War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
There's a simple and depressing explanation for this. Old people vote.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
May 7th | UK General Election 2015 OT - Please go vote!
- Thread starter Volotaire
- Start date
- Status
There's a simple and depressing explanation for this. Old people vote.
JonathanEx
Member
At a guess I'd say it's probably the election law on prominence, easy to just give Tories/Lib Dems their chance to say shit in the post-debate programme. Less time, but they're still given a chance so ticks a box.
Would be wonderful irony after his causing of Brown to fall on his sword.
I'm tempted to go along to the count because you know, seeing Clegg lose, but you know, home is better.
PJV3
Member
They treated him pretty badly, told him to quit as leader but didn't want him to go from number 10 so they could drag out the negotiations with the Tories. I will be very happy if Clegg is given the boot.
Billy_Pilgrim
Member
Latest Ipsos-MORI poll:
LAB - 35% (+1)
CON - 33% (-)
UKIP - 10% (-3)
GRN - 8% (+2)
LDEM - 7% (-1)
The green vote seems to be the interesting one
LAB - 35% (+1)
CON - 33% (-)
UKIP - 10% (-3)
GRN - 8% (+2)
LDEM - 7% (-1)
The green vote seems to be the interesting one
CyclopsRock
Member
Absolutely zero. Realistically, either Labour or the Conservatives will be the major party in a coalition, and whichever one isn't in it will be the opposition.
Ipsos were definitely over selling that this morning.
The interesting part is that the UKIP drop wasn't reflected in a Tory gain which is the case in pretty much every other poll this cycle. Still almost every poll is coalescing around the 34% mark for each party.
Thats more than I earn in my full time job before tax
Isn't the cap for a family not per person?
(Genuinely asking, I don't know)
its likely a "per household" limit to be fair.
It is from what I remember.
Jezbollah
Member
Have you looked at each manifesto?
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
1. Look at the manifestos
2. Look at local candidates
3. Don't vote UKIP
Did Labour really fuck up the country? New Labour were shite but they were both beneficiaries and victims of economic crises. There would have been very little difference with a Tory government, except less social liberalism.
Also, is Clegg really that bad? He's been scapegoated, mostly for the idiotic tuition fee pledge, but is he actually that unreasonable. I'd actually rather have him in Parliament than almost any other MP...
In what way do you think they fucked up the country in the first place (not a dig, just a question)
Light touch regulation. For a party that was founded on the labour class they fell in love with the bankers as much as the Tories did.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
4. If all else fails, vote against the people you hate the most.
Yep, that's fair enough.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
It's hard to entirely blame Labour for a global financial crisis. It was the direct consequence of only having two viable choices for running the UK and both of them being neoliberal. If Michael Howard had become Prime Minister in 2005 then I don't see how the economic collapse could have turned out any worse.
Jezbollah
Member
Just thought I'd collate all manifestos here. Well, almost all. If anyone knows where the SNP manifesto document can be downloaded, please provide a link. Thanks.
The Conservative Party
The Green Party
The Labour Party
The Liberal Democrat Party
Plaid Cymru
The UK Independence Party
The Conservative Party
The Green Party
The Labour Party
The Liberal Democrat Party
Plaid Cymru
The UK Independence Party
I would like to say a few positives for Labour as well (although I'm not voting for them)
Nicked from another site:
"introducing the National Minimum Wage, writing off up to 100% of debt owed by poorest countries, 85,000 more nurses, 32,000 more doctors, Devolution, paternity leave, record number in higher education, 2,000 plus sure start centres, winter fuel payment to oldies, made climate change a priority and passed world's first climate change act, restored devolved government to NI, right to 24 days paid holiday, introduce child tax credit, scrapped section 28, overseas aid budget doubled, free eye tests for over 60s, free TV licence and bus travel for oldies, free entry to museums and galleries, civil partnerships etc... etc... etc..."
Blair made some fuck ups (Iraq.....) Brown made some mistakes (regulation) but I certainly don't think the last labour government was bad. Think we had something like 11 years of growth under them and borrowing, while a bit high, wasn't anything crazy until 2008 hit.
Nicked from another site:
"introducing the National Minimum Wage, writing off up to 100% of debt owed by poorest countries, 85,000 more nurses, 32,000 more doctors, Devolution, paternity leave, record number in higher education, 2,000 plus sure start centres, winter fuel payment to oldies, made climate change a priority and passed world's first climate change act, restored devolved government to NI, right to 24 days paid holiday, introduce child tax credit, scrapped section 28, overseas aid budget doubled, free eye tests for over 60s, free TV licence and bus travel for oldies, free entry to museums and galleries, civil partnerships etc... etc... etc..."
Blair made some fuck ups (Iraq.....) Brown made some mistakes (regulation) but I certainly don't think the last labour government was bad. Think we had something like 11 years of growth under them and borrowing, while a bit high, wasn't anything crazy until 2008 hit.
