2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[Dr The Singh]

Looks like this has been going on for a while, wonder if any other political parties have a 'women's section' at their events?

I want to go, I bet there would be loads of fit totty, all very political minded, up for a bit if scandal

[Jon the Hat]

I want to go, I bet there would be loads of fit totty, all very political minded, up for a bit if scandal

 

It was last year.

[Dr The Singh]

It was last year.

Feck!!!  They doing one this year, if so me, you and Strokes....your taking the munter!!!

[Guest MattP]

A government with the policy to rob Peter to pay Paul can be assured of the support of Paul

        — George Bernard Shaw

 

Though ironically if Paul is on benefits and Peter is at work you'd see this as absolute fine.

[Darkon84]

Though ironically if Paul is on benefits and Peter is at work you'd see this as absolute fine.

 

Beat me to it.

[ramboacdc]

close to page 100 now lets shift course a little.

lib dems. i used to vote for them but now will not be this election.

how many seats will they lose (currently on 56) and how many is enough, do you feel, to have any bargaining power at a coalition table and how many would be a all out disaster? 

[Strokes]

close to page 100 now lets shift course a little.

lib dems. i used to vote for them but now will not be this election.

how many seats will they lose (currently on 56) and how many is enough, do you feel, to have any bargaining power at a coalition table and how many would be a all out disaster?

Why have you abandoned them, what was it that made you change and who do you now support?

[Rincewind]

Or maybe just because the owner is a non-dom

Is  his name Paul?

[Jon the Hat]

close to page 100 now lets shift course a little.

lib dems. i used to vote for them but now will not be this election.

how many seats will they lose (currently on 56) and how many is enough, do you feel, to have any bargaining power at a coalition table and how many would be a all out disaster? 

 

I should think they will retain about 30.  Anything less and Clegg will be under pressure.  I can see the members being against a formal coalition as a result.

 

If the Tories can top out at 290 then the LDs will be key to another Cameron led government with DUP.

[Matt]

Thank **** it's all coming to an end. That said it'll still go on for weeks analyising the results.

 

Soon we'll find out how much they've all been lying about their policys and their soundbytes.

[Jon the Hat]

Thank **** it's all coming to an end. That said it'll still go on for weeks analyising the results.

 

Soon we'll find out how much they've all been lying about their policys and their soundbytes.

 

It will probably take longer than that to have a government.  See Belgium, over a year last time round before they formed a Government.

[Strokes]

Thank **** it's all coming to an end. That said it'll still go on for weeks analyising the results.

Soon we'll find out how much they've all been lying about their policys and their soundbytes.

Not really, non of them have to live up to their policies or sound bites as non will win an outright majority.

[Guest MattP]

I should think they will retain about 30.  Anything less and Clegg will be under pressure.  I can see the members being against a formal coalition as a result.

 

If the Tories can top out at 290 then the LDs will be key to another Cameron led government with DUP.

 

I mentioned this in the predictions thread but hasn't Clegg pretty much ruled out any coalition involving UKIP or the DUP when he made his 'blukip' speech?

[Guest MattP]

Galloway is now odds on from being a 3/1 outsider to win Bradford West.

 

Given what Bilo and The Doctor have been telling us about what he has been getting upto, what does that say about the people of Bradford West?

 

Anti Semitism clearly a huge vote winner in that part of the country, hurrah for the blacksh....whoops...respect!

[Jon the Hat]

I mentioned this in the predictions thread but hasn't Clegg pretty much ruled out any coalition involving UKIP or the DUP when he made his 'blukip' speech?

 

Should have said with DUP support.  If the alternative is Labour SNP I don't think Clegg of Farage will do anything other provide support to Cameron.

[ramboacdc]

Why have you abandoned them, what was it that made you change and who do you now support?

back in 2010 i was 20, had a lot of friends that were students. I agreed with their policies on tax and even on the AV vote. I thought at the time that brown was not a person i wanted to run this country and i do not like the conservatives policies of not helping people at the bottom and helping the people at the top.

now after 5 years i do still agree with a lot of liberal policies and i would vote for them. however i see the bigger evil being 5 more years of a conservative government (even if in coalition) so i will be voting labour in an effort to try and swing this round. i dont fear a labour/snp alliance at all. i honestly think they will work well for each other. 

[Jon the Hat]

Meanwhile, Ed and Ed, does Cameron as sitting PM get a first go at a coalition or not?  Hmm?

 

http://order-order.com/2015/05/05/balls-blows-it-another-2010-video-emerges-to-ruin-labours-squatting-spin/

[Guest MattP]

back in 2010 i was 20, had a lot of friends that were students. I agreed with their policies on tax and even on the AV vote. I thought at the time that brown was not a person i wanted to run this country and i do not like the conservatives policies of not helping people at the bottom and helping the people at the top.

now after 5 years i do still agree with a lot of liberal policies and i would vote for them. however i see the bigger evil being 5 more years of a conservative government (even if in coalition) so i will be voting labour in an effort to try and swing this round. i dont fear a labour/snp alliance at all. i honestly think they will work well for each other. 

