Over the last few weeks, since the Expenses Scandal (so big it get its own capital letters) broke, I've heard/read/seen a lot of concern expressed that disillusionment brought about by the abuse of the MPs' expenses system will result in low turnout or a large protest vote, either of which could favour the BNP, or other extreme parties.
Is this likely? No idea -- I'm not a political pollster.
Is not voting, or voting for a party you would otherwise ignore a sensible response to the scandal? I don't think so.
Taking them in reverse order -- who gets punished the most by electing an extremist? The ousted party? The ousted individual? Or the members of the public who are now represented by, and potentially subject to legislation drafted by, someone who should never have power. As for not voting, this doesn't really punish any individual either, although it again risks punishing the country as whole. Even were it true that "all politicians are corrupt", or "there's no difference between the parties" -- as apathists tend to say -- the fact is that someone will be elected, and we all have a vested interest in making sure that that person is someone who is going to do what we consider to be a good job.
So come on folks, get out and vote and enjoy the warm glow of knowing you did what people in many countries (say China, aptly, given the events 20 years ago today) would give their lives to be able to do. This blog was set up by the venerated Paper Ostrich, after disussions between several of us, as somewhere to let a moderate view be heard away from the loud minority of extremists. Polling stations serve a similar function.
Views and opinions from a moderate viewpoint. We believe in consensus, reason, realism, and common sense. We do not believe in dogma, hysteria, anger, or distorted perspectives. Well, we believe in them, but we don't like them.
