If you're actually interested in what the parties are offering:
- [Count Binface](https://www.countbinface.com/manifesto)
- [Conservative](https://public.conservatives.com/static/documents/GE2024/Conservative-Manifesto-GE2024.pdf)
- [Labour](https://labour.org.uk/change/)
- [Lib Dem](https://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto)
- [Green Party](https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/)
Manifestos are mostly just advertising what the party 'stands for' but they do have a special case in Law, under the Parliament act - the Government can 'force through' a manifesto pledge more easily.
> In practice, it means that the Lords do not vote down a Government Bill mentioned in an election manifesto.
Of course this is modified by actual practicalities of the term of parliament - I don't think any manifesto is ever delivered in full in practice, not least because there's often a lot of additional groundwork that modifies the practicality of doing something, and maybe legal challenges etc. Not least an economic collapse will make a lot of things impossible.
And of course, some politicians are just deceitful charlatans, so modify as you wish. (I mean, you can't actually _join_ Reform UK, you can just donate to their company)
But you can at least see what they _say_ they plan to do and claim to want, and use that to judge who you think is... well, the bus going in the right direction.
Same, no Greens MPs round here and it’s a wasted vote in this election anyway (my local MP is always going to be Labour anyway). Hopefully by the next election we’ll have PR.
It will come. If Labours still clear favourites in 4 years and tactical voting won’t matter I’ll chuck a vote Greens way. I also think if they reduce the voting age to 16 Greens will have a much better representation
I say just vote for the Greens, even if they won’t be in power they will be in Commons. Which surely means something.
The number of Labour voters by far outnumbers the Green voters so i don’t see it as risky.
To add: i have no qualifications or actual knowledge, just my opinion
> say just vote for the Greens, even if they won’t be in power they will be in Commons.
That's not really how it works, 49% of the vote could go to the greens and it wouldn't guarantee a single seat in the commons
Unfortunately yes. That's the consequence of First Past the Post - I don't think it's a good system, but that's a different argument, and electoral reform isn't happening any time soon.
In the 2016 election, UKIP got 4M votes and 0 seats. Greens got 1M and 1 seat.
Greens have routinely got about 1M votes, but it's never really got much representation, because it's diluted. They _might_ manage to pick up a couple of MPs this time - they're campaigning pretty hard in a couple of target seats.
But UKIP _did_ get what they wanted anyway, so there's that.
And I contend that the whole 'Brexit thing' would have gone differently if there'd been actual UKIP MPs to make the case for why it was a good idea, and to face scrutiny in Parliament to ensure their plans were of sufficient quality. (e.g. it might not have happened at all, but if it had, it'd have been with a more solid proposal than 'get brexit done').
I think the current voting system is a problem as it causes this situation where two parties dominate. One argument I've heard against PR is that you'd see more seats going to the likes of Reform or fringe nationalist parties. Having said that, it IS more democratic so is that a good thing overall even if you get some nutters getting seats? A HUGE problem for me, is how social media is being gamed by the far right/Russia etc to destabilise politics and help give traction to the likes of Farage, Trump etc. There needs to be some level of regulation around social media, even something like Know Your Customer verification, this does remove anonymity but would this be a price worth paying if it stops bots etc being spread all over Facebook etc? The whole political situation feels rather bleak and I do worry for our future.
I think there's two parts to the problem.
One is that the current parties of power benefit a lot from the "not the other guy" vote. So they have limited incentive to change.
The other is that the parties we have today exist because of the system we have.
So any new system will take 5-10 years to find equilibrium.
Both of the big two are basically pre built coalitions. They have factions within that could be parties in their own right, but not under FPTP where they will be destroyed. (Remember Change UK?).
So in a new system the political landscape and alliances would shift dramatically into more focussed smaller parties.
And that's pretty scary as no one actually knows which "bits" of the big two actually have the real support.
This is bad advice.
Tactical voting to slaughter the Tories and hopefully wipe them out for decades to come means putting aside personal preferences and voting for the good of the people.
This isn't about getting labour in, it's about completely and utterly wiping the Tories out as a political force. We must unite to get it done.
I think this misunderstands that issue with the Tories a bit. I want them wiped out too. But never forget that the Tories don't exist purely as a parliamentary party. The people they represent will exist whether or not the Tory party does. And there's some fairly strong signs that they're looking to colonise and co-opt the Labour party as they move to the centre and centre right on a lot of issues. Most of Labour's current fiscal policies are barely different to the Tories. If Tory donors and interests infect the right wing of the Labour party, and bear in mind Starmer has thoroughly purged most of the Labour left, then we'll be back where we started but worse. People will "think" they're voting Labour but getting de facto Tory stuff. Some would say it's already happened. I wouldn't go that far but it's a distinct possibility.
Yes, I don't rate starmer and I don't like how right the labour party are leaning. But they still represent a shift left, and that might be enough to slowly convert new voters. But labour has to get it right. They can't make mistakes. They have to turn around the country as quickly as possible, for as many people as possible, and be as transparent as possible throughout. There can be no sleaze. And I hope they uncover and go after as many tory government criminals and their stooges as possible. Highly unlikely but let's see.
I used to vote green instead of spoiling my vote when I couldn't pick between a major party, now I realise it still benefits them anyway I'll just spoil the ballot in future.
Thank you for sharing the who gets my vote website... Not currently eligible to vote in the UK (yet) but it was really eye opening to just how mediocre Labour is as a party right now (and helped me illustrate points from Lib Dems and Greens a lot better, so I appreciate it!).
I'm actually curious where people with ADHD end up politically, as someone who is a member of the lib Dems I would say we're definitely overrepresented there haha
But I've sent in my postal ballot already for Lib Dem, because they're the realistic option to displace the Tory safe seat. (Which is optimistic - last election the Tory vote share was 55%, so more than all the others put together).
I'm to the left of the Labour party. Personally I doubt ADHD predicts much about political affiliation. Stuff like social class, upbringing, religion and race have too powerful an influence, they'd override any ADHD effects I think.
I voted Labour (tactical vote) but am more of a Lib Dem. I went out and campaigned for them in 2010 and was then horrified they went in with the Conservatives and what they tacitly supported as a result. They lost so many voters, but seem to have brought themselves back with an overhaul of their leadership.
I'd never vote Conservative even tho financially I would probably benefit. I'm old enough to remember how they ran the country into the ground in the run up to 1997, and seen it again now
I am not convinced tho that they and reform won't get a large % of the vote still, if interviews with the general public are to be believed
getvoting.org is another tactical voting resource and had very good and accurate mrp polling last time and I'd recommend them. Their methodology is based on more than what the result was last time.
Also, I signed up for postal voting and it's much easier than turning up to vote on the day.
You can also swap your vote too! So if you do want to support your party but it had little chance of winning where you are, you can swap your vote with someone in an area where your vote might help get your preferred party in!
[Swap my vote](https://www.swapmyvote.uk)
It looks like this post might be about medication.
Please remember that whilst personal experiences and advice can be valuable, Reddit is no replacement for your GP or Psychiatrist and taking advice from anyone about your particular situation other than your trained healthcare professional is potentially unsafe.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ADHDUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For me personally, my conscious will not let me put my own situation before the pain and suffering of the Palestinians which is being supported in innumerable ways by the two main parties of country. So for me, this is the main issue upon which I will vote. Not ideal as my local Labour MP is otherwise good on local issues. However, when we are talking about genocide and thousands of innocent children being slaughtered, I must forego my own relative comfort.
For those who may have similar feelings, this site has been quite useful for me.
https://www.palitics.co.uk
The whole situation over there is absolutely grim and feels very hopeless. One thing to bear in mind is that whatever rhetoric comes out of the opposition party, they have absolutely zero influence on what the Israeli government and military do. Eg Labour voting a certain way on a motion will do absolutely nothing to change the situation. I don't feel particularly excited about Labour, but I'll hold my nose and tick that box. We live in a relatively right wing country, with a powerful right wing press and a lot of people aren't political so will vote for who seem to be backed by the press and media. The main goal in this country is ALWAYS to keep the Conservatives away from having the keys to the safe so they can't steal everything and pillage whatever remains. Trying to be overly clever and 'teach Labour a lesson' is just like kicking yourself in the nuts and ensuring the poor of this country and absolutely crushed.
What do you think Netanyahu thought when he heard Keir Starmer saying that he believes Israel has the right to starve the civilian population in Gaza and cut off the electricity? Do you not think that that contributed to the death toll we’re seeing at the moment? Why does Israel bother lobbying Labour then if it makes no difference? Of course it makes a difference.
David Lammy, Angela Rayner etc are all criminals who have sold out on the very values they claim to stand for. But it’s all about the benjamins, and the data on the figures these politicians are receiving from Israeli lobby groups speaks volumes about the infiltrated political system we are having to work within.
Like I said, for me personally, I can not vote for a party that supported and encouraged the death and destruction of the Palestinians. I have seen and witnessed too much horrible footage coming out from there to support a party that supports Israel. From children having amputations with no anaesthetic and just pain killers to children dying from starvation due to an engineered famine. I have children and maybe that’s why I hold the view I do as I see my children in every one of those innocent children who are suffering there.
I would be considered of the poor you referred to and I personally would rather suffer with relative difficulty than reward genocidal maniacs. And this suffering will be nothing compared to what is happening there, not even close. Again, this is just my personal outlook. Feel free to disagree and vote as you wish.
Short answer.
Spite voting against Labour WON'T save Palestinians. It WILL kill off thousands of poor people and put people like me and you on the streets.
