of voters did not vote for the Tories. A majority didn't vote for anyone. No one has a clear mandate to govern.

Now, I will grant, much as I hate the Tories, that if it's possible for the Libs and the Tories to come up with a coalition that actually represents both parties, then...fine, that will be the coalition that most fairly represents the voters.

That said, I sincerely doubt whether such a coalition would be possible. I'm not a Liberal Democrat voter but over recent years they have portrayed themselves more and more as a left wing alternative to Labour, even though I think that it seems Nick Clegg is perhaps returning to its more centrist roots. First off, I can't imagine the Tories agreeing to any level of electoral reform which I imagine is a key part of any coalition they'd enter into.

And on the other side of the coin, firstly, even if they do enter into a coalition a Lib-Labour pact wouldn't get them a majority and adding various nationalist parties would likely form a coalition so unwieldy as to be potentially unworkable, and even if they did go that route with a minority government, I also heard a rumour that Clegg wanted Brown to go. Which frankly is an unreasonable demand. I know he doesn't want to be seen as propping up an unelected Prime Minister, but part of the problem with Brown was that he was elected from within the party after an election, and now they want to repeat that? How will that help?

But frankly, I don't really like the position that Clegg is taking. I understand his desire to play at impartiality, wanting to play ball with the bigger party first, but he DOES need to go in there representing his party's goals and fight for them rather than just being seen to support the bigger party because it's "the right thing to do". Because it's not; that's just propping up a party the people did not vote into power. And frankly, in an official coalition, I don't imagine that's what he'd do.

But what I do fear is an agreement that they won't vote down an attempt by Cameron to form a minority government and then they can step back and watch the Tories destroy themselves. Now, while I fear for the net results of five years of the Tories in power, I can't say that the idea of them destroying themselves is horrifying. But what does piss me off is that the Libs might refuse to try and work something out with Labour simply out of a desire not to be seen unfavourably. That they'd stand aside and let a minority party who will not represent the views of their own voters form a government so they don't have to be tarnished either by association with the Tories and their potentially unpopular government (since ANYONE will have a very tough job), or by association with a predominantly Labour government that will be seen by some as illegitimate even if it's not.

It's not so much that they'd do that that upsets me, it's that they'd do it then try to pass off handing the country to the Tories as "fair". Because I cannot state this enough - it's not. Pretending there's no such thing as an "anti Conservative" vote is naive.

If they genuinely try to form a coalition with both the Tories and Labour and can't, then fair enough. But...I have a horrible sinking feeling that we're headed toward a Tory minority government that will fuck us over politically and also internationally by being perceived as weak and unstable. :/

And frankly, I never thought I'd find myself feeling so antagonistic towards the attitude of the Liberal Democrat leader the day after this election. :(

OH, and all this is without even adding the fact that I am far from convinced the proportional representation the Lib Dems are demanding is a good idea. I mean, I understand the principle and I don't always think it's a bad idea? But I am terrified to the bone when I consider what proportional representation would do for the BNP. They'd get seats. Actual fucking seats. Probably like 10 of them or something. Fascist Nazis in all but name holding seats in our government. This should terrify us. Proportional representation can give platforms and power to some very dangerous marginal groups.

Seriously dudes, it's a fucking clusterfuck. There really is no good outcome to this mess, I don't think.

Also in my area, my candidate lost by 194 votes. 194 freaking votes out of 40 thousand or whatever. There was a recount, then the second recount was refused, I'm not sure why. I think some people are talking about an investigation into the reasons, but I don't think that'll go anywhere. The other dude probably did win; he's just a jerk.

Comments

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

Plus if LibDem did form a Labour pact, the Murdoch press would *crucify* them every day for years.

And yes, the BNP would get a seat or two... This is my problem with PR too.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Regarding the Murdoch issue, that's very true, however, that might end up backfiring to a degree, Fox News style, and have larger segments of the population understand what a crappy mouthpiece that part of the media really is, and the government might even start taking a stance against them similar to Obama's treatment of Fox News, who I think his administration basically stated he considered a hostile news agency.

As to the BNP, yes, I agree, that's the problem. On the one hand, I think it's a terrible shame that one party means I effectively feel I cannot support a voting system that would be fairer, on the other...OMFG BNP.

I think my main issue is that I don't understand why the BNP are allowed to exist in the first place. Their policies are illegal and hateful and it's shocking that it wasn't even until last year that their membership policies were challenged legally. I mean I think fundamentally that's the issue - I think the BNP should be disbanded as a hate organisation. Then I might be more willing to support PR.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

The answer is I suspect for a large number of black and asian organisations to join up with the BNP and start attending all of their meetings en-masse.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

The tragedy is, I'd fear for their physical safety even though in theory I think that's an excellent idea. :(

[spiralsheep.livejournal.com]

I effectively feel I cannot support a voting system that would be fairer, on the other...OMFG BNP.

Hmm, what detrimental effect precisely do you think up to 1.9% of Westminster MPs being bnp would have?

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

I worry it would lend them legitimacy and provide a greater platform to be heard. Certainly if they went beyond certain lines, they'd end up just making themselves look like prats, but as Nick Griffin demonstrates, it's somewhat possible to be a complete bigot in the public eye and yet retain a level (or even increase a level) of popularity by appearing to be a "straight talker" who just won't "bow to political correctness".

Perhaps my worries are unnecessary, but ultimately I guess I just fear them becoming legitimised through desensitisation. I can't help but wonder if UKIP had 20 seats and the BNP 12, who exactly the Tories would be trying to cut deals with. I certainly don't think that even the Tories, at this point, would be dumb enough to enter into a formal coalition with the BNP, but if they were a minority government trying to pass legislation, would they be above courting those votes? I...fear they would not be and that it would be the start of a slope.

Your link, however, does reassure me somewhat. And I was very pleased to see those BNP Councillors losing their seats.

[spiralsheep.livejournal.com]

I worry it would lend them legitimacy and provide a greater platform to be heard.

I understand this, although I disagree (I could be wrong. Experienced politico Ken Livingstone thinks I am). Their share of the vote is growing anyway. And I suggest that this merely reflects attitudes which are already prevalent in British people not that those attitudes are becoming any more common (the pre-existence of those attitudes certainly reflects my daily experience in Britain).

Certainly if they went beyond certain lines, they'd end up just making themselves look like prats, but as Nick Griffin demonstrates, it's somewhat possible to be a complete bigot in the public eye and yet retain a level (or even increase a level) of popularity by appearing to be a "straight talker" who just won't "bow to political correctness".

I would argue that he gets away with that because he's allowed to broadcast in soundbites and that when he's been subjected to deeper public scrutiny, such as his appearance on Question Time, he always comes off worse.

ultimately I guess I just fear them becoming legitimised through desensitisation.

I also fear this but srsly how much worse than the existing attitudes and media are the views they'd legally be able to get away with spouting in public?

I can't help but wonder if UKIP had 20 seats and the BNP 12, who exactly the Tories would be trying to cut deals with.

Well, the Tories in the European Parliament are already in the faaar right group with openly racist parties. I don't see why the Tories here shouldn't own up to their -isms (like the open homophobia the exhibited during this campaign). We can only counter it if people are forced to admit it exists. Otherwise they'll continue on with their denial, which is the first hurdle to awareness.

if they were a minority government trying to pass legislation, would they be above courting those votes?

Well the Labour majority traded abortion rights in Northern Ireland for right-wing votes so plus ca change.

Your link, however, does reassure me somewhat. And I was very pleased to see those BNP Councillors losing their seats.

They were horrible people and useless councillors and they got their comeuppance for both failings.

[heyiya.livejournal.com]

The LibDem willingness to jump into bed with the Tories is the reason I've lost my faith in them -- I used to think of them as a left wing alternative to Labour too, but of late have been more and more thinking that if we are stuck with the current model of party politics, a Labour vote for the sake of the residue of their socialist principles (which I think even Brown has a good dose of, and I see that as partly why he wants to hang on to power -- he cares about what happens to people in the country) as the best of the bad lot.

I share your angst about the BNP and PR -- half a fucking million votes, wtf??? But I do think that, if we scrapped first past the post, the overall landscape would look very different. A lot of people, a LOT, vote tactically for the mainstream parties. Like I said above, I would likely have gone with Labour for this election, unless I were still living in Brighton :). But under a PR system, I would give my vote to the fringier parties, possibly even single-issue parties, that I feel actually represent my interests, because there would be a real chance of them getting a seat and a voice in parliament. I think that the prospect for having a parliament where more voices are really heard would make up for the fact that some of them would be the voices of fascists. And I would trust a broader parliament to fight down the BNP's arguments better than the lowest-common-denominator politics of the current one (where NOBODY can actually make a left argument about immigration for fear of losing the votes of the right-leaning middle class).

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. I had a fairly high opinion of the Lib Dems and would certainly have voted happily for them a few weeks ago. However, during the campaign I got increasingly uneasy with Nick Clegg, but still basically thought he was running a decent party until the last few days. And...I'm still willing to wait and see what he does, but I am concerned that, as spiralsheep notes below, he'll make a decision based on personal power for either himself or his party rather than actually correctly representing the views of his voters. I don't like his insistence that he should discuss with the Tories first because they got more votes than Labour. I think he should discuss with the party most likely to share the views of the people who voted for him and/or the party who is most likely to give him concessions that he/his voters want.

If that's the Tories, fine, but somehow I doubt that.

As to PR, I think I put my finger on it above, I just do not understand why the BNP are allowed to continue existing. I honestly believe that they go far, far beyond freedom of speech but also...I'm not a lawyer and Law Is Complicated. I agree with all the points you make about how in general PR is probably better for everyone, and I also agree that a small number of BNP MPs isn't likely to seriously swing our political debates, perhaps especially if balanced out by a larger proportion of far left MPs.

That said, it's the fact that they got so many that makes me afraid. Based on pure proportional representation, they'd get 12 freaking MPs. And that is terrifying, you know? Ugh. :(

[spiralsheep.livejournal.com]

I predict Clegg will cheerfully exchange electoral reform (for the majority) for ministerial power (for himself) if he's offered half a chance. I hope to be proved wrong.

Looking at the record of the elected BNPers in the London Assembly (which iirc is STV not true PR) I wouldn't mind more BNPpl being allowed to make their true selves known to the British public. They also have EuroMPs who get away with doing whatever they like because no-one's paying attention to them. So why not Brit MPs. Let's see what Brit voters and our representatives rly look like so we can have an honest response instead of denial of the problems.

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Yes, that about sums up my opinion on Clegg too. I'm hoping to be proven wrong, bu have become very wary of him lately.

I also do accept your points on PR and the fact that often the best way to discredit people like this is to put them firmly in the public eye. But at risk of invoking Godwin's Law, I'm mindful that the Nazi party started off damn small too. Hiding it behind a less fair electoral system probably isn't really as good an answer as confronting the issues head-on but...it's the BNP. *wibbles*

Ugh. SO MUCH TENSION.

[spiralsheep.livejournal.com]

the best way to discredit people like this is to put them firmly in the public eye

Which is what happened here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/england/8668885.stm

Whereas nationally the bnp more than doubled their share of the vote because they're allowed to hide under their rocks and pretend to stand for anything they believe will be popular without suffering media scrutiny.

Also, they lost over £130,000 in deposits, LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

Also, they lost over £130,000 in deposits, LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!

This does make me feel somewhat better. ;)