RE: UK Election result

RE: UK Election result (Full Version)

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

Message

mnottertail -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 6:31:17 AM)
So, Tories and LibDems---- Are good old C and C gonna work it out you think? Gotta love monte carlo gaming.

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 6:37:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fannypistor Britain needs discipline! That gets my vote [8D]

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 6:39:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So, Tories and LibDems---- Are good old C and C gonna work it out you think? Gotta love monte carlo gaming. I thinkit has a better chance of working than a Brown/Clegg pact. i think NG is right though, in the end the gulf between cameron/Clegg on vital policies may prove too wide to gap.

mnottertail -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 6:48:28 AM)
PoliteSub007, But if Cameron doesn't toe the line (by that I mean meet way over half way, softening the most extreme positions (after all the conservative-liberaldem chasm is not as wide in UK as US more at right and center)) he loses huge face, personally and for the party, no chance to form a government, and I believe there are enough affable turncoats in the Tories if given some minor positions that a Brown/Clegg asshole buddies would go easily. Face it, it doesn't say Haynes until Clegg says it says Haynes (from a US underpants commercial). Even if it goes as far as a re-vote, I can only think Clegg will pick up a few more at the conservatives expense, and ain't nobody thrilled with Brownie either, so there is a few more to get. The more ballots, the bigger the momentum I should think. Or am I misreading your parliment?

pahunkboy -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 7:10:23 AM)
Considering how rigged it was the Irish won in a landslide- if you go by the true numbers.

Aneirin -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 8:05:09 AM)
The thing is, what we need desperately in this country, is electoral reform, as it is the same system that is in place that existed when the wealthy supported conservatism and Labour was traditionally supported by the working class, in effect, a two party system, the wealth against the poor. Following the serious fuck ups by the electoral commission on Thursday, they boss came out and actually said our voting system is antiquated and out of date, it does not satisfy the needs of twenty first century Britain and in his words, is Victorian. Apparently they have been campaigning for years to change the voting system, but that does not excuse their serious fuck up on Thursday night, where I personally believe the election should be voided, because we in effect acted like a third world so called democracy by preventing voters from voting. The issue I would think certainly does not send the right kind of message to new democracies in third world countries. The best that I can hope from this disaster, is whoever and whatever party gets together and reforms the voting system as the first priority, and then go to the polls again. Proportional representation is the way to go, not a dictatorship based upon an antiquated and unfair system, where a minority winner can dictate to the majority loser, for that isn't democracy.

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 11:09:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Considering how rigged it was the Irish won in a landslide- if you go by the true numbers. Do you mean the Protestant Irish or Catholic Irish. Your posts are becoming more cretinous by the day.

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 11:13:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail PoliteSub007, But if Cameron doesn't toe the line (by that I mean meet way over half way, softening the most extreme positions (after all the conservative-liberaldem chasm is not as wide in UK as US more at right and center)) he loses huge face, personally and for the party, no chance to form a government, and I believe there are enough affable turncoats in the Tories if given some minor positions that a Brown/Clegg asshole buddies would go easily. Face it, it doesn't say Haynes until Clegg says it says Haynes (from a US underpants commercial). Even if it goes as far as a re-vote, I can only think Clegg will pick up a few more at the conservatives expense, and ain't nobody thrilled with Brownie either, so there is a few more to get. The more ballots, the bigger the momentum I should think. Or am I misreading your parliment? You are spot on. Clegg is Kingmaker, so can ask for just about anything. The big question is how far will eiither Brown or Cameron go in granting his (Cleggs) wishes. I have just ( the last ten minutes ) seen one of the top Liberals leaving a meeting they have had. He said as it stands they are behind Cleggs endorsement of Cameron. The Lib Dems are meeting the Conservatives tomorrow, so we may have a clearer answer then.

