trousers

Who?

Ok. Thanks. We're getting somewhere now. So, concentrating on those who are for "some cuts", what figures are we talking about? (no doubt there'll be subsets within the "some cuts" camp so stating a range of values will be fine - maybe best to specify this has a percentage of the cuts proposed by the ConDems to put it into best perspective) Once we have that information we'll then be able to deduce how many protesters agree with the Labour policy on cuts. Cheers :-)

At last. Something that we can't blame the ConDems for.... ;-)

Nope. Lost me there. So was the rally, that the leader of the Labour party endorsed, advocating 'no cuts' or 'some cuts'? (apologies, I'm now genuinely confused by what seems like a mixed message protest) Perhaps it would help if I asked the question from another angle: How many people who attended the rally back Labours plans to retain 4/5ths of the proposed ComDem cuts?

As per my earlier post, I had a quick look through the Guardian and Mirror. They mentioned his appearance in passing but they weren't shouting about it from the rooftops. If it was that inspirational I'd have expected to have read more about it today. Just an observation, not scientific by any means.

I'll leave you to believe that to be true so I don't have to point out yet another inaccuracy on here (me ol' mucker).... ;-)

Sorry to Labour the point (pun intended), but what numbers are we talking about here? How many job losses were the people on the march advocating? (rough numbers will suffice - say, to the nearest 10,000). I don't remember seeing any speeches where specific numbers were read out... cheers.... ;-)

Which makes a sad old sceptic like me wonder why the left wing press didn't seem to make a big splash of his appearance. It got a few mentions in passing when I had a quick butcher's at the Guardian and Mirror earlier.

;-)

No, but have you see the calibre of the people they are trying to educate....? ;-) Said Trousers, tongue-in-cheekily....

Maybe Labour bloated the public sector in their remaining few years of Government and as such a 'relatively small' reversion of 3 years by way of 'cuts' equates to an artificially inflated number of jobs? The honest answer though is that I don't know. I'm just quoting what I hear. Could be that I'm hearing complete tosh of course. That said, the private sector industry I work in has seen 'revertion' cuts far in excess of three years in recent times.

There's gonna be a hell of a lot of people with egg on their faces if Labour are/were right (to propose a 'meagre' 4/5ths of the ConDem cuts....)

a.k.a. relying on the short-term selective memories of fickle voters...which, of course, all politicians from all parties rely on at the end of the day

No.

Back to my OP question...has Miliband shot himself in the foot by aligning himself with a movement that are against most/all cuts when he's leading a party that supports/supported 4/5ths of the ConDem cuts? Genuine question.

To be fair to Dune, he's always quite clear about which sub-set of benefit claimants he's referring to. Your daughter has a genuine right to state support so isn't in one of those subsets.

I think the irony maybe lost on some on here... :-)

;-)

Indeed. They advocate a modified/fairer FPTT (sic) system whereby the constituencies are evenly spread.

Sssshhhh....it's more fun if people only see the facts I quote out of context.... ;-) And, yet, Cameron still got a higher percentage of the increased vote pool than B-liar, yet got significantly less seats.

...or, put another way... c.1.2million more people in the country wanted David Cameron as Prime Minister in 2010 than wanted Tony B-liar in 2005. (roughly 3 times the number of people who turned up for the "no cuts" rally) Make of that what you will... ;-)

In 2005, Tony B-liar / Labour received 9,552,436 votes (35% = 355 seats) In 2010, David Cameron / Conservatives received 10,703,754 votes (36% = 306 seats) When you say "majority" I assume you mean 'number of seats' rather than 'actual human beings'...? Now....if only we had a voting system that had the same number of people per constituency rather than being weighted in favour of a certain red party....hmmm.... ;-) ;-) ;-)

Indeed. But please open such posts in future with : "SaintsWeb Forum Logic Alert". Some of us need to be sitting down before encountering such common sense on here... ;-)

For every £5 cut proposed by the ConDems, Labour proposed to cut £4. Why didn't Miliband mention this at the "no cuts" rally? And not forgetting the fact that the ConDem cuts only take public expenditure back to 2008/09 levels. That is all. "Massive" cuts? Hmmm...

Depends if Cortese himself sticks around i'd imagine...