Guest MattP Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 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. No need to do that, polling has moved on dramatically since then, we're heading for a hung parliament.
The Doctor Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 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! Eh, this week it's only traffic violations and noise pollution he's got up to, although it has come out that he hasn't actually made any complaints to the police over the brewery, so we can add threatening and intimidation of local businesses to his rapsheet for this election. Still shocks me anyone would want an mo with a voting turnout of 11.19% - might as well not have an mp at that rate. Be interesting to see what happens at the moment - the Tory students I know are all planning to vote labour here because they're the lesser of two evils, which I think says all you need to know about how little Galloway is respected by all outside his little flock
lgfualol Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Still don't know who to vote for. I might just do Eeny Meeny Miny Moe, but obviously not vote bnp or ukip if they're a moe. My area will forever be conservative so wouldn't make a difference anyway.
Guest Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Still don't know who to vote for. I might just do Eeny Meeny Miny Moe, but obviously not vote bnp or ukip if they're a moe. My area will forever be conservative so wouldn't make a difference anyway. Isn't mo more likely to be muslim?
ramboacdc Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 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) sorry i missed your post when i was replying. i do see your point however i believe this was due to the liberal coalition. i don't say everything bad was tory everything good was liberal but i do believe clegg when he says that the lib dems would give the tories a heart. I am not the only liberal jumping ship that is well known (56 down to possibly 17 at worse!) because we know a conservative/liberal coalition isn't good for the country. the liberals in my eyes should have got into bed with labour but in 2010 that still wouldn't have got labour over the line and now the lib dems would be accused of pretty much bed hopping. that and i have met my tory MP (andrew bridgen) and i cannot stand the guy! heard him on 5 live promoting mp pay rises, expenses not being scrutinized and just seems to play devils advocate to everything in the conservative party line.
Jon the Hat Posted 6 May 2015 Author Posted 6 May 2015 sorry i missed your post when i was replying. i do see your point however i believe this was due to the liberal coalition. i don't say everything bad was tory everything good was liberal but i do believe clegg when he says that the lib dems would give the tories a heart. I am not the only liberal jumping ship that is well known (56 down to possibly 17 at worse!) because we know a conservative/liberal coalition isn't good for the country. the liberals in my eyes should have got into bed with labour but in 2010 that still wouldn't have got labour over the line and now the lib dems would be accused of pretty much bed hopping. that and i have met my tory MP (andrew bridgen) and i cannot stand the guy! heard him on 5 live promoting mp pay rises, expenses not being scrutinized and just seems to play devils advocate to everything in the conservative party line. I have literally no idea how you can say the Conservative Liberal Coalition has not been good for the country. I don't disagree that having the Liberals in has helped give the coalition a more caring approach, although I think this is mainly because the leadership has been able to point to the agreement to stop its more right wing members kicking off.
Alf Bentley Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 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. The sitting PM should stay on, anyway, until it's clear who's going to form the government. Parliament has been dissolved, but we need - and have - an interim government under Cameron. Cameron is perfectly entitled to stay on for as long as he reasonably believes that he might be able to assemble a majority to pass key legislation like the Queen's Speech. He'll have more credibility in doing so if he has the most seats, but would be entitled to try even if he hasn't. Heath (1974) and Brown (2010) both tried this for several days, but failed to assemble a majority and resigned. Likewise, if it becomes clear that Cameron can't pass a Queen's Speech and that Miliband can, Call Me Dave should call himself a taxi and fvck off out of Downing Street! If he tried to present a Queen's Speech without having the votes to get it passed, I presume the others would vote it down, pass a "no confidence" vote and Miliband would then have 14 days, under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, to form a government and get a confidence vote passed. Or could Cameron just ignore a "no confidence" vote and stay in office having all his legislation voted down by Labour and the SNP? Seriously, to stay on without the ability to pass legislation, purely to fan hatred between the English and the Scots for perceived party advantage would be a democratic abuse that would bring democratic politics into even more public discredit. Can't see that winning the Tories much public approval so can't see Cameron going for it. Different matter if they can pass a Queen's Speech (on whatever basis), of course. We'll soon find out, anyway (though "soon" might take a few weeks). No need to do that, polling has moved on dramatically since then, we're heading for a hung parliament. You're right about polling having moved on dramatically since 1992, so the exit poll will probably be pretty accurate. I wonder how they take account of differences in swing between regions (e.g. Scotland!) and to tactical voting in marginal constituencies? Still time for the situation to shift between now and the exit poll, though, even if the latter is very accurate. I read that 14% of voters are still undecided. If, say 3% more of them go Tory or go Labour, that could make a massive difference to the outcome, particularly if you factor in issues like tactical voting, turnout for different parties etc. "Hung parliament" is probably right, but it's not as certain as some think.