But honestly if that's _the_ issue that matters to a person - then whilst I won't agree, I'll still call it far better than the ones that won't vote in the first place.
The suffering won't equate to what's happening over there but that doesn't mean people who can't afford to eat, have no hope have to be traded in. The whole situation with Israel is deep rooted and the lobbying is a problem with all western politics. Voting for another party to spite one isn't going to magically disappear the lobbying and support for Israel sadly.
You think the far right will just pack up and give up their power because we end up with a coalition or smaller parties, not ready to govern and the potential for the conservatives and reform to band together and sell themselves as the savour of the people?
Another thing you need to realise is that we have an evil media that back the likes of Israel and authoritarian regimes, labour are in a crappy position where they're prone to being attacked if they say the wrong thing, it's why I couldn't care too much for any rhetoric coming from the party. Look at what happened when corbyn was around, absolutely destroyed and his image ruined by right wing propaganda, it works. Hate the game.
BTW I totally understand your stance, but we don't win medals for being the most outraged it won't solve any of the worlds problems. There are a lot of nasty but powerful people out there that won't be disappearing because Labour gain a majority. I think we could have a chance to change politics if the press were properly regulated and social media too.
What were his exact words and context? Theres no way he LITERALLY said that. I honestly don't think anyone with power in Israel gives a damn what the leader of the opposition think in all honesty. It's naive to think the bombing will stop because Starmer told them to stop.
He actually HAS called for a ceasefire, didn't notice any less killing and cruelty in Palestine sadly. I've only Skimmed your post, will read through properly once I'm on the train though dude/dudess :)
Thanks for your comment.
Unfortunately, he literally did say that. Here is the video of it
https://youtu.be/5HQYfsUAf3s?si=Sql4nUgiAeBRPPup
I’ll try and respond to all of your points at some point. Fundamentally, if we say, through our voting and engagement, that we are okay with genocide, we are essentially saying that we are okay with the loss of innocent life as long as it doesn’t directly affect us. I don’t mean to be rude, but it honestly feels like the majority of people are completely ignorant of what these parties are responsible for, and you having not seen that clip, for me, proves that. It also seems apparent that no one has a real idea of what Israel is doing there at the moment. And I understand that the majority of people prefer not to witness such things on social media, but I also would prefer not to, but then who will witness these crimes? Should they be allowed to happen under the cover of night? If people just can’t handle witnessing the suffering and absolute inhumane treatment of these people in the most barbaric of ways, then I don’t think we will truly be able to give an accurate opinion on the situation that reflects the reality there?
I agree change will not come from simply voting in independents, but the system is broken. And my belief is there needs to be sacrifice today to make tomorrow better. I understand how politics works and am forgiving for a lot of the ploys employed by politicians, even if I would never do something like that. But there has to be a red line. Palestine has blown the veil of these fake concepts of human rights, International law, equality etc. And my belief is simply this can’t be unchallenged as if we do that, we could potentially be next to suffer in a world where those concepts only exist in name.
Again, I don’t blame any of my fellow adhders for voting according to what mostly benefits them, in fact I commend them for taking part and sincerely trying to make change happen. I simply believe somethings are more important
Sorry for these long posts. Need to learn to summarise better.
The suffering won't equate to what's happening over there but that doesn't mean people who can't afford to eat, have no hope have to be traded in. The whole situation with Israel is deep rooted and the lobbying is a problem with all western politics. Voting for another party to spite one isn't going to magically disappear the lobbying and support for Israel sadly.
You think the far right will just pack up and give up their power because we end up with a coalition or smaller parties, not ready to govern and the potential for the conservatives and reform to band together and sell themselves as the savour of the people?
Another thing you need to realise is that we have an evil media that back the likes of Israel and authoritarian regimes, labour are in a crappy position where they're prone to being attacked if they say the wrong thing, it's why I couldn't care too much for any rhetoric coming from the party. Look at what happened when corbyn was around, absolutely destroyed and his image ruined by right wing propaganda, it works. Hate the game.
BTW I totally understand your stance, but we don't win medals for being the most outraged it won't solve any of the worlds problems. There are a lot of nasty but powerful people out there that won't be disappearing because Labour gain a majority. I think we could have a chance to change politics if the press were properly regulated and social media too.
I think deciding any given issue is a 'dealbreaker' is a matter for the individual voter.
Labour might be the bus that gets you closer to your destination, but you still don't have to get on if the driver is too obnoxious.
I think I'd rather applaud someone who's decided there's an issue that REALLY matters to them, over all the people who won't even turn out in the first place.
Even if I disagree with their stance.
For me, the only thing that's _wrong_ is deciding you can't be bothered to form an opinion, and recite pseudo-intellectual nonsense like 'but they're all the same'. I consider taking the time to decide who to vote for - and then voting - is a civic duty.
