Douglas South

[notwell]

I agree. Gutting. So, we've one mhk basically and a free loading waste of oxygen.

[Uhtred]

I agree. Gutting. So, we've one mhk basically and a free loading waste of oxygen.

Notty - The Free Loading Waste of Oxygen Party will be celebrating the return of quite a few other members before the night is over.

[notwell]

It's so frustrating he's back in.

[j2bad]

Once he was annointed as Cretney's candidate it was game over.

[TrampyHamster]

It's so frustrating he's back in.

Yes, but if that wasn't the case there would be a total useless twat in the seat.

[JackCarter]

 

It's so frustrating he's back in.

Yes, but if that wasn't the case there would be a total useless twat in the seat.

But you lost ...

[KeithFitton]

I'm saddened that the turnout in Douglas South was the lowest of all constituencies. I originally decided to stand to ensure the electorate had a full choice of candidates but it looks like the majority of people in Douglas South either didn't care enough to turn out or simply didn't believe there were candidates worthy of their vote? Either way, at such an important time for the future of the IoM, it's a shame that 60% of the voters chose not to bother. Fair play to the two people who took the time to go to the polling station and write 'none of the above' on their paper, to at least register a protest. I wonder, if I'd started campaigning earlier, would it have made a difference? Perhaps, but given the circumstances and challenges for getting around in a wheelchair, I think I did what I could.

 

Thanks to those who've posted kind messages.

 

While I'm very disappointed by the result but glad I stood because disappointment is transient, regret is long term.

[SamHandwich]

As I posted before, three candidates who are either current or past LibVan members plus David Fowler doesn't constitute a 'full choice of candidates' in my opinion.

[notwell]

I'm saddened that the turnout in Douglas South was the lowest of all constituencies. I originally decided to stand to ensure the electorate had a full choice of candidates but it looks like the majority of people in Douglas South either didn't care enough to turn out or simply didn't believe there were candidates worthy of their vote? Either way, at such an important time for the future of the IoM, it's a shame that 60% of the voters chose not to bother. Fair play to the two people who took the time to go to the polling station and write 'none of the above' on their paper, to at least register a protest. I wonder, if I'd started campaigning earlier, would it have made a difference? Perhaps, but given the circumstances and challenges for getting around in a wheelchair, I think I did what I could.

 

Thanks to those who've posted kind messages.

 

While I'm very disappointed by the result but glad I stood because disappointment is transient, regret is long term.

My wife and I voted for you as did my next door neighbour.

 

It's absolutely gutting Malarkey got back in. Gutting.

 

The one thing I would say is this - I didn't see a single candidate on my doorstep and I think the fact you were so late to the party has probably cost you (and those 296 wasted votes for David Fowler).

 

If what turned up on my doorstep is representative (i.e no one) then I think the reason for your low turnout is possibly that. Do you know what the figures of turnout were like at the polling stations? i.e was there more in Pulrose than the school in Saddlestone?

[j2bad]

The low turnout was no doubt because this was a foregone conclusion, the Cretney vote was with Malarkey we all do our bit for democracy by voting Kate.

 

I doubt if there was an all island constituency and a list system that I would ever vote for Kate Beecroft. For all those whining about low turnouts it is the obviously unrepresentative nature of our system that drives this.

[OldhamJ]

 

I'm saddened that the turnout in Douglas South was the lowest of all constituencies. I originally decided to stand to ensure the electorate had a full choice of candidates but it looks like the majority of people in Douglas South either didn't care enough to turn out or simply didn't believe there were candidates worthy of their vote? Either way, at such an important time for the future of the IoM, it's a shame that 60% of the voters chose not to bother. Fair play to the two people who took the time to go to the polling station and write 'none of the above' on their paper, to at least register a protest. I wonder, if I'd started campaigning earlier, would it have made a difference? Perhaps, but given the circumstances and challenges for getting around in a wheelchair, I think I did what I could.

