If you smoke, vote
Saturday, June 14, 2008 Further to the UKIP post below, I have been meaning to comment on the slogan "Can't smoke, won't vote" which has appeared on some message boards. I have no problem with people not voting, if that's their choice, and I am vehemently against compulsory voting, but on the smoking issue I couldn't disagree more. That is why - when the next general election comes around - Forest will launch a campaign with the very clear message, "If you smoke, vote".
In fact, when the the Crewe and Nantwich by-election was called last month, we (briefly) considered putting forward a candidate to publicise our Amend The Smoking Ban initiative. The aim, had we gone ahead, was modest to say the least. Our candidate would almost certainly lose his deposit, but if he attracted even a few hundred votes from disgruntled Labour supporters unwilling to vote Conservative, it might - in a close election - have been the difference between Labour winning or losing the seat.
In the event we thought better of it, Labour lost the plot, the Tories won by a landslide, and the only single-issue candidate (Paul Thorogood, representing Cut Tax on Diesel and Petrol) received a meagre 118 votes, 0.28 per cent of those who voted.
Smokers can make a difference, but you must vote and you must vote tactically. In contrast, not voting smacks of indifference, which is the last thing smokers (and libertarians) can afford right now.
Reader Comments (6)
I absolutely agree, Simon, that not voting is unhelpful. Your suggestion that smokers' votes must be tactical I interpret as a call to vote Tory - and here I become confused! David Cameron recently made it clear that the Tories would not amend the ban, so how does voting Tory help us? I can only assume that you consider that, if more Tory than Labour MPs voted against the ban, there is more chance of future successful lobbying of a Tory Government than another Labour Government.
My personal view is that the Tories will get in irrespective of a tactical smokers' vote and I would rather vote according to my conscience. I would have to be convinced that the Tories will have to fight for power before voting tactically.
Who do I vote for?
Who should you vote for Jon? You should vote for yourself and your family, you should vote with your conscience, for the party who will represent as many of your views as possible.
If you do decide to vote on one issue alone, you just might live to regret it.
... but you'd have no objection, Peter, if I were to vote tactically, on the single issue of smoking, in favour of the Tories? (my comment is made in a spirit of benign mischief!!)
I have a theory;
Any democratic system that survives long enough will eventually produce a crop of politicians who are almost indistinguishable regardless of what party they stand from.
We are close to that situation now, with the three main parties differing in only the most trivial issues (with the exception of ID cards).
To see diversity we must look beyond the three main parties and to the fringe groups. I'll be voting UKIP not because I think there's a possibility of getting a UKIP MP for my constituency, but because if they secure a big enough section of the vote then the main parties WILL start to take notice.
Yes RTS, I agree with your first paragraph. For the first time in my life, I am seriously wondering whether to use my 'democratic' right to a free vote, as I know it will be a Tory Government, which is now 'the same thing in different clothes'!