 

Have you changed your mind on that now they make the rich pay more tax than Labour did and have taken the lowest earners out of the tax bracket?

 

Meanwhile, Ed and Ed, does Cameron as sitting PM get a first go at a coalition or not?  Hmm?

 

http://order-order.com/2015/05/05/balls-blows-it-another-2010-video-emerges-to-ruin-labours-squatting-spin/

 

- I think I remember Balls saying similar as well.

 

 

 

Welfare Debate is on in 5 mins on BBC 2, some big hitters on including the genius Iain Duncan Smith, a man who has cured more people of their disabilities than the NHS.

[Jon the Hat]

back in 2010 i was 20, had a lot of friends that were students. I agreed with their policies on tax and even on the AV vote. I thought at the time that brown was not a person i wanted to run this country and i do not like the conservatives policies of not helping people at the bottom and helping the people at the top.

now after 5 years i do still agree with a lot of liberal policies and i would vote for them. however i see the bigger evil being 5 more years of a conservative government (even if in coalition) so i will be voting labour in an effort to try and swing this round. i dont fear a labour/snp alliance at all. i honestly think they will work well for each other. 

 

The Conservatives absolutely do NOT have policies of not helping people at the bottom and helping the people at the top.  This is Labour bollocks.  For a start without a strong Economy you don't have the money to support those at the bottom.  Secondly, under the coalition, millions at the bottom no longer pay tax at all, while those at the top are paying more than ever.  the top earning 3000 people pay more tax than the bottom 9million.  Does that sounds like a Government which is only helping the Rich?  Do some research before you buy into Ed's soundbites.

The conservatives have also spent more on the NHS, and spent better, taking out thousands of admin roles and putting in Doctors and Nurses instead. 

2 Million more jobs - no better way of supporting those at the bottom than getting them off the bottom.

 

All this against a backdrop of Labour telling us week in week out none of it would work and the Tories were getting it wrong.  "If this is wrong, I don't wanna be right!"  ( © Coming to America)

[ramboacdc]

Have you changed your mind on that now they make the rich pay more tax than Labour did and have taken the lowest earners out of the tax bracket?

 

Honestly? no. because i see that as one of the previous "red lines" that the lib dems would have bought in. I see policies such as the spare room subsidy (to give it its proper name to prove no bias) were conservative moves. 

I also still believe that the conservatives are out of touch with myself and my views. I do know people my age or younger who are swayed to the conservatives however. 

[Guest Bilo]

Galloway is now odds on from being a 3/1 outsider to win Bradford West.

 

Given what Bilo and The Doctor have been telling us about what he has been getting upto, what does that say about the people of Bradford West?

 

Anti Semitism clearly a huge vote winner in that part of the country, hurrah for the blacksh....whoops...respect!

 

Disturbing to see that such tactics and rhetoric appear to be paying dividends, but there is a lot of poverty and ignorance in Bradford West. If not for poverty or ignorance, Respect would be laughed out of Bradford as they were laughed out of Leicester in 2005. 

 

There again; Galloway was a rank outsider for the 2012 by-election and he earned a 10,000 majority, so who knows? 

 

I think the election's likely to be unsafe anyway - Phil Woolas all over again, meaning Respect would have to run with another one of Respect's leading lights in Galloway's place. 

[Alf Bentley]

Meanwhile, Ed and Ed, does Cameron as sitting PM get a first go at a coalition or not?  Hmm?

 

http://order-order.com/2015/05/05/balls-blows-it-another-2010-video-emerges-to-ruin-labours-squatting-spin/

 

Our strange, unwritten constitution based on precedent....which often works surprisingly well.

 

Based on the precedents of 1974 and 2010, what Ed and Ed said in 2010 will be right, in practice.

 

As sitting PMs, Heath (1974) and Brown (2010) tried to hold on for a few days in the hope of forming another government, even though they had "lost". Likewise, Cameron will have first go at forming a government that can pass a Queen's Speech, provided that Labour do not win a majority (almost certain), whether or not the Tories have the most seats. If it becomes apparent that he cannot muster up 323 votes to pass a Queen's Speech, then he should let Miliband try. Of course, there'll be all sorts of whispering and negotiations going on between different parties while all this is happening.

 

Clegg and the Lib Dems look set to be crucial in this. It seems pretty clear that Clegg himself would prefer another coalition with the Tories - but it's by no means certain that his party will. So, first question is whether Clegg wins his own seat (he probably will, just, due to Tory tactical voters). Second question is whether his party allows him to go ahead and do another deal with the Tories, an interesting question when he'll have probably just lost them loads of seats due to the last coalition. If Labour gets more seats than the Tories, or is even fairly close, the Tories have lost a lot of seats and a Labour-led coalition looks more viable (e.g. with passive SNP support), will Clegg dare to push for another Tory-led coalition?

 

There's a cynical view being aired in the Grauniad today. It reckons that Cameron might seek to form a Con/LD coalition and produce a Queen's Speech even if they haven't got 323 votes in the Commons....thereby daring Labour and the SNP to ally to vote them down. The naive democrat in me hopes that the Tories won't stoop to that - and would like to think that they won't. If they do, we're into a full-blown constitutional crisis and possibly a high-speed break-up of the UK.

[Strokes]

 

There's a cynical view being aired in the Grauniad today. It reckons that Cameron might seek to form a Con/LD coalition and produce a Queen's Speech even if they haven't got 323 votes in the Commons....thereby daring Labour and the SNP to ally to vote them down. The naive democrat in me hopes that the Tories won't stoop to that - and would like to think that they won't. If they do, we're into a full-blown constitutional crisis and possibly a high-speed break-up of the UK.

Its not really an underhand tactic, Ed Miliband has ruled out any deal with SNP, so you would assume it would be the largest coalition.

[Alf Bentley]

Its not really an underhand tactic, Ed Miliband has ruled out any deal with SNP, so you would assume it would be the largest coalition.

 

The Queen's Speech is the most important parliamentary event of the year and is supposed to be about legislating as to how the country will be run.

 

For a PM to stay on and produce a Queen's Speech in the knowledge that he didn't have the votes to get it passed, purely to make a party political point about Labour potentially relying on SNP support or abstentions, would be an abuse of the democratic system. It would also be an abuse of the democratic system that would fan resentment between English and Scots, encouraging the break-up of the UK - a very bad thing, in my view.

 

To be clear, I'm not talking about Cameron hanging on as PM until it is clear who can form a government. That would be quite justified and there's good precedent for it (Heath in 1974; Brown in 1990). But, in 1974 and 1990, once it became clear that the sitting PM couldn't assemble a majority capable of passing a Queen's Speech, Heath and Brown resigned - and rightly so. Wilson and Cameron, respectively, were the ones who could pass a Queen's Speech in 1974 and 2010.

 

I very much doubt that Cameron will hang on if it becomes clear that he can't command a majority, though. I'm fully expecting days, possibly weeks of chaos, negotiations and machinations, but I'd expect that to end up with either Cameron or Miliband assembling a majority to pass a Queen's Speech....though how long that government lasts is quite another matter.

 

Psychologically, though, I'm preparing myself for a repeat of 1992, just in case. That was neck-and-neck in the polls, with Labour slightly ahead, if anything. Then the exit poll switched it round, anticipating a Major minority government....and the actual results produced a small Tory majority. With so many voters apparently still undecided, something like that could yet happen again. Turnout, effectiveness of party operations at constituency level, tactical voting, late deciders.....outcome still up in the air.

[Guest MattP]

Disturbing to see that such tactics and rhetoric appear to be paying dividends, but there is a lot of poverty and ignorance in Bradford West. If not for poverty or ignorance, Respect would be laughed out of Bradford as they were laughed out of Leicester in 2005. 

 

There again; Galloway was a rank outsider for the 2012 by-election and he earned a 10,000 majority, so who knows? 

 

I think the election's likely to be unsafe anyway - Phil Woolas all over again, meaning Respect would have to run with another one of Respect's leading lights in Galloway's place. 

 

They weren't really 'laughed out' of Leicester were they? Yvonne Ridley got 16% of the vote, when you think of how many Muslims we have in Leicester that's actually a very significent proportion of them, probably even a majority of their voters when you look at the demographics for Leicester South from that time.

 

That said despite finding Respect quite dangerous I don't mind Galloway at all winning his seat, like Farage, Lucas, Boris and Carswell etc I do think the Houses of Parliament will be far more interesting with him in it than just seeing another backbencher from one of the main parties, his speech in the commons on the Syria debate was one of the highlights of the last 5 years and most of what he said came to fruition.

 

Looking at some of the 'activities' in Tower Hamlets, Bradford and Birmingham it often looks like we are getting a Islamist elected whether they belong to Respect or Labour anyway.

 

There's a cynical view being aired in the Grauniad today. It reckons that Cameron might seek to form a Con/LD coalition and produce a Queen's Speech even if they haven't got 323 votes in the Commons....thereby daring Labour and the SNP to ally to vote them down. The naive democrat in me hopes that the Tories won't stoop to that - and would like to think that they won't. If they do, we're into a full-blown constitutional crisis and possibly a high-speed break-up of the UK.

 

I don't understand what would be wrong with Cameron doing that if he wins the most seats, even Balls and Miliband have said themselves in 2010 that the current Prime Minister should be the first to try and form a government if the opposition cannot form a majority.

 

He's perfectly entitles to produce a Queen's speech and 'dare' the others to vote it down, even more so when a lot on the left have openly talked about forming a 'anti-Tory alliance' like it's some sort of serious basis to form a stable government.