SNP's Westminster Manifesto isn't launched until tomorrow.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Best government for LGBT rights in British history, too.
That said, their record on civil liberties and foreign policy was reprehensible.
Jezbollah
Member
CyclopsRock
Member
I think a bit of the trickiness of looking at New Labour's economic record is that, like with all governments, you can really only measure its success in hindsight. The general concencus is that recessions occur when things - whatever they are - get over valued and a recession is effectively a very quick schism of reevaluation. That is to say that if your recession causes you to lose 5% of GDP, it's not really that you lost it, that's just what it should have been in the first place. As long as the growth between recessions is greater than the loss during one, the trajectory goes upwards. The fact our recession was deeper than many other comparatively developed countries suggests that a large chunk of our growth was, how you say, based on hot air. Speaking of which their fiscal policy being pretty loose (which *did* contribute to the massive growth and then collapse of the banks, even if it was the banks making the actual calls on debt etc) meant house prices absolutely ballooned because, despite spraying a load of cash around schools and the NHS, and seeing large levels of immigration our house building remained very low.
As an open minded, relatively successful adult in his mid-to-late twenties, it's hard to see the time between 1997 and 2010 as anything other than the period before which someone like me could have bought a house and the time after as being one in which I can't. I appreciate that the trend had already begun and has continued since then, but they had a long time, booming tax receipts and a healthy majority and yet didn't do anything - indeed, their fiscal policies made it worse.
As an open minded, relatively successful adult in his mid-to-late twenties, it's hard to see the time between 1997 and 2010 as anything other than the period before which someone like me could have bought a house and the time after as being one in which I can't. I appreciate that the trend had already begun and has continued since then, but they had a long time, booming tax receipts and a healthy majority and yet didn't do anything - indeed, their fiscal policies made it worse.
Was driving to work today and spotted some bloody massive "VOTE GEORGE OSBORNE" signs erected in a field along the way.
I've worked here since just after the last election and never realised it was in that gobshite's constituency until today, and now I feel vaguely dirty. That it was Neil Hamilton's constituency before that isn't helping.
Don't vote for anyone, vote against whoever you don't want the most. This requires a little research into your own constituency, and in all likelihood you live in a safe seat where your vote is worth fuck all, at which point it's crude cock-and-balls time!
Yeah, I couldn't vote Labour, but the idea that they 'fucked up the country' is just bollocks. They did a hell of a lot of good stuff (and some very dodgy bad stuff) and then got bitten in the arse by a massive global downturn.
I've worked here since just after the last election and never realised it was in that gobshite's constituency until today, and now I feel vaguely dirty. That it was Neil Hamilton's constituency before that isn't helping.
Don't vote for anyone, vote against whoever you don't want the most. This requires a little research into your own constituency, and in all likelihood you live in a safe seat where your vote is worth fuck all, at which point it's crude cock-and-balls time!
Yeah, I couldn't vote Labour, but the idea that they 'fucked up the country' is just bollocks. They did a hell of a lot of good stuff (and some very dodgy bad stuff) and then got bitten in the arse by a massive global downturn.
Jezbollah
Member
Unless I'm economically retarded, Labour's policy of borrowing and spending did have the effect of us being hit by the recession a lot harder than others.
But either way, we would have been impacted by it regardless of who was in control - so when the Tories come out and say "Labour's great recession" I do cringe - it was the WORLDS great recession.
But either way, we would have been impacted by it regardless of who was in control - so when the Tories come out and say "Labour's great recession" I do cringe - it was the WORLDS great recession.
Panelbase GB poll
LAB 34% (-3%),
CON 33% (+2%),
UKIP 16% (NC),
LD 8% (NC),
GRN 4% (NC).
Panelbase had the 6% Labour lead last which looked (and looks) an outlier. Another poll in the 33%-35% range. I think that's where we'll stay and if there's any movement it'll be late, maybe even on election day.
LAB 34% (-3%),
CON 33% (+2%),
UKIP 16% (NC),
LD 8% (NC),
GRN 4% (NC).
Panelbase had the 6% Labour lead last which looked (and looks) an outlier. Another poll in the 33%-35% range. I think that's where we'll stay and if there's any movement it'll be late, maybe even on election day.
It actually annoys me more when the Lib Dems blame Labour, they spent the 00's wanting to spend MORE. The Tories under Cameron only wanted to match Labours spending (the last time the Tories wanted to spend less pre crash was 2005). Vince Cable's pronouncements where to do with grown being caused by unsustainable personal debt which was correct, but at the same time the Lib Dems wanted to spend more than Labour were spending.
I'm not really sure how terrible he is, but that infamous cledge really surged the amount of votes they got particularly amongst young people. That they were willing to jump in for a submissive coalition with the Tories will probably haunt them for a lot longer than they think. It's a shame really, as many of those who voted for Lib Dems last election probably won't vote at all now.
