@XraySonoCol - eviltoast

Hi, I’m Colin. 💙
I’m an advanced practitioner Diagnostic Radiographer practicing in medical ultrasound. I’m also nuclear power advocate. This is my sonography and healthcare specific learning and discussion Mastodon. Oh and politics, because that’s the way of things.
Member of the lgbtq family. He/him. North West, UK. Vegan since 2021

  • 1 Post
  • 27 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 14th, 2023

help-circle




  • @C4d Oh absolutely and I’m not alone.
    FPTP doesn’t allow for nuance, and I agree the subtlety of which you speak is lost, but that’s not the entire point, the points aren’t just the vote, it’s Labour’s knowledge of opinions of the party that also matters, whether mine or a grassroots collective.
    Labour do not have to know my intention, only my statement. They can either calculate I’m serious or bluffing. If nothing else the exchanges here will encourage introspection in others. That’s of worth.



  • @C4d
    It’s a very recent development over this weekend and so far I’m contacting opposition parties, my union and seeking out activists as well.
    I’ve emailed regional Labour party and also included my local LibDems, Greens parties, as well as Labour, Green and LibDem metro councillors.

    I agree and recognise how FPTP doesn’t work fairly and yes they can call my bluff. I’m uncertain as to whether they can effectively predict how accurate voting intention polls are. Labour keep shifting right.



  • @C4d Like I’ve said elsewhere, it’s a threat of a lost vote, that doesn’t mean I won’t vote tactically at GE. They can gamble that I and others will hold to our threat in their strategy if they wish. Just as they can if they assume that all polls assume a majority acceptance of policies, which is short-sighted IMO.
    They’ve been told they’re not good enough and have a threat of a lost vote because of it.
    Agreed, PR is better, Starmer has U-turned on that as well though.




  • @C4d Only if people fail to see that there are multiple narratives, which include telling Labour I require they change under threat of no vote. They like others know not of my intention, the cost to them is clear, a lost vote, which is what they require. They earn my vote, they work for it. Hopefully ppl who are dissatisfied will see that another way exists and instead demand better, not to succumb to their own apathetic thought processes.



  • @Fedegenerate I didn’t say I won’t vote for them, I just told them they had lost my vote.
    Staying silent and voting for a not good enough Labour let’s them think they are. Telling them I won’t even though I might vote for them, and describing why, gives them an opportunity to evaluate.
    If they’re not good enough for you and yours what are you doing to change that? My strategy is one way. There are others.





  • @frankPodmore The article in it’s just over 600 words does barely anything to answer my points.
    The value is again, that I choose to tell Labour what it is I want from them. Recall that I’ve not shared the email with you, so you have no way of knowing.
    It isn’t a simple dichotomy. I choose to tell Labour what I want from them. There are many varieties of not Tory and labour can choose to be Tory lite, or not. How I vote and what I tell them can align or not as I see fit.



  • @frankPodmore I have rooted my behaviour in reality by telling them what I want. Additionally, I also have the absolute right to change my mind as many times as I wish and to vote tactically, come the GE dependent on the facts available at the time.
    We should all be able to make on the spot decisions based on the available data and only rely on heuristics if the data isn’t available.
    What I tell them and what I do, are not Labour’s concern.