Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

David Cameron - will his recent behaviour encourage or discourage young voters? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: How will the PM's lack of engagement affect young people's voting behaviour
    Young voters will take to the ballot boxes & vote to spite him
    29
    49.15%
    Young voters will become even more disengaged and won't vote
    22
    37.29%
    Something else (please post in the thread)
    8
    13.56%

    • TSR Community Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    The prime minister pulled out of the only live debate #LeadersLive ahead of the General Election for young people (18-25) which is arranged by Bite the Ballot. All other main party leaders will be taking part.


    Subsequently students have taken to Twitter voicing their disappointment using the #WeWantMore hashtag.


    Conservative MPs and other Party members have called upon the Prime Minister to take part, and he was urged by a former Government Minister to pledge his participation – and in so doing, better communicate his Party’s values and policies to younger audiences – in front of Party Parliamentary colleagues at their final meeting of 2015.

    However, Bite The Ballot was informed by a senior Downing Street SpAd on 8 January that the Prime Minister would no longer be taking part in ‘Leaders Live’, adding that the Prime Minister’s Office had never ‘categorically assured [his] involvement’ in the project.

    In response, Bite The Ballot have asked his Office: ‘Can Downing Street ‘categorically assure’ us that the leader of the Conservative Party has no time in next 118 days to give sixty minutes of his time to the young people of this country; a demographic that’s made up of 5.6 million of citizens?’.


    See more at: http://bitetheballot.co.uk/wewantmor....v89OwBWE.dpuf

    According to Your Vote only 24% (18-24) of young people say they're certain to vote - less than the number that vote in X-Factor.


    So with this in mind do you think that by the PM not engaging with young voters that:


    a) Will you take to the polling stations and vote to spite Cameron and make your voice heard.


    b) Will you become even more disengaged with politics and refuse to vote in the General Election 2015?


    You can also make your voice heard by signing the Change.org petition which is asking for Cameron to take part in the live debate
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by She-Ra)
    The prime minister pulled out of the only live debate #LeadersLive ahead of the General Election for young people (18-25) which is arranged by Bite the Ballot. All other main party leaders will be taking part.


    Subsequently students have taken to Twitter voicing their disappointment using the #WeWantMore hashtag.





    According to Your Vote only 24% (18-24) of young people say they're certain to vote - less than the number that vote in X-Factor.


    So with this in mind do you think that by the PM not engaging with young voters that:


    a) Will you take to the polling stations and vote to spite Cameron and make your voice heard.


    b) Will you become even more disengaged with politics and refuse to vote in the General Election 2015?


    You can also make your voice heard by signing the Change.org petition which is asking for Cameron to take part in the live debate
    Will Nicola be there?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    What a shame. What is it with David Cameron and the Conservative Party? All of the other main party leaders had a few minutes of their time to spare to engage young voters, yet David Cameron doesn't. Similarly, all of the other party leaders are up for a debate in front of the whole country; David Cameron and Lynton Cosby aren't. I'll sign the petition.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I actually quite enjoyed the Bite the Ballot interviews, and would have liked to see Cameron answering similar questions as were put to the other party leaders. It's a shame the Prime Minister has, yet again, run scared from scrutiny or debate
    Offline

    3
    Who cares if he doesn't take part in the debate: the Conservatives are the only party that have REAL policies, and the British youth will realise that. A Conservative Britain is a Progressive Britain.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    Who cares if he doesn't take part in the debate: the Conservatives are the only party that have REAL policies, and the British youth will realise that. A Conservative Britain is a Progressive Britain.
    Haha you're funny :,) xD

    Looks like Cameron doesn't really believe in democracy if he's running away from debates.

    I'm unsure whether to vote for the greens or create a new box titled 'none of the above' and tick that.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Lionheart96)
    vote for the greens
    I think that you are the one being funny: if the Greens were in power then taxes would go through the roof, the economy would collapse and we would be in an even worse position than we were in when Labour were in power. The facts are there: Left Wing politics simply doesn't work.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Leaders debates aren't essential and just because they were done before doesn't mean we need them again. I would prefer a leaders debate but they are not needed and if people looked through the parties manifesto then they can still make an informed voting decision
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    Can you not answer the question................?
    It is not worth my time or energy to try and educate a clear simpleton on a different viewpoint when i know that no matter how many facts will be presented, said simpleton will continue to adamantly hold to his beliefs like a fanatical zealot. If you are really interested go read some books about how "great" your political system is and just who the conservatives are really representing.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    The Conservatives serve those who contribute to the economy.
    Do they? I am not so sure.

    There are people out there who are working very hard but having a real struggle at the moment. Some of the hardest workers are also some of the lowest paid and the state of the economy and changes in welfare have hit them hard. That's why so many use food banks.

    You appear to have gobbled up the Conservative's rhetoric on welfare reform. They painted this picture that they were getting tough on scroungers and fighting for those who were working hard... but actually this wasn't the full picture.

    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    Those who are 'most disadvantaged' by the current system are actually those who work because they have to pay taxes that go towards housing/feeding/clothing those who are too lazy to work. Why should I have to pay for housing for those who choose not to work? It's their fault that they are unemployed, not my fault and certainly not the governments fault.
    Some broad brush statements here. I'll assume that you are not really talking about those who are too ill to work, or too old. Incidentally, most of the welfare budget on out of work benefits goes to pensioners and the disabled.

    It isn't always a case of people making a choice of not working. Of course there will be some who abuse the system - but they are a minority. Unfortunately governments seem set on weeding these people out (quite rightly) but go about it in ways which harm genuine people in need of help.

    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    Quite frankly, I believe that the British Welfare System and the NHS are flawed (results of putting socialists in charge of a country), and should be scrapped altogether. After all, by paying hefty taxes, you are already paying for your dental checkup/operation etc, and for those of the voluntarily unemployed.

    A much better system would be one where you pay for what you and your family need, when you need it.
    Such a system would disadvantage a lot of people. Both of my parents worked but never really earned large sums. My mum became very ill and needed lots of medical treatment. My dad became a full time carer for her.

    I doubt that they would have been able to do this without the help of the State. They just would not have had enough money.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Lionheart96)
    It is not worth my time or energy to try and educate a clear simpleton on a different viewpoint when i know that no matter how many facts will be presented, said simpleton will continue to adamantly hold to his beliefs like a fanatical zealot. If you are really interested go read some books about how "great" your political system is and just who the conservatives are really representing.
    I am a firm believer of the phrase "you get out what you put in", and Socialism doesn't abide by this theory. Socialism is all about "give, give, give" until there is no money left. Then, they "borrow, borrow, borrow" and raise taxes: this doesn't help the working class. Many people are struggling as it is with taxes at their current rate. If these taxes are raised even further, then they will be unable to survive.

    Why should I have to give my hard earned money to the government so that a voluntarily unemployed person can live in a fully furnished house with a car? That is where Socialism is wrong.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by InnerTemple)
    Do they? I am not so sure.

    There are people out there who are working very hard but having a real struggle at the moment. Some of the hardest workers are also some of the lowest paid and the state of the economy and changes in welfare have hit them hard. That's why so many use food banks.
    Taxes are too high: if the NHS and education were privatised, and the welfare system changed, then the government would be able to lower taxes. This means that working people would have more money in their pockets each month, which means that they would be able to afford to buy food/clothes etc.



    (Original post by InnerTemple)
    Such a system would disadvantage a lot of people.
    Increasing taxes further would disadvantage a lot of people as well, this time the wealthy (who are currently supporting the Welfare System, NHS etc). Why should someone with a better paid job have to pay more taxes? They earned that money. Their decisions got them that job: they deserve to be wealthy. Forcing them to pay more taxes is an outrage.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    I am a firm believer of the phrase "you get out what you put in", and Socialism doesn't abide by this theory. Socialism is all about "give, give, give" until there is no money left. Then, they "borrow, borrow, borrow" and raise taxes: this doesn't help the working class. Many people are struggling as it is with taxes at their current rate. If these taxes are raised even further, then they will be unable to survive.

