Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think this is a local issue, but admin  please move to the lounge if not.

Boundaries have changed, and my bit of East Dulwich (or possibly all of East Dulwich?) is now combined with Lewisham West.

According to the Get Voting website (see screenshot below), this  is such a safe seat for Labour that tactical voting is not necessary.

I do wonder whether it will turn out to be as safe a seat as they predict, as many people I know who used to vote Labour can no longer bring themselves to do that (for reasons which are definitely a lounge issue!).

I think many people in our area may vote Green, and I'm interested to know people's thoughts (I'm not asking for individual voting intentions, unless you are happy to divulge them!)

The Labour candidate is Ellie Reeves, Rachel Reeves' sister.

Screenshot_20240617-181151.thumb.png.90c2db14fb6b62d91102bcfa4c407ed2.png

9 hours ago, Suggsy said:

Everywhere around here is a slam dunk for Labour. I do wonder why thousands of fairly pointless leaflets are going out for Helen Hayes - huge majority - will no one think of the climate emergency? 

Which bit of East Dulwich will Helen Hayes still "have"? Sorry, too lazy to Google.

I think she is/was an excellent and responsive constituency MP, but some of her actions on wider issues  in recent years have been iffy to say the least (in my opinion).

I don't know if people locally have written to her about it, but if a significant number did, that could explain the leaflets?

I wouldn't have voted for her again. I would have written to her to tell her why if the boundaries hadn't changed.

  • Like 1
46 minutes ago, the_hermit said:

I suspect many people who were put off by Corbyn will vote Labour this time.

I suspect many people who were not put off by Corbyn and/or are put off by Starmer will vote Green this  time.

I could write a great deal about Starmer, but if I do this thread will get lounged 🤣

  • Like 1

I am a great believer in voting according to your beliefs, which in my case is Labour.   The principle here is a fairer more equitable society: taxes to fund better public services.  As Shakespeare said,  "So distribution should undo excess, and each man have enough"

  • Like 3

What are you basing that on?  I write to her about transport issues and get standard lines back, I suspect she doesn't read much of her correspondence unlike her forerunner who read everything and disappointed that her office isn't more on the ball.  She says the right thing on X but not sure she follows this through.  Obviously primed for higher office.

Doesn't make her a bad politician just not sure about supporting her constituents on wider matters.  Conversely on individuals with serious personal issues heard better things.

I can't vote for Reeves. I've written to her a couple of times and got unsatisfactory responses. She seems to be a party line box ticker.

I'll probably vote Green or Lib Dem, but it would be good to see some campaigning from them, or at least some campaign material from any of them. 

Edited by Forest Hill Climber
10 minutes ago, Forest Hill Climber said:

I can't vote for Reeves. I've written to her a couple of times and got unsatisfactory responses. She seems to be a party line box ticker.

I'll probably vote Green or Lib Dem, but it would be good to see some campaigning from them, or at least some campaign material from any of them. 

It's a reasonably safe seat for Labour and Reeves is the Deputy National Campaign Co-ordinator, which should be taking up a lot of her time during an election, so it's not too surprising there's not a lot of campaigning here.

Edited by AddicksAddict
Just now, AddicksAddict said:

It's a reasonably safe seat for Labour and Reeves is the Deputy National Campaign Co-ordinator, which should be taking up a lot of her time during an election, so it's not too surprising there's not a lot of campaigning in here.

Yes, understood, she has a very safe seat. But why is there nothing from Greens or Lib Dems? Have they given up before even starting - then why bother even offering candidatea?

On tactical voting, I'd only due it if there was a chance of getting rid of someone I'd didn't want.  I wouldn't do it as a protest against some aspect of the party I'd naturally support that I didn't agree with.  So, in the case of Labour, I'd want them to be more radical than they're promising but I'd still vote for them here.

3 minutes ago, Forest Hill Climber said:

Yes, understood, she has a very safe seat. But why is there nothing from Greens or Lib Dems? Have they given up before even starting - then why bother even offering candidatea?

They've got better places to spend their campaigning funds on, e.g. Bristol Central for the Greens.  As to why bother offering candidates, for a country-wide party you pretty much have to and the Lib Dems certainly see themselves as that, the Greens are probably getting that way, too.  Labour will put up people in seats where the Tories get over 50% of the votes, and vice versa, because to not do so would be seen as defeatist.

Anyone, off to work, so that's my tuppence worth on this topic.

Have received both Lib Dem and Green leaflets (Dulwich Hill ward).  Both Labour and Conservatives have lots of money from donors funding their campaigns    the other 2 parties have limited resources .

Many years ago when Lib Dems were just Liberals - their election campaigns were funded primarily from income derived from jumble sales.  I helped out at many of these events which took place at Emmanuel Church Hall (now Christ Church) and Dulwich Baths, They were the original  recycling  and anti landfill party.   

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...