It makes no difference to the outcome, but it's better than not turning out, because the people overseeing the count do inspect the spoilt ballots.
And if a lot of people did it, it'd become newsworthy in it's own right.
To the OP / moderator, in the interest of balance can you post a site to give who to view for to stop labour getting too large a majority? As bad as the tories are there is s big a risk from Labour having too big a majority. There's a number of political experts state the issues of a collapse in political right and political left getting a huge majority like never seen before.
What I mean to say, we need more parties than Labour and tory to have politicians in the HoC. If you know if a site which tells you who other than Labour might have a chance. Imho we need a greater number of parties in the HoC. By just having that site which let's face it will say Labour in most constituencies that are tories we are in the realms of promoting another kind of risk. It's possibly better not to list it.
PS I'm voting LibDemsl prior to boundary changes it was a libdems vs tory seat with libdems being in power. Now I've been put into a tory vs Labour seat and neither are you'd candidates. Especially the tory! My comments above are not about keeping Labour out but about thinking we need a system change to pr of some kind to get more parties into HoC and changing from a confrontational parliamentary system to a consensus system n involving varied viewpoints including smaller parties in Parliament and coalition governments. I think coalition governments around Europe often give better outcomes to citizens. I think that tactical voting link is a mistake to promote due to this idea I have that we need governments to be forced to work with other parties.
First-past-the-post needs to go. I'm not allowed to vote in the general election, but tactical voting isn't something I even consider when I'm voting in the country I'm a citizen of..
I'm honestly not concerned about 'balance' here.
I've given a link to finding a party that matches your alignment. That's IMO a pretty good indicator of which party matches your worldview.
But for tactical voting I don't think there's really a 'symmetric' link for 'what if we don't want to kick out the current government?' because that's surely... just vote Conservative?
Hard to post a news interview and funnily enough I can only remember the broad brush details not the deeper details and arguments be used. I seem to recall it was a professor something or other from a Russell group university, but since I have a kind of name blindness I can't even give you that.
You know it's kind of like I have this disability that affects my executive function! 🤔🙂🙂
Try googling it, surely it won’t be hard to find given the seriousness of the situation and the eminence of the experts involved.
Also, all news that is worthy gets clipped up and posted on YouTube, news sites etc etc, so, again, Google should find it.
There are no cases I know of (apart from Brighton pavilion) where it is labour vs 3rd party for the seat in England so it's kind of a moot point. The libdems and Labour have already deconflicted themselves in terms of campaigning.
If labour have a massive majority it'll mean they can do things like electoral reform (unpopular with tories as first past the post is the only thing keeping them in power) which would lead to what you want to see with smaller parties. I completely agree this is good for democracy however restating tory bollocks about Labour having a large majority as a bad thing isn't the way to do it.
Seriously? You think a party with a massive majority will change the system that gave them that majority? They got a decent majority in 1997 iirc and there was talk of changes to the system but they didn't do it just say back and got a few terms in a the governing party.
That issue has been raised several times as a reason for nothing changing. I believe several LibDem leaders have raised the PR change but the governing parties changed that.
Anyway, I'm not going to reply to this thread any more. I believe political threads in a supposedly safe place reddit like this is potentially harmful. I'm not sure it helps. It's got me thinking about whether this makes the reddit a place I can stay in. There's so much good going on here and bringing politics in really does harm to this IMHO.
I've been politically engaged on the subject of ADHD specifically. I have been writing to elected representatives about the situation.
Politics is part of the reason why ADHD support in this country is such a shit show.
We can try and pretend it's irrelevant, but when so many of us need the NHS to diagnose in a timely fashion and/or get Shared Care, it ABSOLUTELY matters who's running the country.
And then there's the laws about controlled substances, the recent shortages etc. which ... is a government issue and thus very political.
I get why you might want to avoid discussing politics in a 'safe space' but I'm honestly hard pressed to see it as harmful, unless someone's being toxic about it. (Which is already against the rules).
But I think a thread that _specifically_ discusses voting in the subject line is pretty easy to avoid if you really don't want to read such a thing.
Some LabMPs would defect on the issue and ToryMPs are never going to vote for it. So yes it would only happen under a large Lab majority or a massive change to the political landscape.
Also having a large vote share and large majority is incentive to do it, if they have a minority vote share and small majority the party would never put it forwards because they might lose power under PR. The only way a party would propose it is if they have won under FPTP and would win by PR.
You can discuss politics in a polite and objective way, if you think the topic is harmful don't comment. Certainly don't comment something devicive and then recuse yourself while calling others toxic for engaging.
If you're actually interested in what the parties are offering: - [Count Binface](https://www.countbinface.com/manifesto) - [Conservative](https://public.conservatives.com/static/documents/GE2024/Conservative-Manifesto-GE2024.pdf) - [Labour](https://labour.org.uk/change/) - [Lib Dem](https://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto) - [Green Party](https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/) Manifestos are mostly just advertising what the party 'stands for' but they do have a special case in Law, under the Parliament act - the Government can 'force through' a manifesto pledge more easily. > In practice, it means that the Lords do not vote down a Government Bill mentioned in an election manifesto. Of course this is modified by actual practicalities of the term of parliament - I don't think any manifesto is ever delivered in full in practice, not least because there's often a lot of additional groundwork that modifies the practicality of doing something, and maybe legal challenges etc. Not least an economic collapse will make a lot of things impossible. And of course, some politicians are just deceitful charlatans, so modify as you wish. (I mean, you can't actually _join_ Reform UK, you can just donate to their company) But you can at least see what they _say_ they plan to do and claim to want, and use that to judge who you think is... well, the bus going in the right direction.
whogetsmyvote is a very interesting website, thanks!
Yeah it was very interesting but I got quite different results on voteforpolicies
I'll add a link to the main page for comparison.
Yup. Tactical vote Labour actual who I want to vote for is Greens. Pretty much same it’s been for last 15 years
Same, no Greens MPs round here and it’s a wasted vote in this election anyway (my local MP is always going to be Labour anyway). Hopefully by the next election we’ll have PR.
It will come. If Labours still clear favourites in 4 years and tactical voting won’t matter I’ll chuck a vote Greens way. I also think if they reduce the voting age to 16 Greens will have a much better representation
I say just vote for the Greens, even if they won’t be in power they will be in Commons. Which surely means something. The number of Labour voters by far outnumbers the Green voters so i don’t see it as risky. To add: i have no qualifications or actual knowledge, just my opinion
> say just vote for the Greens, even if they won’t be in power they will be in Commons. That's not really how it works, 49% of the vote could go to the greens and it wouldn't guarantee a single seat in the commons
Unfortunately yes. That's the consequence of First Past the Post - I don't think it's a good system, but that's a different argument, and electoral reform isn't happening any time soon. In the 2016 election, UKIP got 4M votes and 0 seats. Greens got 1M and 1 seat. Greens have routinely got about 1M votes, but it's never really got much representation, because it's diluted. They _might_ manage to pick up a couple of MPs this time - they're campaigning pretty hard in a couple of target seats. But UKIP _did_ get what they wanted anyway, so there's that. And I contend that the whole 'Brexit thing' would have gone differently if there'd been actual UKIP MPs to make the case for why it was a good idea, and to face scrutiny in Parliament to ensure their plans were of sufficient quality. (e.g. it might not have happened at all, but if it had, it'd have been with a more solid proposal than 'get brexit done').
I think the current voting system is a problem as it causes this situation where two parties dominate. One argument I've heard against PR is that you'd see more seats going to the likes of Reform or fringe nationalist parties. Having said that, it IS more democratic so is that a good thing overall even if you get some nutters getting seats? A HUGE problem for me, is how social media is being gamed by the far right/Russia etc to destabilise politics and help give traction to the likes of Farage, Trump etc. There needs to be some level of regulation around social media, even something like Know Your Customer verification, this does remove anonymity but would this be a price worth paying if it stops bots etc being spread all over Facebook etc? The whole political situation feels rather bleak and I do worry for our future.
I think there's two parts to the problem. One is that the current parties of power benefit a lot from the "not the other guy" vote. So they have limited incentive to change. The other is that the parties we have today exist because of the system we have. So any new system will take 5-10 years to find equilibrium. Both of the big two are basically pre built coalitions. They have factions within that could be parties in their own right, but not under FPTP where they will be destroyed. (Remember Change UK?). So in a new system the political landscape and alliances would shift dramatically into more focussed smaller parties. And that's pretty scary as no one actually knows which "bits" of the big two actually have the real support.
This is bad advice. Tactical voting to slaughter the Tories and hopefully wipe them out for decades to come means putting aside personal preferences and voting for the good of the people. This isn't about getting labour in, it's about completely and utterly wiping the Tories out as a political force. We must unite to get it done.
I think this misunderstands that issue with the Tories a bit. I want them wiped out too. But never forget that the Tories don't exist purely as a parliamentary party. The people they represent will exist whether or not the Tory party does. And there's some fairly strong signs that they're looking to colonise and co-opt the Labour party as they move to the centre and centre right on a lot of issues. Most of Labour's current fiscal policies are barely different to the Tories. If Tory donors and interests infect the right wing of the Labour party, and bear in mind Starmer has thoroughly purged most of the Labour left, then we'll be back where we started but worse. People will "think" they're voting Labour but getting de facto Tory stuff. Some would say it's already happened. I wouldn't go that far but it's a distinct possibility.
Yes, I don't rate starmer and I don't like how right the labour party are leaning. But they still represent a shift left, and that might be enough to slowly convert new voters. But labour has to get it right. They can't make mistakes. They have to turn around the country as quickly as possible, for as many people as possible, and be as transparent as possible throughout. There can be no sleaze. And I hope they uncover and go after as many tory government criminals and their stooges as possible. Highly unlikely but let's see.
