Jump to content

General Election 2015


trousers

Recommended Posts

Tory / SNP Westminster coalition anyone....?

 

http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/297729-stv-poll-labour-would-annihilated-if-general-election-held-tomorrow/

 

The Labour Party in Scotland would face political annihilation if there was a general election tomorrow, according to a poll commissioned by STV.

 

The Ipsos Mori survey shows Labour would poll 23% of the Scottish vote, leaving them with just four seats in Scotland.

In comparison, support for the SNP has surged to 52%, giving them a projected 54 seats at Westminster. The Liberal Democrats would have one and the Conservative party would be left without any Scottish MPs.

The full breakdown of the poll is SNP 52%, Scottish Labour 23%, Scottish Conservatives 10%, Scottish Liberal Democrats 6%, Scottish Green Party 6%, Ukip 2% and 1% support for others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an OAP I have been a lifelong Tory but find DC so weak and there are so many issues that need sorting out. I would never vote Labour or Lib/Dems and realise voting for UKIP could let Milli in through the back door. In essence, I don't trust or believe any of them. Also hate the dangling of carrots pre-election that they hope will sway the electorate, insulting our intelligence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miliband facing calls to quit.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29935172

 

Looks like VFTT's prediction might be on the money.

 

I've said it before, the fact Labour are not streets ahead at this point in the election cycle with the current govt. is a damning indictment of the leadership.

 

I predicted in 2010 that Ed would be made leader but David would lead them into the election. Clearly the second bit won't happen, but I still could see Ed being ousted. Can't really see any viable alternatives though? I'd be willing to bet that Tristram Hunt would be all over it, guy loves himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an OAP I have been a lifelong Tory but find DC so weak and there are so many issues that need sorting out. I would never vote Labour or Lib/Dems and realise voting for UKIP could let Milli in through the back door. In essence, I don't trust or believe any of them. Also hate the dangling of carrots pre-election that they hope will sway the electorate, insulting our intelligence.

 

Cameron is the worst Tory leader since Ted Heath. This " deficit reduction plans " is just nonsense. They are not dealing with the debt at all, just acting like a typical labour government and passing it on to our children and grandchildren . FFS even Healy cut public spending more than this (when forced to by the IMF) If the Tories can't take the difficult decisions needed, what is the point of them. We elect Tories to do the job, not become labour lite. Cameron's only got away with it because he's been up against Brown and Red Ed . Alarm bells should have rung in the party when he promised to match labours spending when he first became leader, but the Tory establishment are in awe of posh born to lead Eton chaps. Big mistake choosing him over David Davis, and if they go for Boris next god help them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cameron is the worst Tory leader since Ted Heath. This " deficit reduction plans " is just nonsense. They are not dealing with the debt at all, just acting like a typical labour government and passing it on to our children and grandchildren . FFS even Healy cut public spending more than this (when forced to by the IMF) If the Tories can't take the difficult decisions needed, what is the point of them. We elect Tories to do the job, not become labour lite. Cameron's only got away with it because he's been up against Brown and Red Ed . Alarm bells should have rung in the party when he promised to match labours spending when he first became leader, but the Tory establishment are in awe of posh born to lead Eton chaps. Big mistake choosing him over David Davis, and if they go for Boris next god help them.

 

Great - well said Ducky., I've put you down as "Yes, I agree with Ed!!'. Stickers and window poster on the way - sent second class. Fancy some door-knocking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cameron is the worst Tory leader since Ted Heath. This " deficit reduction plans " is just nonsense. They are not dealing with the debt at all, just acting like a typical labour government and passing it on to our children and grandchildren . FFS even Healy cut public spending more than this (when forced to by the IMF) If the Tories can't take the difficult decisions needed, what is the point of them. We elect Tories to do the job, not become labour lite.

 

What further cuts would you make LD and how would you sell said cuts to the general public given the uproar over the existing level of cuts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What further cuts would you make LD and how would you sell said cuts to the general public given the uproar over the existing level of cuts?

 

Im not sure why the NHS has become such a sacred cow. We all die in the end so its KPIs must be appallingly bad. It seems to me many of the wrong things have been cut - education, transport and power infrastructure, defence whilst we spend huge amounts giving 80 year old terminally ill patients a few months extra of miserable quality life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not sure why the NHS has become such a sacred cow. We all die in the end so its KPIs must be appallingly bad. It seems to me many of the wrong things have been cut - education, transport and power infrastructure, defence whilst we spend huge amounts giving 80 year old terminally ill patients a few months extra of miserable quality life.

 

Good luck with that manifesto pledge ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck with that manifesto pledge ;)

 

Democracy, pah!

