The Student Room Group

Why do people vote for the Green Party?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Studentus-anonymous
I would never vote Green Party.

It's one thing to be a single issue party but I find they cater more to the misguided and ideologically naive elements of environmentalism rather than of practical concerns and realistic policies.

As a rule any party that is anti-nuclear power is immediately filed under 'Ignore & Never Vote For'.


Enjoy exercising your democratic rights! :smile:


This this this!!!
Original post by Ziggy Sawdust
Yet research has shown that Green Party voters have a higher average IQ than voters of all other UK parties.

And FYI, if you live in a safe seat, which more than half of voters in the UK do, then your vote is worthless regardless of which party you vote for.


I wouldn't get into the business of comparative IQ studies. Debate policies please, not IQ scores.
I forgot the green party existed for a while :biggrin:
Original post by felamaslen
I wouldn't get into the business of comparative IQ studies. Debate policies please, not IQ scores.


I was merely responding to post deriding Green Party voters' intelligence with statistical evidence to the contrary. To be frank, I don't think there would be much point debating policy with the individual who made that comment.
Original post by James222
Hipsters
People who believe in global warming
People for whom gay rights is number 1 issue


You dont have to believe global warming, its a fact.
I usually support labour but Green Party has started to gain my interest. I visited an Eton public debate and saw Natalie Bennett and their policies. I agree with all of them
they probably appeal most to the people have haven't realised that socialism has already been tried in the past and didn't work for us
Original post by zippity.doodah
they probably appeal most to the people have haven't realised that socialism has already been tried in the past and didn't work for us


Proper socialism has never been tried.
Original post by St. Brynjar
Proper socialism has never been tried.


you mean socialism to the extent of the soviet union?
They're a left-wing protest vote when there are no real left-wing options to vote for. The big three are all different flavours of centre-right and right-wing neoliberalism, and UKIP are far-right nationalists. Their environmental and science policies are generally terrible but they are pretty much the only party that recognises that these problems need to be higher policy priorities rather than just paying lip service to them. They're the kind of party where the country's politics would be better for having them more involved in the debate, but would need serious internal reform before they would be capable of effective governance.
Original post by Falcatas
They believe that humans are a plague on the planet and that authoritarian measures such as high tax and government regulations must be imposed on the public.

They are anti-growth, telling us we need to reduce our consumption when in fact we should be increasing it so we can increase prosperity for all humans.

They oppose nuclear energy even though it is much more efficient and cheaper than renewables.


Well, we kind of are. We comsume rescources and give little back to the environement. we're the only species to do this.

I cba to reply to this point, you're either trolling or just plane stupid.

Believe me when I say, it really, really, really isn't cheaper.
Original post by betaglucowhat
They're a left-wing protest vote when there are no real left-wing options to vote for. The big three are all different flavours of centre-right and right-wing neoliberalism, and UKIP are far-right nationalists. Their environmental and science policies are generally terrible but they are pretty much the only party that recognises that these problems need to be higher policy priorities rather than just paying lip service to them. They're the kind of party where the country's politics would be better for having them more involved in the debate, but would need serious internal reform before they would be capable of effective governance.


This
Original post by Pegasus2
Well, we kind of are. We comsume rescources and give little back to the environement. we're the only species to do this.

I cba to reply to this point, you're either trolling or just plane stupid.

Believe me when I say, it really, really, really isn't cheaper.



We are also the most productive species as well. Humans are the pinnacle of evolution, we have drastically increased life expediency and standard of living for our species (we have a lot way to go still of course).

I am not trolling or stupid.

Nuclear fission is more productive than wind which is why it is better.
Original post by Ziggy Sawdust
Yet research has shown that Green Party voters have a higher average IQ than voters of all other UK parties.

And FYI, if you live in a safe seat, which more than half of voters in the UK do, then your vote is worthless regardless of which party you vote for.


I would not disputethe IQ range of Green voters and by that logic you would assume they must be best for the job. The reason I am put off by them as is a large proportion of the electorate, they want to equally focus on issues like the environment ( I actually think everything they say on this issue is true), social welfare and general socialism alongside issues such as the economy, immigration, education and health. I want a party that focuses primarily on the economy and education for example. These minor concerns for the whole population (Various polls find immigration, the economy and EU are greatest concerns) take up too much time, money and effort. It would be awesome if we could have complete social, economic, environmental and political stability but that seems like a perfect world. Greens want to highlight all these issues while at least Tories follow the economic trend, labour the social instability and UKIP the European concerns as their primary message.
Original post by Ziggy Sawdust
Yet research has shown that Green Party voters have a higher average IQ than voters of all other UK parties.

And FYI, if you live in a safe seat, which more than half of voters in the UK do, then your vote is worthless regardless of which party you vote for.


