On Wednesday 09 June 2004 00:35, BenEBoy psychoferret@ukonline.co.uk wrote:
But UKIP is a single issue group. If you don't agree with that single issue then you shouldn't vote for them. In the grand scheme of things, the UK withdrawing from Europe is more important than software patents (*dons flame proof trousers*). People shouldn't vote for UKIP just because they agree with *one* of their policies.
Offered a choice between one Candidate I agree with 90% but not the last 10% on an issue on which I am campaigning, and another with whom I don't agree at all, except on that one point, where neither candidate is going to form, with others, a big enough grouping to have much effect, then I'll vote for the latter!
I'm sorry, but unless they election was *very* close, he's not going to care at all. How many people would vote against him because of patents? <100? <50? It's an important issue, but a minor one to most voters.
From what I've seen, heard and read, it might indeed be that close, if Andrew Duff loses by ONE vote, and then 200 voters tell him its because they worked to send a message on software patents and voting records, then both he, and the rest of his party who did get elected, are going to pay attention.
John Seago wrote:
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 00:35, BenEBoy psychoferret@ukonline.co.uk wrote:
But UKIP is a single issue group. If you don't agree with that single issue then you shouldn't vote for them. In the grand scheme of things, the UK withdrawing from Europe is more important than software patents (*dons flame proof trousers*). People shouldn't vote for UKIP just because they agree with *one* of their policies.
Offered a choice between one Candidate I agree with 90% but not the last 10% on an issue on which I am campaigning, and another with whom I don't agree at all, except on that one point, where neither candidate is going to form, with others, a big enough grouping to have much effect, then I'll vote for the latter!
Depends on who the party is. Personally I wouldn't put my 'X' in the UKIP box knowing that the anti-europe media will make a song and dance over the results if they are high.
I'm sorry, but unless they election was *very* close, he's not going to care at all. How many people would vote against him because of patents? <100? <50? It's an important issue, but a minor one to most voters.
From what I've seen, heard and read, it might indeed be that close, if Andrew Duff loses by ONE vote, and then 200 voters tell him its because they worked to send a message on software patents and voting records, then both he, and the rest of his party who did get elected, are going to pay attention.
*doffs cap*
I've been talking to a friend who works for the greens, who said that the party have been hearing from a lot of people that they will be voting green because of patents. So it looks like it's more of an issue than I thought.
On 2004-06-09 10:59:26 +0100 BenEBoy psychoferret@ukonline.co.uk wrote:
I've been talking to a friend who works for the greens, who said that the party have been hearing from a lot of people that they will be voting green because of patents. So it looks like it's more of an issue than I thought.
Remember, software patents could cover data processing, so it is a pretty broad problem.
CON, LAB and LD have also been voting for more copyright enforcement measures in the last european parliament. That has annoyed some in the free media/indymedia and social forums and those groups are pretty good at spreading messages.
Europe-wide, most strongly against these issues were Green/EFA, GUE/NGL (left, maybe Respect if elected), EDD (right, inc UKIP) and then ELDR (inc Lib Dems, who voted the other way). The large PSE (socialist, inc Lab) and EPP-DE (popular, inc Con) coalitions generally voted for the commission or council views. I'm not sure which ED would join if elected, if any. BNP, ProLife and Independents are likely to be "non-attached" because they're either too extreme for those coalitions or "free vote"rs.
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 20:25, MJ Ray wrote:
Europe-wide, most strongly against these issues were Green/EFA, GUE/NGL (left, maybe Respect if elected), EDD (right, inc UKIP)
The only common thread among EDD parties is their dislike of the EU. AIUI the Danish EDD party is rather leftish.
Also UEN (eurosceptic populist conservatives, inc parties only just on the edge of respectability) voted strongly against swpat but were split on ipred.
and then ELDR (inc Lib Dems, who voted the other way).
The anti-swpat bloc of ELDR did not all follow on ipred. Only D66 (Dutch left libertarians) and the Swedes and Catalans have consistently voted our way. So others need 'pushing'.
The large PSE (socialist, inc Lab) and EPP-DE (popular, inc Con) coalitions generally voted for the commission or council views.
PSE were majority anti-swpat.
I'm not sure which ED would join if elected, if any.
My gut feeling is they'd be at home in UEN.
Alex
BenEBoy wrote:
I've been talking to a friend who works for the greens, who said that the party have been hearing from a lot of people that they will be voting green because of patents. So it looks like it's more of an issue than I thought.
Do you happen to know the views of the individual East Midlands Green candidates on software patents? I've been trying to find out but I've had no luck by email. Perhaps your friend has some idea?
tola ^/.
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 14:58, John Seago wrote:
Offered a choice between one Candidate I agree with 90% but not the last 10% on an issue on which I am campaigning, and another with whom I don't agree at all, except on that one point, where neither candidate is going to form, with others, a big enough grouping to have much effect, then I'll vote for the latter!
what if the 90% on which you disagree is not something over which the candidate could have any effect (MEPs have no influence over their country's EU membership) and the 10% on which you agree is something over which they can have a direct effect because they are to vote on it very shortly after the election?
Alex
-
Alex Macfie -
Ben Francis -
BenEBoy -
John Seago -
MJ Ray