 

People need to be bravely lead by quality politicians or properly informed about the issues. At present we just have feel good warm words and verbal gack. led I used to work in the NHS when they were experimenting with Citizens Juries - getting members of the public to decide on treatment priorities. It didnt take long to work out that "Should the NHS prioritise treatment of babies born before 23 weeks?" elicited an utterly different response to "Should the NHS prioritise care of babies born before 23 weeks when they are likely to be born severely and permanently disabled requiring lifetime care costing up to £2m".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How I agree buctootim, I have experienced both ends of your last two posts, a severely handicapped baby (who didn't survive) and a terminally ill 86 year old mother that I begged to have put out of her pain and misery.

 

 

I sympathise and I've been in a similar situation. Those horrible choices face us all in the end, both for ourselves and those you love.

 

Its very hard to have an objective debate about the best way to use resources when they are such innately emotive issues. Part of the human make-up is to keep hope alive against all odds. Combined with doctor's professional determination to plough on means we often seem to prioritise length of life over quality of life. I think Linda Bellingham got it just right.

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before, the fact Labour are not streets ahead at this point in the election cycle with the current govt. is a damning indictment of the leadership.

 

I'm depressed about Miliband's performance but you also have to bear in mind it is massively difficult to return to government after one term. The public still blames Labour for the global financial crisis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cameron is the worst Tory leader since Ted Heath. This " deficit reduction plans " is just nonsense. They are not dealing with the debt at all, just acting like a typical labour government and passing it on to our children and grandchildren . FFS even Healy cut public spending more than this (when forced to by the IMF) If the Tories can't take the difficult decisions needed, what is the point of them. We elect Tories to do the job, not become labour lite. Cameron's only got away with it because he's been up against Brown and Red Ed . Alarm bells should have rung in the party when he promised to match labours spending when he first became leader, but the Tory establishment are in awe of posh born to lead Eton chaps. Big mistake choosing him over David Davis, and if they go for Boris next god help them.

They realised that the economy would never start growing if they didn't ease up on austerity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this before, but if Ed Miliband is still Labour leader come election time it will be because the party hierarchy either don't think they can win the election, or that they don't wish to.

The problem is they've spent years developing a wide ranging policy programme. Any new leader would need to accept miliband's policy platform or work VERY quickly to get their new ideas in place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not sure why the NHS has become such a sacred cow. We all die in the end so its KPIs must be appallingly bad. It seems to me many of the wrong things have been cut - education, transport and power infrastructure, defence whilst we spend huge amounts giving 80 year old terminally ill patients a few months extra of miserable quality life.

That's really not the problem. The problem for the NHS isn't people at death's door but an ageing population that is more likely to have treatable illnesses.

 

Labour has some interesting plans to save the NHS from its unsustainable funding needs, and health professionals are all behind it, but of course the public doesn't know about it

Edited by Ex Lion Tamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't for Nick Clegg I'd vote lib dem in a heartbeat. The party is on the money as far as policies and the MPs are honest people. Tories have a horrendous attitude of "jobs for the boys" (I'm not just assuming this, I spoke to a Tory councillor who defected to Lib Dem). I completely disagree with Labours stance than a) there shouldn't be an English parliament and b) the house of lords should be elected. Both, imo, can't work. The West Lothian problem only really has one solution that all parties, apart from labour, can see. And UKIP are still a protest party for people who don't want to vote for the other three. The fact they want to cut foreign aid by 80% is obscene.

 

So how do you choose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't for Nick Clegg I'd vote lib dem in a heartbeat. The party is on the money as far as policies and the MPs are honest people. Tories have a horrendous attitude of "jobs for the boys" (I'm not just assuming this, I spoke to a Tory councillor who defected to Lib Dem). I completely disagree with Labours stance than a) there shouldn't be an English parliament and b) the house of lords should be elected. Both, imo, can't work. The West Lothian problem only really has one solution that all parties, apart from labour, can see. And UKIP are still a protest party for people who don't want to vote for the other three. The fact they want to cut foreign aid by 80% is obscene.

 

So how do you choose?

why is it?

why should our money help fund India's space programme?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't for Nick Clegg I'd vote lib dem in a heartbeat. The party is on the money as far as policies and the MPs are honest people. Tories have a horrendous attitude of "jobs for the boys" (I'm not just assuming this, I spoke to a Tory councillor who defected to Lib Dem). I completely disagree with Labours stance than a) there shouldn't be an English parliament and b) the house of lords should be elected. Both, imo, can't work. The West Lothian problem only really has one solution that all parties, apart from labour, can see. And UKIP are still a protest party for people who don't want to vote for the other three. The fact they want to cut foreign aid by 80% is obscene.

