are you frustrated that all the things you want to communicate to the govt has 2B reduced down to voting for..

Question

A, B or C (if youre lucky to have three parties) once every five years ?

dont you want a vote on the issues of the day, once a month...not once every five years.

it annoys me, always, when a contentious issue is floating round that politicians say "well you can make your feelings clear at the general election" as if there arent loads of other issues you wanted to make your point about---AT THE TIME THEYRE HAPPENING, instead of months or years later when the concerns you had have INEVITABLY faded from memory.
how can you consdense the often contradictory issues and feelings you have -for a certain party and sometimes against the same party, into a vote once every five years?
isnt this why single issue groups seem to have taken over from party politics.

Answer 1

It does need to be 4 or 5 years because that is how long policy often takes. If there was an election every year, nothing would get done as the consultation and research time would be longer.

Also, democracy doesn't mean we decide what to do, it means that we decide who we have to decide for us. I don;t understand the intricacies of economics or running a huge organisation like the NHS, military, police etc so I vote for who I think would do the best job for me.

Democracy has many flaws, but its still the best option out there.

Yearly elections would cost a fortune and we would be left in limbo and I don't buy the benign dictator idea - a dictator has too much power, now matter how benign they are.

Answer 2

C

Answer 3

no not really'''