We're around three weeks away from the Scottish Parliamentary and Local Authority elections and I have seen and heard NOTHING on TV or radio, and precious little in newspapers about this. The vast majority of people don't even know it will be different - radically different. Is this a deliberate strategy by Labour to minimise impact or lower turnout and participation? Might it backfire in the long run, creating resentment, confusion and spoiled ballot papers?
For info: In LA elections, candidates will now be ranked in the voter's order of preference - if there are 7 candidates there you can rank them 1,2,3... up to 7, if you wish.
In the Parliamentary election you will have two votes, made with a cross - one for your constituency MSP, one for your Regional choice (who may be the same or different).
2007-04-09 22:01:59 · 3 answers · asked by Tyler's Mate 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I know and understand it as I work in a Library and we're kind of a point of reference for these kind of things. I got my polling card through today which explains about it on the back but if it hadn't been for my work I wouldn't have known about the changes until today.
Even the information for the libraries is very discreet - usually we have posters for every little thing but all thats been sent are plain white leaflets.
One thing that isn't clear though, can I mark just 1 in the LA elections? I might only want to vote for one candidate!
2007-04-10 03:04:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
that's an fairly good question. If our recent rules of physics are staggering, then gentle speed is the cosmic speed cut back. Ergo, if a famous person or galaxy is a million gentle years distant, it follows that the universe would desire to be older than a million years. you're staggering. the gentle from that merchandise would take a million years to attain Earth. Confusion is an atrocity. lamentably, i think of that's component of the human situation. I walk around puzzled for all time, and that's disheartening. i do no longer understand the fact in terms of ways previous the Earth and the universe rather are. whether, that modicum even if, the Holy Bible does comprise metaphors. particularly situations, that's complicated for faculty scholars to envision which passages are to be interpreted actually and that are to be understood as being metaphorical. I applaud you for this question, considering that's a cogent one, and expresses a valid and good challenge. yet what's the relationship between being a Creationist and determining the age of the cosmos (and Earth)? Do you recommend to point out the ostensible fact that the Earth is extra historical than some people would have faith, and, ergo, evolution is extra in all probability to be fact rather than 'basically' concept? lower back, i do no longer understand how previous Earth is. yet to be honest, I do have faith that the Earth is plenty older than 6 or 10 thousand years previous. yet for me, there is not any challenge in believing that the international is older than some Creationists would think of. To me, it does not conflict with the thought that God created people in our recent incarnation. yet to be honest, that's a stable counterargument against the assumption of Creationism, on condition that between the characteristics of Creationism is that the Earth must be basically some thousand years previous.
2016-12-15 21:09:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Government must propagate the Election laws so that the electorate will know what to do when voting.
2007-04-09 23:17:12 · answer #3 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