In what way do you mean?
frankie_baby
Member
Brown actually got us out of recession before the last election, the Tories plunged us back into it
mere_immortal
Member
Jesus christ, that's Britain First levels of pandering and scumbaggery.
Miles Quaritch
Member
British soldiers died in WW2 to stop a Lab/SNP coalition?
What the fuck am I reading...
What the fuck am I reading...
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
It never works out for junior coalition partners.
If your ideas work, the senior partner takes the credit. If a senior partner's idea fucks everything up, then you get the blame. You can't complain against the administration because you're part of it. You can't bring down the administration either as the senior partner will just label you as the people that destroyed the government, causing the electorate - that is already pissed off with you - just getting angrier at you.
The fact that the Lib Dems appear to have just sold out all their principles in return for an AV referendum will be all that history remembers them for.
I still wonder what would have happened if the Lib Dems had teamed up with Labour instead of the Tories. I imagine it would have resulted in a glorious collapse and a second election with the Tories winning a majority, so maybe it's best that didn't happen.
See, I like to try and be reasonable in discussion about some aspects of UKIP in respect to the extreme hate they get and then they go and do this...yikes.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
The No campaign used this same argument during the Independence Referendum and it made me fucking sick to my stomach.
CyclopsRock
Member
No they didn't?
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
Also, that Andrew Charalambous guy they're asking you to vote for:
He's also the son of Greek immigrants. But that sort of hypocrisy is to be expected now.
He's also the son of Greek immigrants. But that sort of hypocrisy is to be expected now.
CyclopsRock
Member
I don't think being the child of immigrants and being anti-immigration (or, rather, anti open immigration) is hypocrisy. He can't choose his birth circumstances any more than anyone else, I don't see why that should define his political leanings.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Because the immigration system he wants to clamp down on is the same one that allowed his parents to come here and prosper?
What right does he have to argue others shouldn't have the same opportunities as him?
CyclopsRock
Member
Yeah, but he didn't choose to come here and prosper, he was just born here like I was. Maybe he'd rather be in Greece? Maybe he wouldn't, it doesn't actually matter. Maybe he thinks immigration puts an unreasonable demand on local resources, or he thinks it supresses wages, or he thinks he can cause social problems when large groups of another nationality settle in one place, or he thinks children who don't speak English negatively impact schools or or or or. What's that got to do with where his parents are from?
Miles Quaritch
Member
Everything?
His parents made a choice to find a better life and by doing so, gave this chap a much better opportunity to prosper than he might otherwise she gotten in Greece?
His argument is one that could have potentially stopped his parents from coming here and giving him the life he has now if it had successfully been made in the past.
His entire existence is because of immigration. His parents came here, prospered and decided to have a child.
He has absolutely no right to suggest others aren't allowed to do what his parents did.
Every time I see something UKIP related it reminds of last year when I voted for the first time:
A guy went into the booth to vote, and came back out, asking loudly "How do I vote for UKIP?"
And that just didn't surprise me at all. Exactly the kind of person i'd expect to vote for a party like that.
A guy went into the booth to vote, and came back out, asking loudly "How do I vote for UKIP?"
And that just didn't surprise me at all. Exactly the kind of person i'd expect to vote for a party like that.
By all predictions there wouldn't be enough seats for the Tories and Lib Dems to form a majority.
If the predictions are accurate I can't see past Labour with the SNP supporting them on a vote by vote basis. No guarantee how long that would last for though.
CyclopsRock
Member
Well... I think we're going to go around in circles here, but I couldn't disagree more. Is it the fact he's a 2nd generation immigrant, or the fact his parents went from Greece --> UK that makes his opposition wrong? To play a fun mind game, if it were the other way round - he were a Greek politician called Dave Smith - would he also have to support immigration? Even if his parents doing so may have made his life poorer (in some ways - many people envy the mediteranean lifestyle) and with less opportunity?
How many generations does one need to have been in the UK for before they aren't called a hypocrit because they think that the damaging aspects of immigration outweigh the benefits? 2? 3? Never?
It just seems ludicrous to me that someone's political views should be defined by a bunch of things that they had literally no control over.
Miles Quaritch
Member
I don't believe it's a matter of generations. When someone directly benefits from immigration, when their life is immeasurably better than it might otherwise have been thanks to immigration, they don't have a right to then say we should take this opportunity from others.
It could be first, second or fifth generation. If immigration led to the life they have now, what right do they have to say others shouldn't be allowed to make the same journey?
It's no different from the 'fuck you, I got mine' mindset. You've benefited, now you want to make sure others don't.
And the argument about putting a strain in services is a ridiculous one. You only put pressure on a service when that service hasn't been adequately funded for years. What if there was a sudden increase in the native population having children? The same services would still be under strain, the only difference would be the scapegoat of immigrants (who usually don't use those services nearly as much people like to pretend) is no longer there.
Fuck that is disgusting.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked