For the English....

For the English.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

NorthernGent -> For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:05:11 PM)
Winner?.... Thought all three were good. Gordon was solid as per usual. Cameron much better. Clegg seems to start off badly when the lines are scripted and then goes from strength to strength when he forgets the lines and starts being himself and opens up. I'd have that at pretty much a draw.......not much to choose between them. What a gaffe from Brown though....saying that he knows nothing of leaflets issued by his party...of which he's the leader. Looks like we finally have a three horse race.

SohCahToa -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:24:09 PM)
Gordon Brown but then I see through the PR hype surrounding the other two. You just need to look at the close statements and see that two dealt in vague platitudes whereas the other gave concrete examples of what is being done. Nick Clegg fell flat on his face on immigration and trident. David Cameron wants to cap immigration but don't know how much he should be capping it by and he can't cap immigration from the EU, which is the biggest source.

LadyEllen -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:29:39 PM)
A draw - which still leaves Nick way out in front........ E

NorthernGent -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:37:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa Gordon Brown but then I see through the PR hype surrounding the other two. You just need to look at the close statements and see that two dealt in vague platitudes whereas the other gave concrete example of what is being done. Nick Clegg fell flat on his face on immigration and trident. David Cameron wants to cap immigration but don't know how much he should be capping it by and he can't cap immigration from the EU, which is the biggest source. I thought Clegg did very well on immigration....his stance was pretty much.....no use in crying over spilt milk...let's get it right from here. But on nuclear weapons....he just can't win that argument. I'd agree with him.......scrap the lot and put the money into education........in fact I'd go further than him than say......scrap the army.....and put the lot into education. But Clegg really is in a minority with that and I can't understand why he'd push that argument. I found myself nodding my head at a lot of the points made by Clegg.....he just seems...well......so much more liberal. Though Clegg was poor when he talked about the other two parties trading on fear....and in the next breath attempted to frighten people with the usual 'conservatives will take money away from the elderly' line.......thought that was cringeworthy. And when he called some of the right wing European parties 'nutters'.....well...that really wasn't leadership material.

DCWoody -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:43:40 PM)
The three proper (ie reliable) polls so far showing Cameron 36%, Clegg 32%, Brown 29%. Cameron 33%, Clegg 35%, Brown 23%. Cameron 30%, Clegg 33%, Brown 30%. Clegg winning just, but a lot closer. That Brown 23 figure is from Angus Reid, famous for fucking up their labour share (always have it 5-10% lower than everyone else), so don't read much into that. But considering this is Libs weakest area (europe), and they've the economy to come.....good news for them I reckon.

LadyEllen -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:44:49 PM)
I believe the position is to not replace Trident on like for like (even Brown isnt intent on that by the way), its to maintain our nuclear capability with a system that isnt premised on the Cold War - smaller yes, but more flexible. The defence argument is about much more than Trident though - what it boils down to I believe is whether we wish to and believe we ought to, attempt to maintain at least the impression of global capability we possessed decades ago, and also about what it is that we wish to and believe we ought to use our defence capability for. These same questions face every other European nation too, and more so in the context of the eventual and inevitable withdrawal or at least curtailment of US participation in the sphere of European defence. E

DCWoody -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:46:21 PM)
Also, what about the Welsh, the Scots? :P

NorthernGent -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:49:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody The three proper (ie reliable) polls so far showing Cameron 36%, Clegg 32%, Brown 29%. Cameron 33%, Clegg 35%, Brown 23%. Cameron 30%, Clegg 33%, Brown 30%. Clegg winning just, but a lot closer. That Brown 23 figure is from Angus Reid, famous for fucking up their labour share (always have it 5-10% lower than everyone else), so don't read much into that. But considering this is Libs weakest area (europe), and they've the economy to come.....good news for them I reckon. Again...I thought Clegg was very good on Europe....now I tend to agree with the conservative position on this one....but Clegg pretty much said....."it ain't perfect - but it's better than the alternative"....and I'd hazard a guess that that is the majority view. The Liberals' weakest position is nuclear weapons....not the majority view....and their strongest is civil liberties....definitely the majority view...and if he can steer the debate down that road then he's on solid territory. I feel Brown is focusing too much on policy and substance. Everyone knows that Brown and Labour have substance.....if that was the defining line then they'd be ahead in the polls regardless of debates. He doesn't need to be smiling all the time in order to add a human touch - he can do it through conveying his personal experiences. Clegg is too light on policy...too much emphasis on relating to the audience. Of the three...Cameron struck the better balance between policy and adding a human touch.

NorthernGent -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:52:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen I believe the position is to not replace Trident on like for like (even Brown isnt intent on that by the way), its to maintain our nuclear capability with a system that isnt premised on the Cold War - smaller yes, but more flexible. The defence argument is about much more than Trident though - what it boils down to I believe is whether we wish to and believe we ought to, attempt to maintain at least the impression of global capability we possessed decades ago, and also about what it is that we wish to and believe we ought to use our defence capability for. These same questions face every other European nation too, and more so in the context of the eventual and inevitable withdrawal or at least curtailment of US participation in the sphere of European defence. E Yes...in a nutshell...he's saying we can't afford it. And I'd agree. It isn't among the main priorities.

SohCahToa -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:53:04 PM)
Isn't it true though that if you have an amnesty you just encourage future illegal immigration? Nick Clegg also makes all this fuss about the criminal gangs exploiting immigrants; are those hand carwashes criminal? Such criminality wouldn't be my first concern unless it directly affected me, if you travel somewhere illegally then realistically you are opening yourself up to the possibility of exploitation. Nick Clegg should be focussing on the concerns of the British people i.e. services struggling under ever and ever greater numbers of people not whether or not immigrants are being exploited. Why is Nick Clegg focussing on immigration this way? He is a coward; he can't bear to be stigmatised with talking about anti immigration unless he is pretending it's for the immigrants benefit as well. Like when they say: "Oh people should not illegally travel in trucks because they might die." People don't care about such things, they just pretend to because it conveniently suits their other desires, same with the cockle pickers.

NorthernGent -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 2:57:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa He is a coward Couldn't disagree more. He must know that he will take flak for that stance.....yet he is resolutely standing behind what is essentially a liberal principle. Liberalism is far less concerned with national boundaries than say Conservatism and always has been. He could take the easy way out and say: "Britons first"..... I mean that's what people want to hear. P.S. Clegg quite clearly said: "let's tighten the borders". I like the way he thinks...which is essentially....let's not worry about what's gone.....let's focus on the future. There's only so much money floating around to deal with immigration - so best to focus on what we do going forward. God knows that people want to hear: "cull the foreigners".....but he's prepared to take a pragmatic approach that doesn't pander to reactionary politics.

LadyEllen -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:02:02 PM)
Are you seriously arguing that certain criminal activities may be legitimised according to the legal status of their victims? E

SohCahToa -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:08:29 PM)
Legitimised would be the wrong word, I never said that. It's the reality of the situation, it's not right it just is. Try to fix it, you never will not even with an amnesty because yes it'll go away for a while but with such short term thinking not for long then what, another amnesty like in Spain? People will always travel places illegally and because they are hiding from the state they will get no protection from it. Criminals know this and will always exploit it.

Politesub53 -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:14:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa Gordon Brown but then I see through the PR hype surrounding the other two. You just need to look at the close statements and see that two dealt in vague platitudes whereas the other gave concrete examples of what is being done. Nick Clegg fell flat on his face on immigration and trident. David Cameron wants to cap immigration but don't know how much he should be capping it by and he can't cap immigration from the EU, which is the biggest source. Brown did better today, as did Cameron. Labour are still spouting the same tired dogma they spoke of back in `97. None of them really have a clue as to how to cut the public deficit, at least how to do it without losing votes. The whole thing comes across to me as a gimack for the TV channels. I was trruly hoping for better. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime. The new way of collating crime figures have been altered, so some types of violent robbery are not included. Education, education education, yet years later pass rates are only higher due to dropping the bar.

SohCahToa -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:15:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent P.S. Clegg quite clearly said: "let's tighten the borders". I like the way he thinks...which is essentially....let's not worry about what's gone.....let's focus on the future. There's only so much money floating around to deal with immigration - so best to focus on what we do going forward. God knows that people want to hear: "cull the foreigners".....but he's prepared to take a pragmatic approach that doesn't pander to reactionary politics. What message does it send out? It's like me saying: "I want to employ the best people in my company starting from now with a proper vetting process but the workers I already have don't worry about those, they can be of any standard." I will never fix the situation unless I make some kind of effort to deal with not just what I might have in the future but also what already exists now. Plus because my company is full or sub standard workers others in the company will question the quality of the output they are expected to give.

LadyEllen -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:16:34 PM)
The reality of the situation is that all manner of crime takes place daily; we cannot argue that this must go unanswered because the same offences will recur. Nevertheless its very simple - one either believes in universal human rights or one does not. E

SohCahToa -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:22:19 PM)
I'm talking about political focus, if a crime occurs it must be punished but whether or not politicians talk about it, that is something else. If a politician starts talking at length about specific crimes affecting other people unless I can sympathise I turn off, I'm not saying the crime shouldn't be punished just that a politician isn't going to score points with me by talking about things that don't affect me. I'm selfish; I mostly only care about the crimes that affect me, sorry about that[:D]

DCWoody -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:24:28 PM)
@Polite, though the conservatives would never dare admit it, crime has been one of the success stories of the labour government, it's fallen substantiallyin their time. Only question is is it worth the larger prison pops, the CCTV cameras, the massively dubious anti-terrorism powers.

Moonhead -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:25:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen I believe the position is to not replace Trident on like for like (even Brown isnt intent on that by the way), its to maintain our nuclear capability with a system that isnt premised on the Cold War - smaller yes, but more flexible. One that isn't entirely provided by the Americans would be a start. The French seem to be doing pretty well on that level, and with the Ariane programme they're providing the ESA, there's no doubt that they have a delivery system for it either. Trident, on the other hand, will go down the tubes the second an American President decides to stop selling his fawning bitch in Downing Street nukes, or Haliburton can't be bothered with the maintenance base that runs the submarines anymore. "Our own independent nuclear deterrent," yeah, right. The sow didn't even have the excuse of Alzheimers when she was spouting that line of shit.

LadyEllen -> RE: For the English.... (4/22/2010 3:32:15 PM)
Indeed MH - it does make me want to scream when certain people say "our independent nuclear deterrent" - we havent had that for years and, as I understand it, not entirely due to the retailers of said deterrent being elsewhere than the UK E

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125