Election thread

Do you have difficulty sustaining your election?

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Sun May 03, 2015 8:50 am

Only a few days to go, polls predicting a hung parliament with labour running a minority govt with support of snp. Worried?
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Piquet @ Sun May 03, 2015 10:17 am

I'm not overwhelmed by the SNP but otherwise I don't mind.
User avatar
Piquet
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:51 pm
Highscores: 1

Re: Election thread

Post by Käsemeister @ Sun May 03, 2015 10:18 am

968 wrote:Only a few days to go, polls predicting a hung parliament with labour running a minority govt with support of snp. Worried?


Petrified.
User avatar
Käsemeister
 
Posts: 37319
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:24 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation.

Re: Election thread

Post by Dirk @ Sun May 03, 2015 12:28 pm

968 wrote:Only a few days to go, polls predicting a hung parliament with labour running a minority govt with support of snp. Worried?

Actually whilst it is close, the Tories are forecast to be just the largest party by most organisations estimates

http://may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/

With Miliband ruling out any sort of deal with SNP now, that gives Cameron an excuse to try and form a minority govt with the LDs. Indeed one pollster is forecasting that Tories plus LDs would be more or less a majority govt. But I realise Miliband will change his mind straight after the election

So its not good. I just hope that Kippers get scared in the last week and vote Tory after all.
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 31104
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Sun May 03, 2015 10:30 pm

Arthur Scherbius wrote:
968 wrote:Only a few days to go, polls predicting a hung parliament with labour running a minority govt with support of snp. Worried?

Actually whilst it is close, the Tories are forecast to be just the largest party by most organisations estimates

http://may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/

With Miliband ruling out any sort of deal with SNP now, that gives Cameron an excuse to try and form a minority govt with the LDs. Indeed one pollster is forecasting that Tories plus LDs would be more or less a majority govt. But I realise Miliband will change his mind straight after the election

So its not good. I just hope that Kippers get scared in the last week and vote Tory after all.


This confuses me because listening to the radio, watching TV it seems to be a forgone conclusion in most commentators mind that Ed Miliband will be PM with a minority govt, even though he will get less seats than Tory. Everyone assumes they'll form a minority govt supported by the SNP. They strenuously deny a deal with the SNP, but my feeling is that they will do a deal as the SNP will be in a lose lose situation if they don't deal with Labour and acquiesce to their demands. If they don't they'll look like they are tacitly supporting the Tories by allowing Cameron to remain as PM, rather than support a minority Labour govt.

The prospect of Miliband as PM is horrifying to say the least. Worse still is Balls as Chancellor and Burnham, that manipulative lying piece of shit as health secretary.
Last edited by Doctor Congo on Sun May 03, 2015 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Dirk @ Sun May 03, 2015 11:15 pm

It is a big fear but on the current polls its not certain that Miliband could get a Queen's speech through

Everyone is guessing at the moment, but lets hope some Kippers see sense
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 31104
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Sun May 03, 2015 11:23 pm

Arthur Scherbius wrote:It is a big fear but on the current polls its not certain that Miliband could get a Queen's speech through

Everyone is guessing at the moment, but lets hope some Kippers see sense


Therein lies the problem. Kippers are usually fanatical lunatics, as demonstrated on the PH kipper forum. They won't see any sense unless St Nigel tells them too.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Dirk @ Sun May 03, 2015 11:25 pm

968 wrote:
Arthur Scherbius wrote:It is a big fear but on the current polls its not certain that Miliband could get a Queen's speech through

Everyone is guessing at the moment, but lets hope some Kippers see sense


Therein lies the problem. Kippers are usually fanatical lunatics, as demonstrated on the PH kipper forum. They won't see any sense unless St Nigel tells them too.

Amazingly he has.

He suggested that Kippers should vote Tory if that is the only way to keep labour out

Not well publicised though- almost as though its just an excuse for not being to blame for lab-snp
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 31104
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Sun May 03, 2015 11:27 pm

Arthur Scherbius wrote:
968 wrote:
Arthur Scherbius wrote:It is a big fear but on the current polls its not certain that Miliband could get a Queen's speech through

Everyone is guessing at the moment, but lets hope some Kippers see sense


Therein lies the problem. Kippers are usually fanatical lunatics, as demonstrated on the PH kipper forum. They won't see any sense unless St Nigel tells them too.

Amazingly he has.

He suggested that Kippers should vote Tory if that is the only way to keep labour out

Not well publicised though- almost as though its just an excuse for not being to blame for lab-snp


Find that quote and post it on the PH forum. Currently they're all hoping for a Labour govt it seems.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Dirk @ Sun May 03, 2015 11:40 pm

User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 31104
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Tue May 05, 2015 11:38 am

With regards to Labour/SNP government.

I have now seen Ed Milliband on several occasions categorically state that he will not form a coalition with the SNP nor do any deals, or have anything to do with them at all. He went as far as to act bewildered about how the assumption is there as they are enemies.
I am not naïve enough to think that politicians don't say X and then do Y, but he has gone to such length to stress that there is no way he will do it, and specified why he wont do this that I don't really see how he could.
And yet everyone still assumes that is what will happen.
THoughts?
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31869
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by WalMitty @ Tue May 05, 2015 11:51 am

Turntable wrote:With regards to Labour/SNP government.

I have now seen Ed Milliband on several occasions categorically state that he will not form a coalition with the SNP nor do any deals, or have anything to do with them at all. He went as far as to act bewildered about how the assumption is there as they are enemies.
I am not naïve enough to think that politicians don't say X and then do Y, but he has gone to such length to stress that there is no way he will do it, and specified why he wont do this that I don't really see how he could.
And yet everyone still assumes that is what will happen.
THoughts?


I dont really like him, and wont vote for him, but I think he comes across as genuine.
Having said that, if forming a coalition is anything like the start of Borgen he is foolish to rule out anything.
WalMitty
 
Posts: 2968
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:23 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Deuteronomy @ Tue May 05, 2015 11:51 am

I think that all this talk of hung parliments is enough to scare people into voting Labour or Conservative.

My money is on blue and a majority win - which sadly does worry me with the talk of a Euro referendum.
User avatar
Deuteronomy
 
Posts: 17347
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:57 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Tue May 05, 2015 12:00 pm

Duke Thrust wrote:I think that all this talk of hung parliments is enough to scare people into voting Labour or Conservative.

My money is on blue and a majority win - which sadly does worry me with the talk of a Euro referendum.


Id be amazed if they won and also slightly worried about a referendum.
Although I often wonder if a referendum is the right thing to do: If more than half the population wants out of Europe at any cost, isn't it right that we have one?
That said: I naively assumed that the Scottish referendum would should up the anti-voters but it appears to have done quite the opposite. These racists are really bad losers is seems.
Last edited by Turntable on Tue May 05, 2015 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31869
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Disastrous @ Tue May 05, 2015 12:12 pm

I don't understand how Labour can win.

The thing that confuses me about all this is that surely people don't flip-flop between Red and Blue every few years, do they? Maybe I'm wrong and they do, but how does that make sense?

I would have thought that if we take Person A, who is nominally Tory, then he may be tempted by UKIP or maybe LidDem depending on how far to the left or right he sits, but will never ever consider Labour a viable alternative. And the opposite with a Labour voter.

So how can it shift so far year by year?
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39463
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Tue May 05, 2015 12:46 pm

Good point.
I cant remember the percentage they thing are potential swing voters (about 15%?)

WHat I wonder, though, is whether the past 20 years have seen an overall shift towards labour.
Labour governed the most catastrophic recession in UK history and even after that conservatives only got in by forming a coalition. Based on no facts, I suspect if Conservatives had been in power in 2008, labour would have won by an absolute landslide.
This time around I think Conservatives have done a bloody good job with settling the ship and yet it appears they are going to be voted out.
No idea what fuels general voting opinion but it seems its not necessarily anything like what fuels my voting opinion.
RIghly, or wrongly, inequality of wealth seems to be an insurmountable bugbear of a lot of the population. Instead of being aspirational it causes resentment.
Or maybe nothing to do with that. I've given up trying to second guess
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31869
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Jorge Orwell @ Tue May 05, 2015 12:52 pm

Arthur Scherbius wrote: but lets hope some Kippers see sense



If Cameron needs the Kippers to win, maybe spending the past 5 years calling them names, like a petulant 5 year old, wasn't a very good idea ;)

Wirral West has the following options:

Margaret Greenwood: Labour Party
David James: Independent
Hilary Jones: UKIP
Esther McVey: Conservative Party
Peter Reisdorf: Liberal Democrats


Having looked at all the candidates and read their manifesto's:

Not voting labour, given previous record
Not voting for D James , his tax and spend policies are worse than labours
Not voting Conservative as McVey is a terrible MP and has seemingly been fiddling her expenses (claiming to pay rent to companies that don't exist)
Not voting Lib Dem: Peter is a nice enough chap, but would struggle to lead the local cub pack

Only option is UKIP, yes like most, I disagree with a few of their policies, but not as many as for the other 4 candidates

So, if not UKIP, then who should I vote for?? . . . . .
Last edited by Jorge Orwell on Tue May 05, 2015 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Jorge Orwell
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Out of my very tiny mind

Re: Election thread

Post by minimoog @ Tue May 05, 2015 12:54 pm

I remember being so pissed off with Labour last time that I seriously considered voting Tory.

I didn't of course, because I remembered I'm not a cnut.
User avatar
minimoog
 
Posts: 9838
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:03 am

Re: Election thread

Post by Tokyo Sexwale @ Tue May 05, 2015 12:59 pm

minimoog wrote:I remember being so pissed off with Labour last time that I seriously considered voting Tory.

I didn't of course, because I remembered I'm not a cnut.


I wonder quite what else they could do to put you off them then, short of actually raping you.
User avatar
Tokyo Sexwale
 
Posts: 49858
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:14 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Dirk @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:02 pm

Tokyo Sexwale wrote:
minimoog wrote:I remember being so pissed off with Labour last time that I seriously considered voting Tory.

I didn't of course, because I remembered I'm not a cnut.


I wonder quite what else they could do to put you off them then, short of actually raping you.

Dropping a fcuking great stone slab on his toe?
User avatar
Dirk
 
Posts: 31104
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:03 pm
Highscores: 5

Re: Election thread

Post by Disastrous @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:11 pm

Moog, you illustrate my point - if people are so tied to one of the two main parties (as I'd have thought most people are) then how can the winner shift so much??

15% odd swing voters shouldn't make such a difference, should it? I would have expected a party to remain in power for years and years until they piss off their core voters enough to vote for a rival.

People are mad-I can't get my head round how 'people' think.
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39463
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by minimoog @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:21 pm

Tokyo Sexwale wrote:
minimoog wrote:I remember being so pissed off with Labour last time that I seriously considered voting Tory.

I didn't of course, because I remembered I'm not a cnut.


I wonder quite what else they could do to put you off them then, short of actually raping you.


Did I say I voted Lab? No.
User avatar
minimoog
 
Posts: 9838
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:03 am

Re: Election thread

Post by Tokyo Sexwale @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:26 pm

minimoog wrote:
Tokyo Sexwale wrote:
minimoog wrote:I remember being so pissed off with Labour last time that I seriously considered voting Tory.

I didn't of course, because I remembered I'm not a cnut.


I wonder quite what else they could do to put you off them then, short of actually raping you.


Did I say I voted Lab? No.

Oh sorry, I got the wrong end of the stick there then.
User avatar
Tokyo Sexwale
 
Posts: 49858
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:14 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by minimoog @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:35 pm

Being as I live in a safe Tory seat it's all fairly pointless, but me voting Con is like the turkey voting for Christmas.

So you can see I was really pissed off with Lab.
User avatar
minimoog
 
Posts: 9838
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:03 am

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:35 pm

WalMitty wrote:
Turntable wrote:With regards to Labour/SNP government.

I have now seen Ed Milliband on several occasions categorically state that he will not form a coalition with the SNP nor do any deals, or have anything to do with them at all. He went as far as to act bewildered about how the assumption is there as they are enemies.
I am not naïve enough to think that politicians don't say X and then do Y, but he has gone to such length to stress that there is no way he will do it, and specified why he wont do this that I don't really see how he could.
And yet everyone still assumes that is what will happen.
THoughts?


I dont really like him, and wont vote for him, but I think he comes across as genuine.
Having said that, if forming a coalition is anything like the start of Borgen he is foolish to rule out anything.



He comes across like a genuine cnut. This is the man so genuine he stabbed his own brother in the back for leadership of their political party. What a cnut. He was interviewed on the Today program yesterday and slithered around choosing careful phraseology to avoid saying NO to any form of partnership with the SNP. He's a lying shit like most politicians and therefore will certainly seek a backdoor way to get in even if he doesn't have the most votes/seats.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Doctor Congo @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:37 pm

Jorge Orwell wrote:
Arthur Scherbius wrote: but lets hope some Kippers see sense



If Cameron needs the Kippers to win, maybe spending the past 5 years calling them names, like a petulant 5 year old, wasn't a very good idea ;)

Wirral West has the following options:

