voter apathy?

[anneasquith]

yesterdays by election , turnout 28.8%, is this an all time low. ?

[emmie]

perhaps some are politics weary, it's on news, in the papers, and as many are having nightmares as to how to pay for christmas, and get through it without too much upset, their priorities may be elsewhere.

[lcg]

no. probably not a record, but people were too busy xmas shopping/hiding inside from the rain. 8.8% swing to labour, tho...shows people are getting fed up with cameron's 'tinkering'.

[AB Editor]

http://www.parliament...h/rp2004/rp04-061.pdf

Might have some useful info, but not the exact answer.

The DM claims it to be the lowest turn out: http://www.dailymail....seat-West-London.html

[Ankou]

no

http://news.bbc.co.uk...k_politics/365094.stm

[AB Editor]

Also, it was dark, cold and wet yesterday evening - it can ruin the whole thing.

[AB Editor]

Thanks Ankou.

[lcg]

the dm will claim anything if they think people will believe it. the sooner people realise it is actually a comic, the better.

[jno]

lowest for 11 years; not too surprising when you hold it in the middle of winter.

[Old_Geezer]

Many now realise that in constituencies as populated as they are, your single vote means next to nothing. Some find it difficult to convince themselves they would be doing more than just 'going through the motions' with no real say, so if they are busy with something else, and especially if they don't see any likelihood of change, the turnout is inevitably low. I'm unsure what the answer is though, it is a problem for large groups.

[rojash]

It's interesting to note though that the accepted wisdom is that the lower the turnout, the worse it is for Labour. The result therefore must say something about the electorate's view of the current government.

[emmie]

rojash, perhaps all governments, seeing how many from all sides of the house, had their hand in the tills, and trust is something the electorate have lost in their politicians.

[Gromit]

It was a strong Labour seat, so Tories and LibDem supporters didn't bother turning out for nothing.

[rojash]

Gromit, presumably you could equally make the case "it was a strong Labour seat, so Labour supporters didn't bother turning out as they knew they would win anyway."

[ichkeria]

Well I follow the news and politics quite closely and I didn't even know there was a by-election until I heard the news today - though admittedly I don't live in the constituency.
And 10 days before Christmas, in a non-marginal, too. I'm surprised the turnout was that high.
Still, I'll drink to an 8 per cent swing to Labour in an already safe seat. Roll on the election!

[bigbadmarty]

Have to agree with em10 here . It is a shame after the struggles of the working class and women to obtain representation .

[ichkeria]

"Make voting compulsory and fine non voters - revenue?"

That will never happen. If you force people to vote you will get people voting for stupid candidates out of spite. It's a shame more people don't care, but I'd rather it was the people who DO care making their choices than having ballots stuffed with a lot of ignorant votes. And sometimes people DO tiurn out who otherwise might not, in a good cause - look at the Barking result in the General election when locals turned out in their thousands to vote againd Nick Griffin. Bit there are other examples, good and bad.

[anneasquith]

only a generation ago, most people would have voted whenever an election was on. maybe we dont trust any politicians now, irrespective of their politics ?