Who are the candidates and who's got your vote?

[moorendman]

Question, why is Michael Taylor first? His party is not incumbent, it's not alphabetical, It's not Lady's first, is he the oldest, the youngest, so why?

Call me cynical but do I sense some kind of vested interest or some kind of attempt at manipulation here?   

No I wont call you cynical, but I might think you have conspiracy theorist tendencies You can think all you want about vested interest but I would doubt they would all agreed to have met me if they thought so. I could decline to explain but that might add to your insecurities. The posts will be made in the order I interviewed each candidate. ( and he is the oldest too , but thats a coincidence. )

[Condate]

Basically they're all good people who will do their best for their constituents. However they will all be told by they party whip how vote on important matters. So the only realistic way to vote is on party politics. At the end of the day you are voting for a political party, and how you vote will affect the whole population, not just Hazel Grove.

This is why we get stuck with the politicians we do. I wish people would remember that while all the candidates belong to political parties, that does not mean they represent those parties in the commons. They don't. Strictly speaking there is no such thing as a Conservative MP, or a Labour MP, or a Lib Dem MP. They are all (or will be when they are elected) simply members of parliament. Yes, there is a serious problem with the disgraceful system of party whips (which people have been complaining about for centuries), but fundamentally, we are voting for a person, not a party and for me and for many people there are candidates of a political party I would vote for and others from the same party I wouldn't vote for if in a million years. That's why it's so important to hear what the individual candidates say. If people vote for a candidate simply because he or she belongs to a particular party, even though the candidate holds views far removed from ones own, it is no wonder we get the sorts of parliaments we do.

I do wish we could get rid of party names on the ballot paper. It would at least be a visible reminder to voters that they are not voting for a party. I also wish we had a few independent candidates too. If people voted only for candidates who held views they support, we would have a very different house of commons.

We should also remember that what happens elsewhere is not relevant to the election here. We are only concerned with who represents the constituency of Hazel Grove and nothing else.

[simonesaffron]

Had a quick look at your website Moorendman.

Enjoyed the bit from 'The Masque of Anarchy' not seen nor heard that for 50 years, tremendous.

Question, why is Michael Taylor first? His party is not incumbent, it's not alphabetical, It's not Lady's first, is he the oldest, the youngest, so why?

Call me cynical but do I sense some kind of vested interest or some kind of attempt at manipulation here?   

[moorendman]

As a Mellor Resident living at the very edge of the constituency, I realised I was unlikely to be called by any prospective candidate. I decided to go and meet each candidate and put to them the same questions. Some of the readers of this thread may find the candidates responses interesting. Read more here: https://mellorview.wordpress.com/

[simonesaffron]

Dave,

You can't tell people that they are ''wrong' to vote in a particular way for a particular reason. It is their vote (not yours) and they can vote for whosoever they wish and for the most obscure reason that they choose, if they do choose.

[Dave]

Basically they're all good people who will do their best for their constituents. However they will all be told by they party whip how vote on important matters. So the only realistic way to vote is on party politics. At the end of the day you are voting for a political party, and how you vote will affect the whole population, not just Hazel Grove.

Spot on, I think.  As individuals I'm sure all our local candidates are well-intentioned and would represent us conscientiously.  And it would surely be quite wrong to vote on the grounds of someone's gender.  So it comes down to the respective policies of the parties, and - just as important - their competence.    After all, there's no point in voting for someone because they stand for something you believe in, if they then fail to implement it effectively once they are elected.

That's the problem with the Tories.  One may agree with some of their policies - who could disagree with deficit reduction, for example - but they have let themselves down through weak leadership and poor political judgement. 

[simonesaffron]

Exactly Harry, and therein lies a big part of the dilemma.

That is the reason for this topic's existence in the first place.

[Harry]

The struggle for me is to separate one part from another. So I'm doing it by candidate and that's proving just as difficult.

Basically they're all good people who will do their best for their constituents. However they will all be told by they party whip how vote on important matters. So the only realistic way to vote is on party politics. At the end of the day you are voting for a political party, and how you vote will affect the whole population, not just Hazel Grove.

[chicken lady]

I think of it as that as well, and the sooner it is buried in that hole the better.

You beat me to it Ian B!

[simonesaffron]

It's a good point that you make BG.

We've established that Lisa is a woman, but what if she was black, disabled and lesbian?   

The struggle for me is to separate one part from another. So I'm doing it by candidate and that's proving just as difficult.   

[Bowden Guy]

But, Simone, how would the Identity Politics test run if William Wragg was disabled? Does being disabled trump being a woman? What if the UKIP a bloke was from an ethnic minority? Would that trump being disabled etc etc etc etc...........

[Dave]

The coalition government has done an outstanding job on the economy

The present government has spectacularly failed to achieve its own stated objective of eliminating the budget deficit within the lifetime of this parliament.  How can anyone, even a passionate Tory supporter, call that 'an outstanding job'! 

As for this:

everything else is a bit of a sideshow.

Let's just take one issue: the safeguarding of the United Kingdom.  Last September  David Cameron came close to having to tell the Queen that her realm was falling apart.  He got away with it then, but he remains a weak leader who regularly has sand kicked in his face by the bully boys on his right wing.  As a result, he has been forced to commit to a referendum on EU membership in 2017.  If that occurs, and if (as is quite possible) England votes to leave the EU but Scotland votes to stay, there will be another Scottish referendum and this time the result will be different.  And David Cameron, leader of the Conservative and Unionist party, will go down in history as the man who presided over the end of the United Kingdom.  That's not a sideshow! 

The more I see of Cameron, the more I admire Margaret Thatcher.

[simonesaffron]

It must be the same person that was in the pub the other night, he was wearing that tee shirt and he had a Del boy mask on.

I think as Disgusted said, he is some sort of renegade. I can't see it being any of the opposition parties, it's a tied on vote loser if it came out.

Three weeks to go and I've still not made my mind up. Nothing to go off yet.  As I drive about, not seen a Ukip poster, a few labour ones around, Conservatives appear to be winning poster war in North but Lib Dems winning easily in south, although not really sure where the border is.

Interesting fact that I may have published before, if I have, apologies for repetition.

650 MP'S in Westminster, how many women?  148, ratio 3+ to 1, bit like our candidates. That in itself might be a good enough reason to vote for Lisa.       

[Disgusted of Marple]

Just spotted a chap on Market Street wearing a bright red T shirt with the slogan "Lisa Smart - Putney Reject".....

Saw that too. Hoping he is some kind of renegade rather than part of an organised effort. Really wide of the mark, that.

[IanB]

I think the coalition as a hole

I think of it as that as well, and the sooner it is buried in that hole the better.