 

So how do you choose?

You realise the lib dems support an elected House of Lords right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't the unions vote him in because David was close to Blair?

 

Whatever the reason, it's a monumental f*ck-up. With UKIP eating away at he Tory vote and the Lib Dems as popular as genital warts this election was there for the taking for Labour.

 

I'm depressed about Miliband's performance but you also have to bear in mind it is massively difficult to return to government after one term. The public still blames Labour for the global financial crisis

 

The problem is they've spent years developing a wide ranging policy programme. Any new leader would need to accept miliband's policy platform or work VERY quickly to get their new ideas in place

 

All fair points, and my gut instinct is that the party don't especially want to get power back after the upcoming election. Therefore, there was no point in sacrificing a big hitter like the tories did with william hague. Leave it for another term, then come back with a decent majority and the economy on the upswing like blair/brown did. They inherited an open chequebook from john major, I'm guessing the party would rather that than inherit the current meagre recovery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All fair points, and my gut instinct is that the party don't especially want to get power back after the upcoming election. Therefore, there was no point in sacrificing a big hitter like the tories did with william hague. Leave it for another term, then come back with a decent majority and the economy on the upswing like blair/brown did. They inherited an open chequebook from john major, I'm guessing the party would rather that than inherit the current meagre recovery.

That pretty much makes no sense.

 

Hague got in as a new young hope for the Tories (and he wasn't a wet lefty etc like Ken Clarke). He bombed, but that wasn't a masterplan to avoid power, especially as he was replaced by that well known election winning big hitter Iain Duncan Smith.

 

The Milliband leadership came from a similar kind of place: party reverting to type, eschewing popularity for core vales or something. Basically you end up with an unelectable twonk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even think Labour have done a decent job of steering themselves back to their core values, though that must have been the intention of the unions that elevated "Red" Ed (what a laugh) into psuedo-power. He'll likely be remembered for two things, his successful intervention in Syria and his inability to form a coherent opposition against multiple foes.

 

The coalition can be knocked for six on any number of their policies, but in many areas, Labour have seen the positive effect of populism and have chased Tory voters, laying claim to the bits they like.

 

We've seen it all before. It was the final season of The Thick of It, minus that wildcard UKIP element.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a fúcking own goal.

 

If you're going to get two newspapers to photograph you while you are helping the homeless, I reckon you need to hand out more than 2p.

 

1414790621562_Image_galleryImage_MANCHESTER_ENGLAND_OCTOBE.JPG

 

Ed-Miliband-Labour-217086.jpg

 

FFS, I gave a quid to a Pompey supporter a month ago! No class, Ed :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a fúcking own goal.

 

If you're going to get two newspapers to photograph you while you are helping the homeless, I reckon you need to hand out more than 2p.

 

1414790621562_Image_galleryImage_MANCHESTER_ENGLAND_OCTOBE.JPG

 

Ed-Miliband-Labour-217086.jpg

 

FFS, I gave a quid to a Pompey supporter a month ago! No class, Ed :)

 

I just want to give Ed a hug. I almost feel sorry for the bloke. He literally cannot get anything right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, I do believe he is in essence a good bloke that wants to do good.

 

He's just utterly useless at it, and somehow manages to make himself look bad even when trying to do good. It's almost impressive.

 

Possibly. He lacks any sort of self-awareness though. Plus he trampled over his own brother's political ambitions to run for leadership.

 

I don't think he has any experience or rapport with traditional working class Labour voters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly. He lacks any sort of self-awareness though.

 

Yes

 

Plus he trampled over his own brother's political ambitions to run for leadership.

 

I never totally understood this attack of Ed. Surely this would be equally true of David? They clearly both had political ambitions, why should Ed just bow to David?

 

I don't think he has any experience or rapport with traditional working class Labour voters.

 

I don't think many Labour politicians do, to be honest. Most likely true of all the parties in all probability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never totally understood this attack of Ed. Surely this would be equally true of David? They clearly both had political ambitions, why should Ed just bow to David?

 

There is no technical reason why he should not have done. However, given the way that Labour likes to present itself, putting people first, I can understand why people doubt the credentials of someone who claims to represent that sentiment, but couldn't put his brother first in the leadership contest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no technical reason why he should not have done. However, given the way that Labour likes to present itself, putting people first, I can understand why people doubt the credentials of someone who claims to represent that sentiment, but couldn't put his brother first in the leadership contest.

 

Does that then not apply equally to David?

 

I'm actually unsure he would have done much better than Ed personally. Maybe he is a bit slicker PR wise, but I think one of the fundamentally problems underpinning reluctance for people to back Labour wholeheartedly at the moment (other than perceived incompetence) is the link to New Labour of those still at the top. If David was leader, I think that would be much worse, he was even more central to Blair & NL than Ed. This is ofcourse, just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never totally understood this attack of Ed. Surely this would be equally true of David? They clearly both had political ambitions, why should Ed just bow to David?

 

David Miliband was established as a major player long before Ed came on the scene and had been groomed for the top job for years. He was Blair's head of policy before he was 30 and was made one of the youngest ever foreign secretaries in history. Then just when it was all set for him, his younger brother politicks his way in on the leadership contest for his own ends, using the unions and living off his family name.

 

The man literally cosied up to the unions to win the leadership contest, then set about distancing himself from them in his victory speech. He isn't completely unelectable because he looks like Wallace, he's completely unelectable because he was so utterly transparent from day one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm depressed about Miliband's performance but you also have to bear in mind it is massively difficult to return to government after one term. The public still blames Labour for the global financial crisis

 

No they don't. It's only the Tories that are still trying to push that narrative. The vast majority of the voting public are intelligent enough to realise just how untrue it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they don't. It's only the Tories that are still trying to push that narrative. The vast majority of the voting public are intelligent enough to realise just how untrue it is.

 

Labour indeed had nothing to do with the global financial crisis.

 

However Labour were being warned about the size of the UK deficit long before the global financial crisis happened, and Brown point-blank refused to listen.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/apr/18/politics.ukgeneralelection20051

 

Hence why the Tories were greeted with the "There's no money left" post-it-note.

 

The global financial crisis and Labour leaving the economy with the biggest peace-time deficit in living memory are different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that then not apply equally to David?

 

I'm actually unsure he would have done much better than Ed personally. Maybe he is a bit slicker PR wise, but I think one of the fundamentally problems underpinning reluctance for people to back Labour wholeheartedly at the moment (other than perceived incompetence) is the link to New Labour of those still at the top. If David was leader, I think that would be much worse, he was even more central to Blair & NL than Ed. This is ofcourse, just my opinion.

You're underplaying how important "being slicker PR-wise" is and would have been over the last four years.

 

David Milliband was already a global statesman, chummying up to Hillary Clinton and just carrying himself like a leader, someone electable.

 

Even if all other things were equal, the fact that David Milliband looks like he could actually be Prime Minister would be worth a decent few points in the polls.

 

Beyond the PR stuff I think he would have been better at the actual "doing" anyway, and at least bring some genuine opposition to Cameron.

 

Ed is just a bumbling gimp with no human touch and a dismal profile and can't see him laying a glove on Cameron next year, in what could have been a winnable election for Labour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're underplaying how important "being slicker PR-wise" is and would have been over the last four years.

 

David Milliband was already a global statesman, chummying up to Hillary Clinton and just carrying himself like a leader, someone electable.

 

Even if all other things were equal, the fact that David Milliband looks like he could actually be Prime Minister would be worth a decent few points in the polls.

 

Beyond the PR stuff I think he would have been better at the actual "doing" anyway, and at least bring some genuine opposition to Cameron.

 

Ed is just a bumbling gimp with no human touch and a dismal profile and can't see him laying a glove on Cameron next year, in what could have been a winnable election for Labour.

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labour indeed had nothing to do with the global financial crisis.

 

However Labour were being warned about the size of the UK deficit long before the global financial crisis happened, and Brown point-blank refused to listen.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/apr/18/politics.ukgeneralelection20051

 

Hence why the Tories were greeted with the "There's no money left" post-it-note.

 

The global financial crisis and Labour leaving the economy with the biggest peace-time deficit in living memory are different things.

 

"Tories 'to match Labour spending'"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6975536.stm

 

The situation would have been better if we had been running a surplus. The main issue though was deregulating the banks. Unfortunately both the major parties were caught up in international neo-liberal groupthink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're underplaying how important "being slicker PR-wise" is and would have been over the last four years.

 

David Milliband was already a global statesman, chummying up to Hillary Clinton and just carrying himself like a leader, someone electable.

 

Even if all other things were equal, the fact that David Milliband looks like he could actually be Prime Minister would be worth a decent few points in the polls.

 

Beyond the PR stuff I think he would have been better at the actual "doing" anyway, and at least bring some genuine opposition to Cameron.

 

Ed is just a bumbling gimp with no human touch and a dismal profile and can't see him laying a glove on Cameron next year, in what could have been a winnable election for Labour.

Sadly I agree. Regardless of policies, he carries himself much better and that's what people vote for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})