Alf Bentley Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Isn't mo more likely to be muslim? Mo Johnston? http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/scottish/the-day-mo-johnston-signed-for-rangers-28486440.html
ronnup Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 http://benjaminstudebaker.com/2015/05/02/britain-for-the-love-of-god-please-stop-david-cameron/ Well written article that helps show how Cameron is ruining us
Monk Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 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. In that case I had better get some popcorn in. One things for sure, the SNP are not going to sit quietly on the back rows of Westminster, especially with Cameron's hateful anti scot rhetoric. If he does go ahead and try to form a minority coalition, I can't see any outcome other than a vote of no confidence. He'll claim this is the scots holding England to ransom, but in reality he has no mandate to govern the whole of the UK (he barely has for the last 5 years anyway). Also bear in mind that the Lib Dems have their own troubles, and if they perform worse than expected, Clegg himself will be under pressure, meaning any coalition would be even weaker. I see only 2 possible outcomes - a minority Labour coalition without the SNP, which will face a vote of no confidence from the right, and Ed will have to choose whether to have a second election or to do a deal with the SNP. Either way, Ed will become extremely unpopular with his own party.
ramboacdc Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 I have literally no idea how you can say the Conservative Liberal Coalition has not been good for the country. I don't disagree that having the Liberals in has helped give the coalition a more caring approach, although I think this is mainly because the leadership has been able to point to the agreement to stop its more right wing members kicking off. see this...this right here is why i love politics sometimes! love a debate on it! my opinion is the liberals came in with their promises and the tories have used them to run under the bus and go "well we may have had a bedroom tax..but look at tuition fees! boo hiss! vote for us and we will make sure they don't get a chance to do it again."
Guest MattP Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Eh, this week it's only traffic violations and noise pollution he's got up to, although it has come out that he hasn't actually made any complaints to the police over the brewery, so we can add threatening and intimidation of local businesses to his rapsheet for this election. Still shocks me anyone would want an mo with a voting turnout of 11.19% - might as well not have an mp at that rate. Be interesting to see what happens at the moment - the Tory students I know are all planning to vote labour here because they're the lesser of two evils, which I think says all you need to know about how little Galloway is respected by all outside his little flock He's currently ahead by 2% in the last opinion poll, that's clearly a lot more support than a little flock. I don't think these are the sort of people bothered about a voting record, at the hustings in Hall Green the Labour candidate 'won' the debate on Kashmir, that says a lot about what you need to know about what you need to campaign on to win a lot of votes in these areas. It's good to hear that the Bradford Conservative Student(s?) is voting Labour to keep him out but I'm not sure that's going to be enough? You need that massive moderate Muslim majority we are always told exists to come out and vote against his antisemitism and racism surely? Bad move by Labour to put a woman up against him as well? Have to play to the audience and Bradford West clearly has a large portion of fanatical Islamism it it. The sitting PM should stay on, anyway, until it's clear who's going to form the government. Parliament has been dissolved, but we need - and have - an interim government under Cameron. Cameron is perfectly entitled to stay on for as long as he reasonably believes that he might be able to assemble a majority to pass key legislation like the Queen's Speech. He'll have more credibility in doing so if he has the most seats, but would be entitled to try even if he hasn't. Heath (1974) and Brown (2010) both tried this for several days, but failed to assemble a majority and resigned. Likewise, if it becomes clear that Cameron can't pass a Queen's Speech and that Miliband can, Call Me Dave should call himself a taxi and fvck off out of Downing Street! If he tried to present a Queen's Speech without having the votes to get it passed, I presume the others would vote it down, pass a "no confidence" vote and Miliband would then have 14 days, under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, to form a government and get a confidence vote passed. Or could Cameron just ignore a "no confidence" vote and stay in office having all his legislation voted down by Labour and the SNP? Seriously, to stay on without the ability to pass legislation, purely to fan hatred between the English and the Scots for perceived party advantage would be a democratic abuse that would bring democratic politics into even more public discredit. Can't see that winning the Tories much public approval so can't see Cameron going for it. Different matter if they can pass a Queen's Speech (on whatever basis), of course. We'll soon find out, anyway (though "soon" might take a few weeks). You're right about polling having moved on dramatically since 1992, so the exit poll will probably be pretty accurate. I wonder how they take account of differences in swing between regions (e.g. Scotland!) and to tactical voting in marginal constituencies? Still time for the situation to shift between now and the exit poll, though, even if the latter is very accurate. I read that 14% of voters are still undecided. If, say 3% more of them go Tory or go Labour, that could make a massive difference to the outcome, particularly if you factor in issues like tactical voting, turnout for different parties etc. "Hung parliament" is probably right, but it's not as certain as some think. I'm sure he'll stay on, but if he wins the most seats I would like to see him still present a Queen's speech to the house. As for having the right if he finishes second just because he is PM, I actually hope he doesn't, I actually think Clegg got it spot on in 2010 when he said the largest party should be the first ones who have the right to form a government, I really wouldn't want to see him trying to drag together a coalition if he's actually lost to Ed Miliband.