Margaret Greenwood: Labour Party
David James: Independent
Hilary Jones: UKIP
Esther McVey: Conservative Party
Peter Reisdorf: Liberal Democrats


Having looked at all the candidates and read their manifesto's:

Not voting labour, given previous record
Not voting for D James , his tax and spend policies are worse than labours
Not voting Conservative as McVey is a terrible MP and has seemingly been fiddling her expenses (claiming to pay rent to companies that don't exist)
Not voting Lib Dem: Peter is a nice enough chap, but would struggle to lead the local cub pack

Only option is UKIP, yes like most, I disagree with a few of their policies, but not as many as for the other 4 candidates

So, if not UKIP, then who should I vote for?? . . . . .


Well he was right though, UKIP are a bunch of fruitcakes and not so closet racists. So not really petulant, actually rather accurate and that is borne out by the PH thread about UKIP which shows just how putrid their supporters are.
User avatar
Doctor Congo
 
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Turntable @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:47 pm

Disastrous wrote:Moog, you illustrate my point - if people are so tied to one of the two main parties (as I'd have thought most people are) then how can the winner shift so much??

15% odd swing voters shouldn't make such a difference, should it? .


I *think* it's to do with seats rather than percentage.
I think whilst many seats are guaranteed by die-hard voters of either party (in support of your statement), those swing voters are often in areas where the seat can go either way. So just getting and extra 5% of those votes could theoretically get you 25%+ more seats . Not actual figures, but you get my drift.
User avatar
Turntable
 
Posts: 31869
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:47 pm
Highscores: 7

Re: Election thread

Post by Disastrous @ Tue May 05, 2015 1:51 pm

Turntable wrote:
Disastrous wrote:Moog, you illustrate my point - if people are so tied to one of the two main parties (as I'd have thought most people are) then how can the winner shift so much??

15% odd swing voters shouldn't make such a difference, should it? .


I *think* it's to do with seats rather than percentage.
I think whilst many seats are guaranteed by die-hard voters of either party (in support of your statement), those swing voters are often in areas where the seat can go either way. So just getting and extra 5% of those votes could theoretically get you 25%+ more seats . Not actual figures, but you get my drift.




I suppose so. I'm surprised that swing voters exist between the two major parties, I suppose. I can see people swinging around between broadly similar parties but can't fathom people who are able to change ideology every few years, and then back again. But maybe it's not that and just people swinging to a minority can fcuk it enough for the main parties?

I'm with you - what I look for seems to not be what most people want or something, and I can't possibly get my head round what drives people any more.
User avatar
Disastrous
Monkey Licker!
 
Posts: 39463
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: Election thread

Post by Pigeon @ Tue May 05, 2015 2:08 pm

Disastrous wrote:The thing that confuses me about all this is that surely people don't flip-flop between Red and Blue every few years, do they? Maybe I'm wrong and they do, but how does that make sense?


To make it make sense, don't think in terms of voting for, think in terms of voting against. If you have a choice between cnuts and cnuts you can at least vote for different cnuts than the cnuts that got in last time. Which is, after all, the main benefit of Western-style (a more accurate description than "democratic") political systems: they provide churn without bloodshed, if not perfectly at least more effectively than other systems do.

Turntable wrote:RIghly, or wrongly, inequality of wealth seems to be an insurmountable bugbear of a lot of the population. Instead of being aspirational it causes resentment.


Well, yeah, like, duh.

pyramid.jpg
pyramid.jpg (37.01 KiB) Viewed 1857 times
User avatar
Pigeon
CTF Technical Expert
CTF Technical Expert
 
Posts: 24201
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:50 pm
Location: All alone in the crazy city

Re: Election thread

Post by Jorge Orwell @ Tue May 05, 2015 2:31 pm

968 wrote:Well he was right though, UKIP are a bunch of fruitcakes and not so closet racists. So not really petulant, actually rather accurate and that is borne out by the PH thread about UKIP which shows just how putrid their supporters are.



Yet, the conservatives are apparently desperate for me to vote for McVey, even though her performance at a local level is terrible and McVey refuses to respond to questions about her expenses. . . . what does that say about them.

Nobody has yet to give me a sensible reason to vote con . . . . only oooh if you don't we'll end up with Minigland, problem with that, is that a vote for McVey means we end up with McVey and Cameron, neither of whom have done anything at all, to deserve my endorsement
User avatar
Jorge Orwell
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Out of my very tiny mind

PreviousNext

Return to Political Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

yt
  Enable youtube titles