Is this like the apparent research that showed that Democrats had higher IQ than Republicans in the US, only for it to turn out to be completely made up? Or the good old Firefox users vs IE users that fooled everyone a few years back?
Pretentious liberals have a habit of falling hook, line and sinker for dubious studies that back up their apparent superiority.
Considering the average UK IQ is 100, I'm not even going to point out the obvious flaw in those figures. Even if they were true, the data is based on IQ tests they took when they were ten. Clearly some people wised up as they got older while others didn't.
Original post by pol pot noodles
Is this like the apparent research that showed that Democrats had higher IQ than Republicans in the US, only for it to turn out to be completely made up? Or the good old Firefox users vs IE users that fooled everyone a few years back?
Pretentious liberals have a habit of falling hook, line and sinker for dubious studies that back up their apparent superiority.


Here's a link to the abstract for the original study, you can judge it's validity for yourself. It is perhaps worth pointing out that the results were puplished in a peer reviewed journal, and that the data was collected by the British Cohort Study (a very reputable longitudinal survey). In any case, I wasn't claiming to be 'superior', I was simply refuting the claim of a UKIP voter that Green Party voters are "fools".

Original post by pol pot noodles
Considering the average UK IQ is 100, I'm not even going to point out the obvious flaw in those figures.


I presume, from your reference to the overall average IQ in the UK, that by "obvious flaw in the figures" you are referrring to the disparity between the average UK citizen's IQ (100) and the range of average IQ of party voters, which are predominantly significantly higher in most instances? If so, then I'm afraid you have failed to take into account the disproportionate numbers representing each party as well as the 'did not vote' group. For instance the Green Party (average IQ score 108.3) receives just 1% of the popular vote, compared to 'did not vote' group (average IQ 99.7) which accounts for ~40% of the population. Thus, the Green Party voters' IQ scores would have very little impact on the overall average IQ for the UK, and there is no flaw in the figures.

Talking of logical flaws, do I need to point out the obvious non sequitur "x and y studies are flawed, therefore unrelated study z must also be flawed"?

Original post by pol pot noodles
Even if they were true, the data is based on IQ tests they took when they were ten. Clearly some people wised up as they got older while others didn't.


IQ tests are a measure of innate intelligence, not wisdom. IQ is largey fixed after a early childhood, and if anything declines in adulthood.
Original post by ClickItBack

Furthermore, it is entirely down to the choice of the individual as to how much they decide they want to work. I did a year working for a large multinational in a typical office job - it was so relaxed it was mind-numbing. Of my 7 'work' hours a day I probably only really had to put any effort in for 2 hours. Most of my time was spent browsing the net or chatting to colleagues - all of whom did the same.


This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about, though. Jobs these days are easier, cushier, more efficient. You say you could do a day's worth of work in 2 hours, yet you were still compelled to turn up for the full 7 - perhaps even staying a while after office hours doing nothing worthwhile just to avoid being 'that guy who only ever stays the bare minimum amount of time'. Those other 5 hours are a total waste that could've been spent as leisure time, doing more fulfilling things, pursuing personal interests or goals. The idea that everybody needs to work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week is fast becoming obsolete.
People vote for them because they are ACTUALLY Left Wing, unlike labour who are centre right at best...

Also they realise that health and happiness are more important to the future of society rather than just money. Money is not happiness, happiness is not money, why does everyone focus so much on money and which party can provide the most wealth for its citizens?
Original post by MASTER265
I would not disputethe IQ range of Green voters and by that logic you would assume they must be best for the job. The reason I am put off by them as is a large proportion of the electorate, they want to equally focus on issues like the environment ( I actually think everything they say on this issue is true), social welfare and general socialism alongside issues such as the economy, immigration, education and health. I want a party that focuses primarily on the economy and education for example. These minor concerns for the whole population (Various polls find immigration, the economy and EU are greatest concerns) take up too much time, money and effort. It would be awesome if we could have complete social, economic, environmental and political stability but that seems like a perfect world. Greens want to highlight all these issues while at least Tories follow the economic trend, labour the social instability and UKIP the European concerns as their primary message.


The simple fact is that the mass consumerism that sustains the economic growth the current system relies upon is totally unsustainable. The environment might be a low priority the majority of the electorate right now, but all too soon it'll be having a very significant impact on everyone. As a result of climate change and population growth, resources that have been plentiful and cheap for citizens of developed nations for decades will soon become increasingly rare. Bare essentials like food and medicine will consequently become increasingly expensive and peoples' standards of living will fall dramatically. It is extremely short-sighted to see these issues as unimportant or irrelevant.

I'm not the spaced out, tree hugging hippie type people tend to associate with the Green Party, I'm just a sensible practical person who has the foresight to know better than to **** where I eat.
Despite primarily being environmentalists they essentially represent the only mainstream left wing option to vote for. The big three are just a blurred stain alongside nationalist rightwing minnows.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending