9 Jul
9:01am, 9 Jul 2024
25,043 posts
|
larkim
Cerrertonia wrote: Fenners-Reborn wrote:Apparently the same person has been a Reform candidate in more than one seat at the same time. Which is itself illegal. It's an offence to provide false information on nomination papers and it's an offence to stand in more than one constituency. But is it true? |
9 Jul
9:06am, 9 Jul 2024
17,443 posts
|
jda
I have also been asked if I wanted to be a paper candidate in a local election (I didn't do it). Those who think it's immoral or unfair, does that also apply to the Labour candidates who didn't campaign exclusively in their own constituencies, or more generally the Labour party that didn't give equal resources to all constituencies? "Paper candidate" just means someone who stands with no realistic chance of winning and who doesn't necessarily devote huge effort in what is self-evidently a lost cause. Even if I had allowed my name to go forwards, I'd still have done more good for the party by supporting a neighbouring ward where the candidate stood a chance of winning. This is very much a feature of the way FPTP works so get used to it. |
|
9 Jul
9:07am, 9 Jul 2024
17,444 posts
|
jda
If the same person has been a candidate in two constituencies it should be a trivial matter to name the person and the constituencies in question. They are all listed on wikipedia FFS.
|
|
9 Jul
9:08am, 9 Jul 2024
25,044 posts
|
larkim
jda wrote: larkim, you don't have to vote for anyone you don't like in STV. Just fill in the first place and leave the rest blank. Yes, well aware of how it works. But it's a cleft stick; vote once, and for only candidate I value, and have no say once they've "gone" in the counting, or hold my nose and vote for other "least worsts" and get at least a small say. When I've voted using STV in the past, the "RON" option (re-open nominations) was always a good option; doesn't necessarily work in the sort of time-sensitive elections like Parliamentary GEs, but having a positive "negative" vote I think is worth incorporating in any system. |
|
9 Jul
9:16am, 9 Jul 2024
17,446 posts
|
jda
Well you either want to express a preference for B over C, or you don't. I don't see how you can reasonably blame the voting system for your ambivalence. FPTP makes life "easy" by not giving you the choice, but that can hardly be argued as a reason for preferring it. The aim is after all to choose a candidate that matches the electorate's preferences as well as it can (noting that there isn't a perfect solution to this and it depends what you mean by matching and preferences).
|
9 Jul
9:35am, 9 Jul 2024
5,779 posts
|
paulcook
Cerrertonia wrote: Fenners-Reborn wrote:Apparently the same person has been a Reform candidate in more than one seat at the same time. Which is itself illegal. It's an offence to provide false information on nomination papers and it's an offence to stand in more than one constituency. Niko Omiliana, or the name, was on at least 8 constituency lists. |
9 Jul
9:36am, 9 Jul 2024
24,374 posts
|
3M
Worth pointing out that some people just "are" political animals, and enjoy that life. I've known a couple of parliamentary candidates who were willing to stand in seats (on in 2017, one last week) where they stood no realistic chance of election to parliament (one blue, one red!). In both cases it was combination of the party fielding a candidate so voters could express an opinion on them, and perhaps more usefully, an opportunity for them as individuals to see how they did in the hurly-burly of electoral politics. I'm reasonably convinced both would have done their best as MPs had they been elected, too. (Even though I only agree with one of them politically  ) . One went on to be the chair of a local Conservative Association, the other is a sitting Labour Councillor.
|
|
9 Jul
9:37am, 9 Jul 2024
5,780 posts
|
paulcook
jda wrote: Those who think it's immoral or unfair, does that also apply to the Labour candidates who didn't campaign exclusively in their own constituencies, or more generally the Labour party that didn't give equal resources to all constituencies? I was going to make a similar point. I'm not having it the Conservatives, given they picked about 200 of their candidates in 2 days, didn't have plenty of paper candidates. And secondly, if Lib Dems, Labour, Green, or others, stand down to give a free reign to other left-wing parties for tactical voting, are they just not paper candidates? |
9 Jul
9:56am, 9 Jul 2024
7,553 posts
|
ThorntonRunner
I liked the Newsthump "article" yesterday pointing out that we had a PR referendum in the 2010s so who does Farage think he is wanting to overturn the result of a referendum 🤣🤣
|
9 Jul
10:03am, 9 Jul 2024
50,429 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
paulcook wrote: Cerrertonia wrote:Fenners-Reborn wrote:Apparently the same person has been a Reform candidate in more than one seat at the same time. Which is itself illegal. It's an offence to provide false information on nomination papers and it's an offence to stand in more than one constituency. Niko Omiliana, or the name, was on at least 8 constituency lists. I didn't think that was permitted. If so, shouldn't it be prosecuted as a breach? G
|
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Oct 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