    Why should I have to give my hard earned money to the government so that a voluntarily unemployed person can live in a fully furnished house with a car? That is where Socialism is wrong.
    Why do you keep talking about socialism? I never said i was voting for labour. Socialism isn't the only alternative to the conservatives/capitalism.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    I am a firm believer of the phrase "you get out what you put in", and Socialism doesn't abide by this theory. Socialism is all about "give, give, give" until there is no money left. Then, they "borrow, borrow, borrow" and raise taxes: this doesn't help the working class. Many people are struggling as it is with taxes at their current rate. If these taxes are raised even further, then they will be unable to survive.

    Why should I have to give my hard earned money to the government so that a voluntarily unemployed person can live in a fully furnished house with a car? That is where Socialism is wrong.
    P.S. i never asked you to give anything to people who don't work, i don't even believe in that. Of course you should get out what you put in. My main issues are the environment, war and foreign policy and Corporations and bankers being put at an advantage in the system.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    Taxes are too high: if the NHS and education were privatised, and the welfare system changed, then the government would be able to lower taxes. This means that working people would have more money in their pockets each month, which means that they would be able to afford to buy food/clothes etc.
    Depends how much they earn. Someone on £15,000 a year would only have about £80 a month extra should all taxes be removed.

    They isn't much really - these people would still be worse off. And don't forget you are also asking them to pay for healthcare, education, some kind of insurance for welfare benefits etc.

    One assumes that you think we should have an army and police force etc? So presumably there would be some tax, so these people wouldn't even get their full £80 back!

    (Original post by a320airbus97)
    Why should someone with a better paid job have to pay more taxes? They earned that money. Their decisions got them that job: they deserve to be wealthy. Forcing them to pay more taxes is an outrage.
    Because that is what a progressive tax system does. It makes people with more money pay more in.

    People generally have an interest in living in a functioning society. This means you want your fellow citizens to be educated, healthy, have some income. You also want a police force to protect you and your business, a fire service and Armed Forces. You want roads and infrastructure so people can use your business.

    This all costs money which has to come from somewhere.

    You also seem to be equating the size of someone salary with the importance of their function in society. This is a bit silly.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Lionheart96)
    Why do you keep talking about socialism? I never said i was voting for labour. Socialism isn't the only alternative to the conservatives/capitalism.
    You stated that you were considering voting Greens. The Green Party is a Left Wing (not Centre-Left party like Labour) party whose ideology supports Environmentalism, Green Politics and Eco-Socialism. The Greens are certainly not as left wing as the communists, but they are more socialist than Labour.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    the only good thing the green party is good for is taking votes off labour

    some of the policies they have are dreadful and ill-thought and would ruin this country
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by InnerTemple)
    Depends how much they earn. Someone on £15,000 a year would only have about £80 a month extra should all taxes be removed.

    They isn't much really - these people would still be worse off. And don't forget you are also asking them to pay for healthcare, education, some kind of insurance for welfare benefits etc.

    One assumes that you think we should have an army and police force etc? So presumably there would be some tax, so these people wouldn't even get their full £80 back!
    Of course there would be some tax: that is inevitable.

    However, the majority of people spend very little on healthcare (dental checkup etc), meaning that for the majority of people who currently use the NHS, paying for healthcare as and when you need it would in fact benefit them. With education, why should a couple with no children have to pay for schools?

    Also, if healthcare is not free, then those who go to their GP/A&E etc when they are not in fact ill would be deterred, therefore reducing costs. Same with education: if university fees were increased, then people would be deterred from doing 'soft/Mickey Mouse' degrees.

    A pay-as-you-go method would be more beneficial to society.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Some or the right wing garbage on here:zomg: I was defending the right yesterday, now I'm so over that. I'm too nice:sad:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    David Cameron is surprising me. He seems detached from the reality that his party has to move heaven and earth if they want a majority at the next election. This isn't like the 2005 election, where labour had to do little in order to get another 5 years in government. He didn't win a majority at the last election, and polls put him far off from even coming close to achieving that .He just doesn't have the drive nor influence he had during the run up to the last election. With wanting to reintroduce fox hunting, and him chickening out on these debates, he is going a long way to lose votes. If I was in charge of the Tories election campaign I'd be worried.
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.