Why do you vote as you do?

[shaunbhoy]

I dislike extremes and 1 party with 4 terms in office is not good for the country or the party.

I like the idea of the new party balancing out the extremes of the old.

I voted Labour in 1997 (I voted Lib/Dem in '92, what a wasted vote... ) and I'm going to vote Conservative in this election for that reason.

Much like cojak, I voted LibDem in 1992, and I voted for good old Tony "Things can only get better" Blair in 1997. By 2001 I had realised that things had in fact got much worse, so I then voted Tory and have done so ever since. My vote is now given to whichever Party looks most likely to oust NL. On balance, whilst I believe that PR is the fairest system of real democracy, and support the LibDems in that, there are too many of their other policies that are alien to me. So.............Tory it is!!

[dang65]

You would vote for a party that would leave you personally worse off and let them spend your extra tax money on the welfare state? I'd rather pour my loose change down the drain than indirectly give it to some scrounging single mum who should be told that having children with eight different men is morally reprehensible.

Do you genuinely believe that the Welfare State doesn't leave you personally better off? Have you really not grasped the concept of a Welfare State at all? Just because it may not pay 25 pounds a week into your personal bank account, or whatever, does not mean that it isn't working on your behalf every minute of the day and night. Duh.

[Mich the Tester]

I am unable to vote due to living abroad for more than 16 years, but;

Conservative; probably my first choice, but I’m not keen on the anti-EU sentiments. Although I think there’s a lot wrong with the EU, it does give me the freedom to live anywhere in Europe along with Lady Tester, who is Dutch, and not have to concern myself about residence permits etc. It could benefit from more influence from the Brits, instead of all this posturing and moaning. I like their ideas about smaller government and control of public spending.

Liberal Democrat; second choice for me, would vote for them if I lived in a place where they stand the best chance of getting rid of labour, or if there’s a rabidly anti-EU tory standing. Not too keen on their slightly leftward leanings, but I like their ideas on personal liberty.

Labour; not even if hell freezes over.

UKIP; no thanks, becasue they would effectively destroy my freedom to move and do business throughout Europe.

BNP; just piss off to Mars if you want a mono-ethnic society.

OMRLP; went downhill since Lord Sutch died

[DodgyAgent]

Do you genuinely believe that the Welfare State doesn't leave you personally better off? Have you really not grasped the concept of a Welfare State at all? Just because it may not pay 25 pounds a week into your personal bank account, or whatever, does not mean that it isn't working on your behalf every minute of the day and night. Duh.

How exactly does the welfare state enrich anyone?

Why is paying people not to do anything of any advantage whatsoever to anyone?
Why is it that the more an individual relies upon the welfare state the more likely they are to be disfunctional or criminals?

[Weltchy]

Do you genuinely believe that the Welfare State doesn't leave you personally better off? Have you really not grasped the concept of a Welfare State at all? Just because it may not pay 25 pounds a week into your personal bank account, or whatever, does not mean that it isn't working on your behalf every minute of the day and night. Duh.

You seem to have associated two separate arguments of mine as one, therefore incorrectly assuming that I consider that the Welfare State doesn't leave me better off. Can I suggest you re-read my comment and have a rethink on your entire paragraph!

Once you come back with decent criticism to my comment, I'll dignify your comments with a proper response.

[expat]

New board needs a popcorn smiley.

[TinTrump]

How exactly does the welfare state enrich anyone?

Ideally, it does improve the lot of the poorest people; I suspect you haven't studied British social history or else you would have an understanding of the plight of many people before this was introduced. Just look at the philanthropists of the 19thC and the conditions they sought to improve. Follow it through to the expectations post WWI and WWII when finally people had had enough.

Not to say is hasn't been misused/abused in more recent times.

For myself, Mich the Tester hit upon one of my key issues; civil liberties, of which we seem to be apathetic to its erosion under this authoritarian government of mediocre individuals.

[Jeebo72]

Seeing the strong bias in the poll on how you will vote (in which I have not voted, BTW), I am prompted to ask a follow-up: why? Is it because you think that you personally will be better off under the Conservatives? And is that a sufficient reason to vote Conservative?

I hate socialists. Even when I was 12, and my parents were very much "working class" I hated socialists. Something for nothing is not for me. Survival of the fitest is the true norm. Unf. we won't let the week die off anymore so the gene pool is polluted with week genes. And thus our race will eventually die out (before the sun goes supanova anyway). No bad thing.

[dang65]

How exactly does the welfare state enrich anyone?

Why is paying people not to do anything of any advantage whatsoever to anyone?
Why is it that the more an individual relies upon the welfare state the more likely they are to be disfunctional or criminals?

All the people who work for you, fix things for you, transport you to your holiday, supply everything you need to your local shops, staff those shops, empty your bins, bring fuel for your car, teach your children, look after your poorly relatives, keep criminal activity under control... all of them are educated, supported, looked after and often housed as well by the Welfare State, and the Welfare State pays for those people during times when there isn't enough demand for their services and they get laid off work till there is. It's to the advantage of all of us, whether we "directly" use it ourselves or not.

As for the dole scroungers and benefits cheats... they are acting illegally anyway. That's their fault, not the system's fault, and if they are caught then they are prosecuted. There are MPs who exploit the expenses system, contractors and agents who exploit the tax rules, fat cat bankers who exploit the bonus system and even doctors who exploit the drugs system. Dodgy people do dodgy things. The vast majority of people don't.

You don't demand that cars be abolished because some people drive too fast, do you?

[dang65]

You seem to have associated two separate arguments of mine as one, therefore incorrectly assuming that I consider that the Welfare State doesn't leave me better off. Can I suggest you re-read my comment and have a rethink on your entire paragraph!

Once you come back with decent criticism to my comment, I'll dignify your comments with a proper response.

I'm not a f#ing Professor of Semantics, mate. When you say, "You would vote for a party that would leave you personally worse off and let them spend your extra tax money on the welfare state?" I take that to mean that you think that spending your extra tax money on the Welfare State is a waste of money which leaves you personally worse off.

If you meant something else entirely then try putting it in f#ing English for us.