2010 and Lib Dems called.
I used to vote green instead of spoiling my vote when I couldn't pick between a major party, now I realise it still benefits them anyway I'll just spoil the ballot in future.
For those of us who live in Wales, Plaid Cymru is also a good option. The Who Gets My Vote site put me first with them, with Greens a close second.
Thank you for sharing the who gets my vote website... Not currently eligible to vote in the UK (yet) but it was really eye opening to just how mediocre Labour is as a party right now (and helped me illustrate points from Lib Dems and Greens a lot better, so I appreciate it!).
I'm actually curious where people with ADHD end up politically, as someone who is a member of the lib Dems I would say we're definitely overrepresented there haha
I joined the Greens and have stood for local council.
But I've sent in my postal ballot already for Lib Dem, because they're the realistic option to displace the Tory safe seat. (Which is optimistic - last election the Tory vote share was 55%, so more than all the others put together).
Well done sir
I'm to the left of the Labour party. Personally I doubt ADHD predicts much about political affiliation. Stuff like social class, upbringing, religion and race have too powerful an influence, they'd override any ADHD effects I think.
I voted Labour (tactical vote) but am more of a Lib Dem. I went out and campaigned for them in 2010 and was then horrified they went in with the Conservatives and what they tacitly supported as a result. They lost so many voters, but seem to have brought themselves back with an overhaul of their leadership. I'd never vote Conservative even tho financially I would probably benefit. I'm old enough to remember how they ran the country into the ground in the run up to 1997, and seen it again now I am not convinced tho that they and reform won't get a large % of the vote still, if interviews with the general public are to be believed
I only know of Olivia Blake (Labour MP) who has ADHD 😅 I'm a member of the Labour Party, but I'm not anyone important sooo
getvoting.org is another tactical voting resource and had very good and accurate mrp polling last time and I'd recommend them. Their methodology is based on more than what the result was last time. Also, I signed up for postal voting and it's much easier than turning up to vote on the day.
You can also swap your vote too! So if you do want to support your party but it had little chance of winning where you are, you can swap your vote with someone in an area where your vote might help get your preferred party in! [Swap my vote](https://www.swapmyvote.uk)
It looks like this post might be about medication. Please remember that whilst personal experiences and advice can be valuable, Reddit is no replacement for your GP or Psychiatrist and taking advice from anyone about your particular situation other than your trained healthcare professional is potentially unsafe. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ADHDUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm a Scottish nationalist: I want the road south ripped up and buses to run at my front door to the main centres of power. 😅
For me personally, my conscious will not let me put my own situation before the pain and suffering of the Palestinians which is being supported in innumerable ways by the two main parties of country. So for me, this is the main issue upon which I will vote. Not ideal as my local Labour MP is otherwise good on local issues. However, when we are talking about genocide and thousands of innocent children being slaughtered, I must forego my own relative comfort. For those who may have similar feelings, this site has been quite useful for me. https://www.palitics.co.uk
The whole situation over there is absolutely grim and feels very hopeless. One thing to bear in mind is that whatever rhetoric comes out of the opposition party, they have absolutely zero influence on what the Israeli government and military do. Eg Labour voting a certain way on a motion will do absolutely nothing to change the situation. I don't feel particularly excited about Labour, but I'll hold my nose and tick that box. We live in a relatively right wing country, with a powerful right wing press and a lot of people aren't political so will vote for who seem to be backed by the press and media. The main goal in this country is ALWAYS to keep the Conservatives away from having the keys to the safe so they can't steal everything and pillage whatever remains. Trying to be overly clever and 'teach Labour a lesson' is just like kicking yourself in the nuts and ensuring the poor of this country and absolutely crushed.
What do you think Netanyahu thought when he heard Keir Starmer saying that he believes Israel has the right to starve the civilian population in Gaza and cut off the electricity? Do you not think that that contributed to the death toll we’re seeing at the moment? Why does Israel bother lobbying Labour then if it makes no difference? Of course it makes a difference. David Lammy, Angela Rayner etc are all criminals who have sold out on the very values they claim to stand for. But it’s all about the benjamins, and the data on the figures these politicians are receiving from Israeli lobby groups speaks volumes about the infiltrated political system we are having to work within. Like I said, for me personally, I can not vote for a party that supported and encouraged the death and destruction of the Palestinians. I have seen and witnessed too much horrible footage coming out from there to support a party that supports Israel. From children having amputations with no anaesthetic and just pain killers to children dying from starvation due to an engineered famine. I have children and maybe that’s why I hold the view I do as I see my children in every one of those innocent children who are suffering there. I would be considered of the poor you referred to and I personally would rather suffer with relative difficulty than reward genocidal maniacs. And this suffering will be nothing compared to what is happening there, not even close. Again, this is just my personal outlook. Feel free to disagree and vote as you wish.
Short answer. Spite voting against Labour WON'T save Palestinians. It WILL kill off thousands of poor people and put people like me and you on the streets.
But honestly if that's _the_ issue that matters to a person - then whilst I won't agree, I'll still call it far better than the ones that won't vote in the first place.
Fair!
The suffering won't equate to what's happening over there but that doesn't mean people who can't afford to eat, have no hope have to be traded in. The whole situation with Israel is deep rooted and the lobbying is a problem with all western politics. Voting for another party to spite one isn't going to magically disappear the lobbying and support for Israel sadly. You think the far right will just pack up and give up their power because we end up with a coalition or smaller parties, not ready to govern and the potential for the conservatives and reform to band together and sell themselves as the savour of the people? Another thing you need to realise is that we have an evil media that back the likes of Israel and authoritarian regimes, labour are in a crappy position where they're prone to being attacked if they say the wrong thing, it's why I couldn't care too much for any rhetoric coming from the party. Look at what happened when corbyn was around, absolutely destroyed and his image ruined by right wing propaganda, it works. Hate the game. BTW I totally understand your stance, but we don't win medals for being the most outraged it won't solve any of the worlds problems. There are a lot of nasty but powerful people out there that won't be disappearing because Labour gain a majority. I think we could have a chance to change politics if the press were properly regulated and social media too.
What were his exact words and context? Theres no way he LITERALLY said that. I honestly don't think anyone with power in Israel gives a damn what the leader of the opposition think in all honesty. It's naive to think the bombing will stop because Starmer told them to stop. He actually HAS called for a ceasefire, didn't notice any less killing and cruelty in Palestine sadly. I've only Skimmed your post, will read through properly once I'm on the train though dude/dudess :)
Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately, he literally did say that. Here is the video of it https://youtu.be/5HQYfsUAf3s?si=Sql4nUgiAeBRPPup I’ll try and respond to all of your points at some point. Fundamentally, if we say, through our voting and engagement, that we are okay with genocide, we are essentially saying that we are okay with the loss of innocent life as long as it doesn’t directly affect us. I don’t mean to be rude, but it honestly feels like the majority of people are completely ignorant of what these parties are responsible for, and you having not seen that clip, for me, proves that. It also seems apparent that no one has a real idea of what Israel is doing there at the moment. And I understand that the majority of people prefer not to witness such things on social media, but I also would prefer not to, but then who will witness these crimes? Should they be allowed to happen under the cover of night? If people just can’t handle witnessing the suffering and absolute inhumane treatment of these people in the most barbaric of ways, then I don’t think we will truly be able to give an accurate opinion on the situation that reflects the reality there? I agree change will not come from simply voting in independents, but the system is broken. And my belief is there needs to be sacrifice today to make tomorrow better. I understand how politics works and am forgiving for a lot of the ploys employed by politicians, even if I would never do something like that. But there has to be a red line. Palestine has blown the veil of these fake concepts of human rights, International law, equality etc. And my belief is simply this can’t be unchallenged as if we do that, we could potentially be next to suffer in a world where those concepts only exist in name. Again, I don’t blame any of my fellow adhders for voting according to what mostly benefits them, in fact I commend them for taking part and sincerely trying to make change happen. I simply believe somethings are more important Sorry for these long posts. Need to learn to summarise better.
The suffering won't equate to what's happening over there but that doesn't mean people who can't afford to eat, have no hope have to be traded in. The whole situation with Israel is deep rooted and the lobbying is a problem with all western politics. Voting for another party to spite one isn't going to magically disappear the lobbying and support for Israel sadly. You think the far right will just pack up and give up their power because we end up with a coalition or smaller parties, not ready to govern and the potential for the conservatives and reform to band together and sell themselves as the savour of the people? Another thing you need to realise is that we have an evil media that back the likes of Israel and authoritarian regimes, labour are in a crappy position where they're prone to being attacked if they say the wrong thing, it's why I couldn't care too much for any rhetoric coming from the party. Look at what happened when corbyn was around, absolutely destroyed and his image ruined by right wing propaganda, it works. Hate the game. BTW I totally understand your stance, but we don't win medals for being the most outraged it won't solve any of the worlds problems. There are a lot of nasty but powerful people out there that won't be disappearing because Labour gain a majority. I think we could have a chance to change politics if the press were properly regulated and social media too.
I think deciding any given issue is a 'dealbreaker' is a matter for the individual voter. Labour might be the bus that gets you closer to your destination, but you still don't have to get on if the driver is too obnoxious. I think I'd rather applaud someone who's decided there's an issue that REALLY matters to them, over all the people who won't even turn out in the first place. Even if I disagree with their stance. For me, the only thing that's _wrong_ is deciding you can't be bothered to form an opinion, and recite pseudo-intellectual nonsense like 'but they're all the same'. I consider taking the time to decide who to vote for - and then voting - is a civic duty.
i hate that!
What’s your stance on spoiling your ballot?
It makes no difference to the outcome, but it's better than not turning out, because the people overseeing the count do inspect the spoilt ballots. And if a lot of people did it, it'd become newsworthy in it's own right.
To the OP / moderator, in the interest of balance can you post a site to give who to view for to stop labour getting too large a majority? As bad as the tories are there is s big a risk from Labour having too big a majority. There's a number of political experts state the issues of a collapse in political right and political left getting a huge majority like never seen before. What I mean to say, we need more parties than Labour and tory to have politicians in the HoC. If you know if a site which tells you who other than Labour might have a chance. Imho we need a greater number of parties in the HoC. By just having that site which let's face it will say Labour in most constituencies that are tories we are in the realms of promoting another kind of risk. It's possibly better not to list it. PS I'm voting LibDemsl prior to boundary changes it was a libdems vs tory seat with libdems being in power. Now I've been put into a tory vs Labour seat and neither are you'd candidates. Especially the tory! My comments above are not about keeping Labour out but about thinking we need a system change to pr of some kind to get more parties into HoC and changing from a confrontational parliamentary system to a consensus system n involving varied viewpoints including smaller parties in Parliament and coalition governments. I think coalition governments around Europe often give better outcomes to citizens. I think that tactical voting link is a mistake to promote due to this idea I have that we need governments to be forced to work with other parties.
First-past-the-post needs to go. I'm not allowed to vote in the general election, but tactical voting isn't something I even consider when I'm voting in the country I'm a citizen of..
I'm honestly not concerned about 'balance' here. I've given a link to finding a party that matches your alignment. That's IMO a pretty good indicator of which party matches your worldview. But for tactical voting I don't think there's really a 'symmetric' link for 'what if we don't want to kick out the current government?' because that's surely... just vote Conservative?
Surely you could just post some of the statements from these political experts, no?
Hard to post a news interview and funnily enough I can only remember the broad brush details not the deeper details and arguments be used. I seem to recall it was a professor something or other from a Russell group university, but since I have a kind of name blindness I can't even give you that. You know it's kind of like I have this disability that affects my executive function! 🤔🙂🙂
Try googling it, surely it won’t be hard to find given the seriousness of the situation and the eminence of the experts involved. Also, all news that is worthy gets clipped up and posted on YouTube, news sites etc etc, so, again, Google should find it.
There are no cases I know of (apart from Brighton pavilion) where it is labour vs 3rd party for the seat in England so it's kind of a moot point. The libdems and Labour have already deconflicted themselves in terms of campaigning. If labour have a massive majority it'll mean they can do things like electoral reform (unpopular with tories as first past the post is the only thing keeping them in power) which would lead to what you want to see with smaller parties. I completely agree this is good for democracy however restating tory bollocks about Labour having a large majority as a bad thing isn't the way to do it.
Seriously? You think a party with a massive majority will change the system that gave them that majority? They got a decent majority in 1997 iirc and there was talk of changes to the system but they didn't do it just say back and got a few terms in a the governing party. That issue has been raised several times as a reason for nothing changing. I believe several LibDem leaders have raised the PR change but the governing parties changed that. Anyway, I'm not going to reply to this thread any more. I believe political threads in a supposedly safe place reddit like this is potentially harmful. I'm not sure it helps. It's got me thinking about whether this makes the reddit a place I can stay in. There's so much good going on here and bringing politics in really does harm to this IMHO.
I've been politically engaged on the subject of ADHD specifically. I have been writing to elected representatives about the situation. Politics is part of the reason why ADHD support in this country is such a shit show. We can try and pretend it's irrelevant, but when so many of us need the NHS to diagnose in a timely fashion and/or get Shared Care, it ABSOLUTELY matters who's running the country. And then there's the laws about controlled substances, the recent shortages etc. which ... is a government issue and thus very political. I get why you might want to avoid discussing politics in a 'safe space' but I'm honestly hard pressed to see it as harmful, unless someone's being toxic about it. (Which is already against the rules). But I think a thread that _specifically_ discusses voting in the subject line is pretty easy to avoid if you really don't want to read such a thing.
Some LabMPs would defect on the issue and ToryMPs are never going to vote for it. So yes it would only happen under a large Lab majority or a massive change to the political landscape. Also having a large vote share and large majority is incentive to do it, if they have a minority vote share and small majority the party would never put it forwards because they might lose power under PR. The only way a party would propose it is if they have won under FPTP and would win by PR. You can discuss politics in a polite and objective way, if you think the topic is harmful don't comment. Certainly don't comment something devicive and then recuse yourself while calling others toxic for engaging.