RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford

RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (Full Version)

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

Message

Moonhead -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/2/2012 8:06:05 AM)
I assume that's why Cameron wanted a coalition in the first place: he's pretty much destroyed the libdems. Certainly no bastard who voted for them during the last general election will be very likely to do that again...

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/2/2012 8:56:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead The fact that anybody can describe the current (post New) Labour party as "far left" is puzzling. The ridiculous Milliband may be a little to the left of Blair and his crypto Thatcherite clique were, but he's hardly Nye Bevan, is he? Except I didnt say that. I was talking of the breakaway from Labour by the Social Democrats. I had more time for people like Skinner and Benn etc, because at least they were consistent. It may hurt the lefty image but many from new labour did indeed have those values back in the day. The only reason they changed was because they realised they would never get elected in the UK. If you want to be logical, it shows just how much the labour left were despised, when someone like Thatcher had nno trouble staying in power for so long. The only conclusion is she was the peoples choice. [;)]

Moonhead -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/2/2012 9:07:20 AM)
Actually, given that she was in the habit of winning with forty percent of the turnout or less, the more obvious conclusion is that the SDP/Liberal Alliance were splitting the protest vote and everybody else was the people's choice.

lily666 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/2/2012 12:10:37 PM)
ah gorgeous george whom whilsy mp for barking was the mp who both attended and voted the least in during his term in parlaiment

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/2/2012 4:44:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Actually, given that she was in the habit of winning with forty percent of the turnout or less, the more obvious conclusion is that the SDP/Liberal Alliance were splitting the protest vote and everybody else was the people's choice. That wont wash, the lib dems had just as many disgruntled conservatives vote for them. The truth is labour policies of the time were either too extreme or piss poor.

Moonhead -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/3/2012 4:00:18 AM)
It isn't the truth that more of the election turnouts in 83 and 87 voted against Thatcher than for her, then?

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/3/2012 11:09:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead It isn't the truth that more of the election turnouts in 83 and 87 voted against Thatcher than for her, then? But we both know thats common in almost every UK election. It is rare to see anyone get over 50%. What is an undeniable fact is Labours share of the vote fell dramatically and Thatchers didnt. Her percentage share hardly dropped in her second and third elections.

PeonForHer -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/3/2012 12:07:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead It isn't the truth that more of the election turnouts in 83 and 87 voted against Thatcher than for her, then? I've got to agree with Polite here, Moonie, when he points out that working class people shouldn't be allowed the vote because they're too stupid and will support nutcases like Lady Looney.

Moonhead -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/3/2012 12:46:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead It isn't the truth that more of the election turnouts in 83 and 87 voted against Thatcher than for her, then? But we both know thats common in almost every UK election. It is rare to see anyone get over 50%. What is an undeniable fact is Labours share of the vote fell dramatically and Thatchers didnt. Her percentage share hardly dropped in her second and third elections. Which disproves my point that the SDLP were splitting the Labour vote rather than the Conservative one how?

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/3/2012 4:50:19 PM)
Because in the first year that the SDLP took part in the elections both major parties lost votes. Labour lost some 9.5 % and the Conservatives 1.5% in 1989 the conservative vote stayed about the same . The SDLP vote fell with almost all the vote, less a fraction of a percent going to Labour. From then on every election saw the SDLP vote fall and Labours rise, right up until 2005 and 2010. Labours vote in those years fell due to poor policies, no more and no less. Peon, the reason the average working man wont vote Labour isnt that they are too dumb, but because they are too smart. The only time Labour had a decent share of the vote since 1945, when the did break the 50% barrier was in Blairs landslide year, but even 1997 didnt see them break 50%. Guys, get a grip and get some proper policies, I will even start voting Labour again. [8D]

PeonForHer -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/3/2012 5:27:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Peon, the reason the average working man wont vote Labour isnt that they are too dumb, but because they are too smart. The only time Labour had a decent share of the vote since 1945, when the did break the 50% barrier was in Blairs landslide year, but even 1997 didnt see them break 50%. Polite, please ignore my earlier remark. I don't know what came over me. [:(][:)] In one fundamental sense, the Conservatives should always get more votes than any left wing party. This is because there's only one way of conserving things (keeping them as they are, or not moving), but a potentially infinite number of ways of changing them (moving, or progressing towards something else). I don't have any great desire for people to vote Labour. I do have a desire that they not vote Tory, though.

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/4/2012 2:59:31 AM)
Peon, As i said in reply to Tweaks, I am unhappy with Cameron and how he and his party are performing. That said, i remember cleary Labour in the 70s and 80s and I dont want that back again. Hackney twinned itself with left wing countries just to prove a point, Lambeth (Where i am from) banned the use of ther word "family", since the felt it was discriminatory. The unions held the country to ransom, at one stage I seemed to be on strike more than I was at work. We had rubbish piled high in the street, families burying there own dead (At least a few poor souls did this) I dont want to see a Labour party lurch too far left of centre. I want one that puts taxpayers money to good use with decent policies, but again as I said to tweaks ( and to quote Maggie) There is no alternative. Its a sad state of affairs my friend.

Moonhead -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/4/2012 4:35:03 AM)
The winter of discontent was a dreadful time, no question, but when was labour in power during the '80s? I must have missed that one...

PeonForHer -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/4/2012 6:39:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Peon, As i said in reply to Tweaks, I am unhappy with Cameron and how he and his party are performing. That said, i remember cleary Labour in the 70s and 80s and I dont want that back again. Honestly, Polite, I think that no-one has to fear that Labour will return to the way it was, for instance, under Michael Foot. The circumstances just don't fit that particular sort of world view anymore. We've had a New Right for decades now; the challenge, as most on the left see it, is to work out a viable 'new left' (I should say 'newer left', since the former term's already been taken) to match it.

tweakabelle -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/9/2012 7:27:40 PM)
I found this analysis of Galloways' victory by Patrick Cockburn very interesting: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/patrick-cockburn-galloway-won-for-some-very-good-reasons-7626852.html

Owner59 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/9/2012 7:32:50 PM)
Could it be the recent scandals involving the murdocks? Kind of a "get rid of the all" vote?

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/10/2012 1:19:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Could it be the recent scandals involving the murdocks? Kind of a "get rid of the all" vote? No, not in my opinion. These type of shock by-election results, as well as the ones due in May for the local councils are mostly a protest vote regards those in power. Come election time, those who always vote Conservative and those who always vote Labour, will mostly do so again. While Labour were in power we had several areas vote for BNP councillors. It was just a protest against too much unbridled immigration and too many powers being given to the EU. Come the last election the BNP hardly got a look in and I dont think they even won a seat. Edits for clarity....The BNP are the closest we have to neo-nazis.

Politesub53 -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/10/2012 1:37:44 AM)
Tweaks, that is an unusually strong condemnation from the Independent. Galloway himself put the odious Jeremy Paxman (BBC) in his place last week with the following paraphrased quote"Dont forget, I am not on trial, and you are unfit to judge me". Sure Galloway is self serving and played on current foreign affairs, but it does show just how far away both main parties are, not just from ethnic voters, but voters in general in the UK. Hardly anyone I speak with about politics is happy with how their particular party is performing.

tweakabelle -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/10/2012 2:48:41 AM)
Polite, I find it hard to explain a 35% swing on the basis of a single personality, especially one whose previous record at the hustings is as chequered as Galloways's. IIRC he was rejected twice by voters at previous elections. Here, it is often said that the candidate only accounts for a small percentage of the total vote - usually measured in single digits. The Independent attributes the swing in large measure to Galloway's very public and long term opposition to four controversial policies the British (and the US) Govt has long supported: "the sanctions against Iraq between 1990 and 2003; the American and British occupation of Iraq; foreign intervention in Afghanistan; and the blockade of Gaza" Galloway's success and appeal appears to have transcended ethnic divisions and traditional loyalties. It makes more sense to me to locate this success in popular opposition to negative foreign interventions (Afghanistan and Iraq) and brutal policies (Gaza), as the Independent does, than to any 'star' qualities said to be found in a particular individual. I could well add to that fears of another war in Iran. Or am I reading too much into all this from the great distance I am viewing things?

Moonhead -> RE: Galloways' victory in Bradford (4/10/2012 5:15:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Could it be the recent scandals involving the murdocks? Kind of a "get rid of the all" vote? No, not in my opinion. These type of shock by-election results, as well as the ones due in May for the local councils are mostly a protest vote regards those in power. Come election time, those who always vote Conservative and those who always vote Labour, will mostly do so again. While Labour were in power we had several areas vote for BNP councillors. It was just a protest against too much unbridled immigration and too many powers being given to the EU. Come the last election the BNP hardly got a look in and I dont think they even won a seat. Edits for clarity....The BNP are the closest we have to neo-nazis. That tends to be a given, though: as the lunatic righty fringe is stronger when the respectable right has taken a dive, as it did under the rule of Bush's poodle. Also, a lot of BNP supporters will happily vote for a conservative instead, particularly one who's happy to complain about immigration to the media. Remember how Boris "Roderick Spode" Johnson got elected as London's mayor? The BNP voters putting him as their second choice was enough votes to swing the election for him. (The really weird thing about that is the way most of the pro propresent party couldn't be arsed to name any second or third choices. I thought that was what the tits were supposed to be all about...)

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125