 

Thanks to those who've posted kind messages.

 

While I'm very disappointed by the result but glad I stood because disappointment is transient, regret is long term.

My wife and I voted for you as did my next door neighbour.

 

It's absolutely gutting Malarkey got back in. Gutting.

 

The one thing I would say is this - I didn't see a single candidate on my doorstep and I think the fact you were so late to the party has probably cost you (and those 296 wasted votes for David Fowler).

 

If what turned up on my doorstep is representative (i.e no one) then I think the reason for your low turnout is possibly that. Do you know what the figures of turnout were like at the polling stations? i.e was there more in Pulrose than the school in Saddlestone?

 

 

I echo these comments, I live in Harcroft Meadow and the only knock we had at the door was from Mr Fowler. I did not vote for him personally, but maybe the 296 who did used that as their main criteria when voting. There are a large number of houses on our estate, but we didn't appear to be deemed significant enough for any of the three main candidates to call as far as I'm aware, however they always seem to find the time to visit Pulrose and Anagh Coar !!

[notwell]

^{There are over 1000 voters easily in Harcroft Meadow, Saddlestone and Farmhill. Probably more.}

 

^{Malarkey farmed the Pulrose etc vote with that Pinewood shite. It'll end up closed anyway.}

 

^{The by election was the first time i'd been compelled to vote. So this was the first full election i've voted in. I think there are a lot of people living around me who probably were of the same sort of approach over the years. It's an opportunity missed for Keith IMHO}

[Lisenchuk]

The low turnout was no doubt because this was a foregone conclusion, the Cretney vote was with Malarkey we all do our bit for democracy by voting Kate.

 

I doubt if there was an all island constituency and a list system that I would ever vote for Kate Beecroft. For all those whining about low turnouts it is the obviously unrepresentative nature of our system that drives this.

My sentiments exactly.

[KeithFitton]

As I posted before, three candidates who are either current or past LibVan members plus David Fowler doesn't constitute a 'full choice of candidates' in my opinion.

 

It's a 'full choice' in as much as you could vote for the two incumbents, two challengers or one of each. With only one challenger, you had to vote for one of the incumbents if you wanted to use both of your votes. The quality & diversity of the candidates is a different matter and is of course, subjective.

 

In terms of door knocking, during the by-election in 2015, we knocked on almost every house with a registered voter, including all of Harcroft Meadow, over a five week period. This time, I had less than two weeks to get out & about, as well as write a manifesto, stuff envelopes, deal with printing etc. I had hoped that the newsletter would have explained that position and people who particularly wanted to meet me would contact me. A few people did so, but obviously other people wanted the knock on the door. Fair enough, but simply not possible for me. Also, being a wheelchair user, I could only canvas if I had someone with me to help (which really p***** me off, having to rely on other people!) So from my perspective, I would have loved to meet more people on the doorstep.

 

 

The low turnout was no doubt because this was a foregone conclusion, the Cretney vote was with Malarkey we all do our bit for democracy by voting Kate.

 

I doubt if there was an all island constituency and a list system that I would ever vote for Kate Beecroft. For all those whining about low turnouts it is the obviously unrepresentative nature of our system that drives this.

 

I disagree. From the people I spoke to in two elections, not one person cited this as a reason for not being interested in voting.

 

In principle, I would like to see an all Island vote but in reality, I don't think it would work. With about fifty candidates, they would almost certainly focus their resources on Douglas & Ramsey to maximise exposure. The south & Peel may get some coverage, but that would be mainly from candidates who live in those areas and were banking on a parochial response. In the by-election, I had a couple of people say they wouldn't vote for me because I lived outside the constituency, so I think an all Island system would promote even more Douglas centric candidates.

 

[Edited for clarity. Every house with a registered voter, not every house]

[Moghrey Mie]

I think if Keith Fitton had started his campaign earlier and indicated that he really wanted to do the job rather than just giving people another option as regards candidates he would have done better.