Disaffection among young UK voters fuelling growth of smaller parties

11 comments

1. Maybe people are looking to smaller parties because the two parties that get all the air time offer nothing to us. Just more of the same old so it is time for some changes.

2. blows my mind that anyone would give the tori’s or labour another shot . it’s like they want to watch the world burn

3. Traditional parties have very little to offer, that said, I’d give the labour manifesto a punt. Reform are a joke party with a serious racist grifter at the helm.

   So yeah I get why young voters look else where.

   Why vote for parties that don’t give a shit about you? The young need a future, they need jobs, support, something to bloody aim for. It’s no wonder so many are so left behind they simply gave up.

4. It’ll be interesting to see the extend that this actually happens in the general election. Smaller parties often tend to poll well, but when the day comes and people need to actually vote, then tactical voting and FPTP mean that they a lot of those votes go back to the main parties.

5. Tories and Labour are 2 cheeks of the same rotten backside. Its hilarious how the British people have and will keep voting them in expecting anything significantly different. Only electroral reform to a PR type system will ensure some genuine change, until that point the 2 main parties will move closer and closer to eachother.

6. Young people are smarter than older generations, so they don’t trust rich-funded news in rich-funded newspapers.

   In addition to that, they don’t want TV so much.

   As a result, they don’t trust Labour/Tories in the same scale with older people.

7. Labour need to make an offer if they want to get young people on board. At the moment their offer is more tailored to the elderly vote. The Tory offer is almost exclusively tailored for the elderly vote.

8. Daily reminder for all Britons to read Part 11 of the Equality Act 2010.

   >”Public sector equality duty

   >(1)A public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to—

   >(a)eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;

   >(b)advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

   >(c)foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.”

   https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/11

   >(3)Having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to—

   >(a)remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

   >(b)take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

   >**(c)encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.**

   https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/11

   If a fellow from [X country] should migrate to Britain, he should be protected under the Equality Act 2010 for his [X country] heritage, that he is traditionally underrepresented in Britain and that his participation is “disproportionately low”, and therefore every public sector institution or office must advance policies that aid him over regular Britons.

   At every moment that the “conservatives” have complained and cried about moral decay and left-wing politicking in the civil service, one should understand that what they are crying about is mandated somewhat by law. One should understand that hard law provides soft incentives: laws guide the direction of our national behaviours. That if our laws point in the one direction, even if a behaviour (such as wearing a rainbow lanyard, say) is outside of the warrant of that direction, it still points that way. It is the ‘outside behaviour’ that the “conservatives” cry about, yet their own inaction to modify or repeal this bill has guaranteed—alongside their projects of mass immigration—an incentive to disinherit British children in favour of those “traditionally underrepresented”, and to foster our national behaviours that point to this result.

9. You mean young people don’t understand anything and are throwing their dummies out the pram

10. Having more diverse politics would be a very good thing, having a high concentration of voters torn between just two party’s that have the majority of the seats between them is actually very bad for democracy. I’m glad smaller party’s are getting more support and hopefully we see more seats gained by the smaller party’s. More people should vote and support party’s based on their own evaluation and core values. Instead they either fully trust and follow mainstream media poison or vote for a party just to prevent another party winning. Even seeing leaders even suggest to vote in that manor makes me cringe. “a vote for X is actually a vote for Y” No it isnt, can’t believe leaders are openly suggesting people to vote like that (Kier Starmer and Penny Mordaunt I’m looking at you)

11. I’d like to see lib dems have a good run. They still make pledges like they have a nice dream for our future.