hypochondriac

Not bad. They were always leaving and this should push up the price.

History shows that if someone tries to debate with you then you get personal, make petty snipes about intelligence and then run off saying you have 'won.' I suspect that most don't see mainstream political parties as evil like you do. Most people have no real affiliation with any party and tend to make their mind up based on what they see and read and then their own experiences and those of the people around them. If someone wants to vote labour now then that's fine with me as long as their reasons are honest and sincerely held. Same with someone voting Tory. I'm not going to exaggerate things, insinuate that most Tories are paedos etc to make a political point. You continue to see things in black and white terms and post your witty pictures though if you like. I'm sure that will do much to sway the vote. At least bridge too far tends to make proper arguments despite being hopelessly biased.

As you said. Not really worth expressing an opinion if someone is so utterly entrenched and biased.

Agree. I think the coalition has been good for the country. Yes they haven't done everything right but anyone in power would have been in a bad situation with some difficult choices to make. I think they have done pretty well.

They should have made a lot more public noise about it. The policy may have gone through but the perception would then have been that the Tories had got it through despite lib dem opposition.

It was the policy that got them the student vote and rightly or wrongly the perception of the man on the street was that this was one of their main policies. Many many people voted for them solely on that basis.

I agree. I'm not sure it was just the fact that he couldn't stop the tuition fees, it's the perception that he made no fuss to oppose it which will damage him imo. It's why it's going to be so tough if we get another coalition since any coalition partner will want to kick up a huge fuss to show that they are fighting for the people who voted for them.

I responded to a comment about the lib dems. I think the whole point of a manifesto where no one does anything from it makes the whole thing pretty pointless regardless of which party that comes from. If ukip gets in as a minority partner and then gets rid of the main thing that made most people vote for them in the first place (in the lib dems case that is tuition fees clearly) then of course I will criticise them. If ukip got in and then said that they don't support a referendum anymore and that was only if they got in as a majority government, then quite rightly they would be roundly criticised and lose much of their vote. I don't support ukip- or any political party- and it's odd that you think I do.

Indeed. You could argue though that the lib dems were misleading by pretending that there was a chance that their manifesto would be used to govern. There never was.

What do ukip have to do with this?

Pretty meaningless making any pledges in that case then since they knew they were never going to form a majority government.

Go ask on avforums.

:spaz::spaz:

Don't think you can really make a judgement on djuricic. He has looked quite good to me but he has hardly played.

Sounds a lot like Glasgow to me.

It's a nonsense to imply that those who don't support the Rooney rule lack sensitivity and cannot see from another perspective. Some minority groups including black people have themselves stated that they consider it unnecessary.

I'll take that as a yes. I suspect some posters voted for ukip in the European elections and expressed their support for certain policies (I probably did) . Doesn't mean they are supporters of ukip or that they are obliged to vote for them in an election.

So made up nonsense from you then. Correct?

Who are you boys?

Not as strange as putting someone on ignore and then discussing it...

I hope I'm one.

Maybe other people just kept them secret?

Because he is a good player and could win us some crucial games?

OK I think that's a fair comment. I just can't bring myself to vote labour at the moment because I don't find ed either believable or credible so really the only other option for government is the Tories.

No idea if their closure was politically motivated but regardless of the reason it was the right thing to do. So many staff members and so much waste for what amounts to only a small benefit. So do you think of labour had been in power they would have spent less and cut more? Because clearly they would have spent more and not cut a lot which has shown would not have been the right approach.