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 11:21:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Following the serious fuck ups by the electoral commission on Thursday, they boss came out and actually said our voting system is antiquated and out of date, it does not satisfy the needs of twenty first century Britain and in his words, is Victorian. Apparently they have been campaigning for years to change the voting system, but that does not excuse their serious fuck up on Thursday night, where I personally believe the election should be voided, because we in effect acted like a third world so called democracy by preventing voters from voting. The issue I would think certainly does not send the right kind of message to new democracies in third world countries. I agree some polling stations had a fiasco on Thursday. No need to void the election though, as anyone who think the lost votes affected the result can legally ask for a new ballot in that constituency. quote: Proportional representation is the way to go, not a dictatorship based upon an antiquated and unfair system, where a minority winner can dictate to the majority loser, for that isn't democracy. Your maths is skewed, like Ellens is. Cameron won the majority of the votes, if we are talking proportionally. Sure he didnt win 51% BUT he did win the biggest vote for any SINGLE party. It is hardly democratic to claim it is somehow void as his vote was less than everyone elses put together. This assumes everyone who didnt vote for Cameron would instead have voted for a single party.

tigreetsa -> RE: UK Election result (5/8/2010 9:49:01 PM)
The 2010 General Election result is basically a train wreck which has been coming for years and it comes because neither Labour nor the Conservatives are fit to govern in their present states. But rather than sit down and look at who didn't vote for them and why, both parties think they can continue on as before. None of the three parties could come up with an effective campaign. The Conservatives started out okay but it quickly became negative, Labour's campaign wasn't that positive either and the Liberal Democrats ended up rewriting their campaign and basing it on their leader Nick Clegg. Gordon Brown isn't a Prime Minister by any stretch of the imagination, and you have to wonder why he is all Labour have to offer as a leader. The same goes for the Conservatives. David Cameron to me is a political lightweight, he is Blair Lite, and again here you have to wonder is he all that the Conservatives can come up with. There's not much difference between Labour and the Conservatives. Yes we could have electoral reform and PR and yes that could be a possible solution but what we don't have, and what I strongly believe we need, is a strong party with definite policies and a strong leader - one who can stand up to both the banks and the media and unite the country. Yes Margaret Thatcher stood up to the unions but she inadvertently let the banks and the media have power and this has continued to the present day, for neither Tony Blair nor Gordon Brown have stood up to them or done pretty much but let a few union leaders into the House of Lords by the back door. Had any of the parties - Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats - have had a strong leader with definite policies and a clear manifesto they would have won the election outright - but they didn't. This is an election result which comes from people voting because they didn't want either Gordon Brown or David Cameron as the next Prime Minister, and even fewer it appears saw Nick Clegg as a likely candidate for Prime Minister. The biggest problem we face right now is that we don't have the political or economic stability for a coalition government to effectively run the country. Since 1989 Poland, which has proportional representation, has had 14 Prime Ministers, and the shortest tenures have come from coalition governments, for example Waldemar Pawlak of the Polish Peasants Party who in 1992 lasted just 33 days.

LillyoftheVally -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 2:04:36 AM)
I think that politics need to change, I think that the expenses scandal and the war and many other things has shown that the government seems to think that once they are in power they have the right to do whatever the hell they want without worrying about what we want. The PR thing seems to show that really well in my opinion, if as many conservatives are saying voting reform is unimportant or if as cameron is saying they should work in our benefit then how is a referendum even causing pause. I think Clegg is doing the right thing, the conservatives had the majority of the votes, of course more people didn't want them in power than did, but still they got the biggest as one party. I don't want the conservatives in, I really don't, and I hope to god that the result of the negotiations means that the link between lib dems and conservatives is minimal so that they don't get tarred with the tory brush. The most important thing though is that we have a stable government on issues such as the economy.