MooseBreath Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Cameron was on great form on radio 4 this morning. The interviewer, bizarrely, tried to not give Cameron a chance at answering anything before interrupting him, really challenging the concept of an interview, and he was obviously brimming with bias, but in spite of that tinpot BBC nonsense Cameron spoke like a man cruising to victory. Very calm, very assured, very confident. Contrast that to Ed 'I'm so nervous I can't stand up, hell yes' Miliband. Amazing that two people so clearly in different leagues are competing for the same post.
Guest MattP Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Anyone just see the Daily Politics? Bloke jumps in front of live reporter shouting 'Don't vote Labour, Manchester Labour Council are killing people' before beign wrestled by two coppers, then you see him back in the picture as they carry him away
The Doctor Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 He's currently ahead by 2% in the last opinion poll, that's clearly a lot more support than a little flock. I don't think these are the sort of people bothered about a voting record, at the hustings in Hall Green the Labour candidate 'won' the debate on Kashmir, that says a lot about what you need to know about what you need to campaign on to win a lot of votes in these areas. It's good to hear that the Bradford Conservative Student(s?) is voting Labour to keep him out but I'm not sure that's going to be enough? You need that massive moderate Muslim majority we are always told exists to come out and vote against his antisemitism and racism surely? Bad move by Labour to put a woman up against him as well? Have to play to the audience and Bradford West clearly has a large portion of fanatical Islamism it it. Which opinion poll - I'm struggling to find any up here. At the moment I'm voting labour because it's looking like they're the closest challenge to him, but frankly I'd vote UKIP or Tory if it'd keep Galloway out... the problem with FPTP; lends itself too well to tactical voting. Still, he's got his flock but beyond that not much - he can't even appeal to the politically naive 18 year old freshers: kicked up a massive fuss over the students only hustings held at the university and how his supporters couldn't get tickets as a result. Possibly - we'd need a strong turnout: he won 55% last time, but that was of a 50% turnout - meaning he got 23% of the constituencies support, in a constituency that is 45% Muslim. If labour can appeal to the other 50% of muslims, combined with the students that are generally opposed to Galloway (just under 16% approval with students going by the post-hustings vote) then they should take it, but apathy at the moment is likely to be what gets him in. The extremists who support him will turn out en masse, the people who don't really like him not turning out will be what gets him in. To an extent, yes - but at the same time Shah is a local charity worker, relatively well respected by the community before all this: they've tried to play the community, but there's an inherent problem with democracy - it values the opinions of idiots as much as anyone elses, and Bradford West is full of idiots.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 http://benjaminstudebaker.com/2015/05/02/britain-for-the-love-of-god-please-stop-david-cameron/ Well written article that helps show how Cameron is ruining us I'm not going to bite and go through every cherry picked statistic and inaccuracy in that article. Some good points are raised but I long to read a balanced argument on here one day or for more people to be capable of using their own words eloquently enough to put across their own argument rather than rely on blogs or journalists or just regurgitate the same stuff that we have read millions of times. However, I do want to raise the point of tuition fees. I find it bizarre that socialists think it should be free and that people who are afforded great earning potential from uni (future bankers, barristers, doctors, corporate lawyers, management consultants etc) shouldn't have to pay for that privilege, to me that's exactly what they should think. In fact the current system seems very socialist to me. His comparison is silly, here you can pay 9k a year to go to some top class institutions, if we compare like for like in the US then it's considerably cheaper and none of it is paid upfront unless you can afford it. We can't directly compare our unis to those in the US and maybe you can say the cost is too high for some of our lower tier unis but if you don't earn enough afterwards you don't pay anything anyway. Our system isn't perfect but it doesn't put people off going to uni and if anyone is put off going to uni because of it then they shouldn't be going to uni cos they don't have basic research and comprehension skils
RobHawk Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Some great radio satire from Radio 4 being plugged on the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32608909
ramboacdc Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/7-monster-raving-loony-party-5644717
The Doctor Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4lxq0sLNnw The Poke's made up policies and asking people about it. Amount of people taking them seriously
Nalis Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Cameron was on great form on radio 4 this morning. The interviewer, bizarrely, tried to not give Cameron a chance at answering anything before interrupting him, really challenging the concept of an interview, and he was obviously brimming with bias, but in spite of that tinpot BBC nonsense Cameron spoke like a man cruising to victory. Very calm, very assured, very confident. Contrast that to Ed 'I'm so nervous I can't stand up, hell yes' Miliband. Amazing that two people so clearly in different leagues are competing for the same post. This has been a common theme for all party leaders interviewed in the campaign, too many interviewers loving the sound of their own voice rather than letting the interviewee answer the bloody question in the first place!
Monk Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 This has been a common theme for all party leaders interviewed in the campaign, too many interviewers loving the sound of their own voice rather than letting the interviewee answer the bloody question in the first place! Andrew Neil is terrible at this
bovril Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4lxq0sLNnw The Poke's made up policies and asking people about it. Amount of people taking them seriously "I come from an academic background..."
The Doctor Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 "I come from an academic background..." It's the guy at UKIPs 8 year old soldier policy that gets me "I don't know about 8, 11 would be fine"
Rincewind Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Does Cameron ever a nswer a question? Every timei've seen him he goes off topic. Although this seems to be the trend in a lot of politicians nowadays.
Guest MattP Posted 6 May 2015 Posted 6 May 2015 Which opinion poll - I'm struggling to find any up here. At the moment I'm voting labour because it's looking like they're the closest challenge to him, but frankly I'd vote UKIP or Tory if it'd keep Galloway out... the problem with FPTP; lends itself too well to tactical voting. Still, he's got his flock but beyond that not much - he can't even appeal to the politically naive 18 year old freshers: kicked up a massive fuss over the students only hustings held at the university and how his supporters couldn't get tickets as a result. Possibly - we'd need a strong turnout: he won 55% last time, but that was of a 50% turnout - meaning he got 23% of the constituencies support, in a constituency that is 45% Muslim. If labour can appeal to the other 50% of muslims, combined with the students that are generally opposed to Galloway (just under 16% approval with students going by the post-hustings vote) then they should take it, but apathy at the moment is likely to be what gets him in. The extremists who support him will turn out en masse, the people who don't really like him not turning out will be what gets him in. To an extent, yes - but at the same time Shah is a local charity worker, relatively well respected by the community before all this: they've tried to play the community, but there's an inherent problem with democracy - it values the opinions of idiots as much as anyone elses, and Bradford West is full of idiots. The 2% quote was from Galloway himself on the DP, I googled a poll and couldn't find any either, apologies as that could be nonsense, according to the beeb the constituency is 51% Muslim. It's one of the most interesting seats of the evening, another one that will probably be riddled with corruption as well, looking forward to the postal vote turnout from it. Andrew Neil is terrible at this He is, but only because he can immediately spot when someone has no intention of answering his question, he's probably the best political interviewer I've ever seen. I was reading the Times on Saturday and they had an in depth interview with 'insiders' from the campaign, he's that good at interviewing people and tasking them to task that Labour and the Tories are deliberate in keeping Miliband and Cameron away from him, always available for a slot on Andrew Marr on Sunday but never the Sunday Politics. It's the guy at UKIPs 8 year old soldier policy that gets me "I don't know about 8, 11 would be fine" Genuinely laughed out loud at that part Does Cameron ever a nswer a question? Yeah all the time, if you don't hate him you can hear it. He ducks a few of course, which politician doesn't?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.