NorthernGent -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 3:04:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tigreetsa None of the three parties could come up with an effective campaign. The Conservatives started out okay but it quickly became negative, Labour's campaign wasn't that positive either and the Liberal Democrats ended up rewriting their campaign and basing it on their leader Nick Clegg. I reckon the Lib Dems made a huge mistake in that they assumed Nick Clegg was the sole reason for their upturn in fortunes....I believe it was more to do with their policies being opened up through television....and it became clear that the Lib Dems had fresh ideas. Then Nick Clegg took on the role of messiah with some of his speeches after the debates....absolutely cringeworthy with his: ''THIS IS YOUR COUNTRY VOTE WITH YOUR HEARTS VOTE FOR THE COUNTRY THAT YOU WANT"....over and over again....listening to that I was thinking oh fuckin' hell we've got another one here....but there was nowhere to go really so Lib Dems it had to be for me. quote: ORIGINAL: tigreetsa Gordon Brown isn't a Prime Minister by any stretch of the imagination, and you have to wonder why he is all Labour have to offer as a leader. The same goes for the Conservatives. David Cameron to me is a political lightweight, he is Blair Lite, and again here you have to wonder is he all that the Conservatives can come up with. There's not much difference between Labour and the Conservatives. I don't agree with any of this at all. Brown has been the victim of a sustained media campaign....though he hasn't helped himself at times.....but if the election had been one of: "your life depends on it....who do you vote for"....Brown would have been head and shoulders above the other two....strange way of looking at it perhaps but the point is that when push comes to shove Brown is far more capable than the other two. And not much difference between Labour and the Tories? It was clear during the debates that the old dividing lines were in evidence. Labour and the Tories still have a massive difference of opinion over Europe/the economy/public expenditure schemes/immigration and so on. What I couldn't understand at all about the Tories was that they campaigned on change and fresh ideas.....but there was absolutely nothing different about them.....family values....wrestling back powers from the EU.....personal responsibility.....tough on immigration....tough on law and order.....did I miss something?...because to me these principles are the bedrock of Toryism and always have been. How on earth did they think no one would notice? Do they really think they can throw in the word 'change' and something about the environment and everyone would think this is the new...fresh...improved Conservative Party? All a touch bizzarre really.

NorthernGent -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 3:14:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyoftheVally I think Clegg is doing the right thing, the conservatives had the majority of the votes, of course more people didn't want them in power than did, but still they got the biggest as one party. I don't want the conservatives in, I really don't, and I hope to god that the result of the negotiations means that the link between lib dems and conservatives is minimal so that they don't get tarred with the tory brush. The most important thing though is that we have a stable government on issues such as the economy. The issue with this though Lilly......is that they have massive differences of opinion in key areas....I would have thought it unimaginable that the Tories would give ground over the economy.....similarly the Liberals simply can't move to the Tory position because these policies underpin Conservatism and Liberalism...and where they come to an agreement then what is the point of them having any principles? They may as well change the party names. The Liberal Party talks of 'fair taxation' the Conservative Party talks of reducing taxes for top earners....the two are simply utterly incompatible. Vince Cable spent four weeks labelling Tory plans for the economy as 'dangerous and irresponsible'....and I reckon the people who voted for them would agree....so how does the Liberal Party turn their backs on their voters by moving to the Tory position? Then you have Europe....well the Tories are never in a million years going to embrace Europe as the Liberal Party does..... If they do come to an arrangement....and reading today's newspapers there seems to be a good chance....then it can only be at the expense of at least some of the core views of their voters.

NorthernGent -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 3:21:32 AM)
And then there's electoral reform. Can you really see the Tories going for an elected House of Lords? Can you really see them going for PR? when you consider that the core Tory support is in rural areas where less people live and at the very least it will reduce their power for the foreseeable future and probably will lead to a situation where the Tories will never again form a majority government.

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 3:27:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tigreetsa The 2010 General Election result is basically a train wreck which has been coming for years and it comes because neither Labour nor the Conservatives are fit to govern in their present states. But rather than sit down and look at who didn't vote for them and why, both parties think they can continue on as before. You wont ever get more than 50% for one party when we have so many choices. Nothing to do with train wrecks. As I keep saying, Cameron had most votes, end of argument. quote: The biggest problem we face right now is that we don't have the political or economic stability for a coalition government to effectively run the country. Since 1989 Poland, which has proportional representation, has had 14 Prime Ministers, and the shortest tenures have come from coalition governments, for example Waldemar Pawlak of the Polish Peasants Party who in 1992 lasted just 33 days. Final someone sees coalitions for what they are. The only one to work long term in the last 100 years was the one between the great depression and the start of WW2. PR, as wanted by the Liberals, would only make hung parliaments more common.

Politesub53 -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 3:38:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent And then there's electoral reform. Can you really see the Tories going for an elected House of Lords? Can you really see them going for PR? when you consider that the core Tory support is in rural areas where less people live and at the very least it will reduce their power for the foreseeable future and probably will lead to a situation where the Tories will never again form a majority government. I think they might swallow an elected House of Lords but not PR. An elected second chamber would stop anyone frome parachuting their cronies into office. You make a good point about the Tories not having a majority parliament in the foreseeable furutre. The party needs to change and represent the working class more than it already does.

NorthernGent -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 3:52:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent And then there's electoral reform. Can you really see the Tories going for an elected House of Lords? Can you really see them going for PR? when you consider that the core Tory support is in rural areas where less people live and at the very least it will reduce their power for the foreseeable future and probably will lead to a situation where the Tories will never again form a majority government. I think they might swallow an elected House of Lords but not PR. An elected second chamber would stop anyone frome parachuting their cronies into office. You make a good point about the Tories not having a majority parliament in the foreseeable furutre. The party needs to change and represent the working class more than it already does. Surely it would have to morph into a Liberal Party? Most people live in towns and cities....the Tories' answer is to bang up CCTV to watch everyone in the towns and cities.....Tory values are not the values of the people who live in towns and cities....particularly the Northern towns and cities.... I can't imagine Tory activists being particularly enamoured with adjusting policy and principle toward the working class. As it stands.......a lot of them aren't happy with Cameron as they think the old campaigning lines such as Europe and immigration should have been the key campaign issues in this election. I think it's the Daily Telegraph that has come out and said Cameron isn't a conservative....so the cracks are appearing already....any change toward the working class would see all out war within the Conservative Party and its activists.

LillyoftheVally -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 4:16:22 AM)
NG, They are opposed totally I agree, which is why I think that the Lib Dems only have to agree to abstain from voting on a few key things such as the budget so that any cock up that happens is put down to the conservatives but that at least there won't be weeks and weeks of disagreement within the house of commons but that other things they can vote whatever they want, I think that the lib dems have to push for PR to pacify their voters or else they will loose all credibility. I wish the election had gone another way, I think a lib/lab coalition would have been better for the country esp with Vince Cable in the mix, but it simply hasn't gone that way. I am not sure that they will be able to create a real deal, I guess time will tell.

Aneirin -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 5:19:31 AM)
What interests me at the moment, is the possibility of a Clegg/Cameron alliance, and is Clegg going to sell out in the interests of his personal ambition, a job in government. If he does go the way of his ambitions, that to me will say all the time he was in it for himself,(which they are anyway despite what they say, flags,the country, the people etc is just emotive motivational sound bites), to me, he will be the better man if in the face of meeting his ambitions, he declines and follows his stated values. But Cameron of Witney, I just had to laugh when it was said he might have gone to The New Inn pub post election, I expect it will be the one down the hill not up it, if the one up the hill still exists, they would literally eat him alive in there, as it was often the place was a pub for biker gangs, battle re-enactors and other alternative reactionary types and there was more often than not something dead roasting on the spit over the fire and axe chucking.

RCdc -> RE: UK Election result (5/9/2010 11:46:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin What interests me at the moment, is the possibility of a Clegg/Cameron alliance, and is Clegg going to sell out in the interests of his personal ambition, a job in government. If he does go the way of his ambitions, that to me will say all the time he was in it for himself,(which they are anyway despite what they say, flags,the country, the people etc is just emotive motivational sound bites), to me, he will be the better man if in the face of meeting his ambitions, he declines and follows his stated values. Cleggs stated values was foremost that he would support and try to work with the party who were placed in the majority by the people. If he went against his word, I'd be more worried. But he isn't and for that, I admire him. the.dark.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875