• 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.

UK PoliGAF: General election thread of LibCon Coalitionage

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

curls

Wake up Sheeple, your boring insistence that Obama is not a lizardman from Atlantis is wearing on my patience 💤
Wes said:
Guardian Live Blog said someone confirmed on their twitter that there will be an immigration question from the audience.
Click to expand...

Hopefully Brown calls them a bigot. If so he gets my vote.
 
phisheep

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
I am fed up with all this knurdling around what services will be protected.

If any one of them says that there are going to be big cuts and there is no area of government spending that can currently be considered immune from them - they will have my vote.
 
M

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
As an American I've been following this whole campaign for the last couple of weeks, mostly during work, but this little snippet in the New York Times made me want to facepalm almost as much as Gordon there.

New York Times said:
Whether the incident will prove to be a blip in the campaign or the moment when Labour’s already faltering hopes for victory fell into the abyss, may not be clear until new opinion polls appear at the weekend. But one straw-in-the-wind report that cheered Labour officials came when a Labour councilor in Rochdale, where the prime minister made his gaffe, said that 90 percent of his constituents did not understand the word bigoted. “They thought he said ‘big headed,’ ” he said.
Click to expand...

Just...wow. :lol

Right up there with some of the amazingly stupid stuff we've heard over here in our election cycles.
 
scotcheggz

scotcheggz

Member
MetatronM said:
As an American I've been following this whole campaign for the last couple of weeks, mostly during work, but this little snippet in the New York Times made me want to facepalm almost as much as Gordon there.



Just...wow. :lol

Right up there with some of the amazingly stupid stuff we've heard over here in our election cycles.
Click to expand...

I heard on one report about yesterdays incident that the lady in question had to have the word explained to her by journalists.

Made me confused when other stations were showing "the moment she was told by reporters what Brown had said about her" and she was all upset. Did they explain bigoted and then tell her that brown said that about her, or was she just having a guess that it was a bad thing? :lol
 
R

radioheadrule83

Banned
phisheep said:
I am fed up with all this knurdling around what services will be protected.

If any one of them says that there are going to be big cuts and there is no area of government spending that can currently be considered immune from them - they will have my vote.
Click to expand...

They seem to be scared of using the word cut, particularly with reference to the "ringfenced" topics (NHS, Schools, Police, Defence etc) but if you read between the lines they have all already intimated how they might make savings in those areas:

- review of IT systems, the NHS nationwide database / IT system being one area with the private sector seriously fucked over the government in contract negotiations -- they were late, over budget and its still not up to scratch. The current government already has plans to claw back money from contractors

- trident is obviously a big element of the lib dems policy, does it *really* need to be renewed now? Anyone reasonable about this knows we are not facing imminent nuclear attack, and should any western country face it - it would mean nuclear armageddon. You can't fight dirty bombs and terror attacks with trident. I work in defence, and there's already a giant spending review scheduled for the summer (they occur every 10 years) -- without doubt, big projects will be canned I reckon.

- I can't agree with the conservatives on faith schools at all (its a horrible idea - we'd end up with our own bible belt or extremist madrasas), but private investment is not at all a bad idea for schools, providing they don't attempt to fiddle the syllabus... and in a way its something Labour are already doing with academys and so forth. But yeah, private money = less public money needed in the education budget

- review of ID card scheme, review of any legislation that is onerous to enforce and scrapping of plans for things like a DNA database would be a start for reducing the burden on the police budget


I think they'll all attack DWP / benefits as well. Not too hard, because unemployment hasn't peaked yet, but I think we'll definitely be put on the road to something like Workfare. Taxpayers in the country are in favour of something like that, the only reason the politicians aren't making a stronger, louder case for benefits reform is because it would alienate those actually on benefits and influence their vote... better to announce shit like that in the post election budget than scare people off voting for you now.

I think that seems to be the entire philosophy on spending plans actually. Don't scare the voters, come clean after the election. I don't like it either, but I can understand it. I think the Lib-Dems have been the most forthcoming by far. Paxman nailed Cameron on it best during his interview -- his current manifesto is nowhere near as clear as their 2005 manifesto on spending.

As someone working in the public sector though and knowing how distant members of parliament are from the inner workings of many departments I'll tell you now - it's like someone else said earlier in the thread: you need to actually be in government and speaking to your departments before you have a real idea of what you can afford to do and prioritise accordingly.
 
E

Empty

Member
what an idiot

kerry-postal-vote-tweet.jpg
 
D

Dark Machine

Member
Empty said:
This is quite interesting, and a major boost for Cameron ahead of tonight's debate: The Economist backs The Tories.

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=16007299&source=hptextfeature
Click to expand...

The Economist is a good magazine, and as a reader of it I applaud much of the stuff it has, however I object to this, it shouldn't take a side at all, but rather analyse and comment, the Tory's have enough propaganda. Either way, if they DID back someone I knew it'd be the Tories, since the Economist believes wholeheartedly in the market being able to solve nearly everything given the chance, and the tories being the most Privatisation/market friendly party traditionally. Though if the mag's Liberal, surely they should support the Lib Dems? :D Contradiction much?

Edit: Looking at the comments below the article, it seems much of their readership disagrees with them.
 
W

Wes

venison crêpe
Schoolgirl told to step outside for wearing 'posh boy' T-shirt

Labour-strategists-campai-006.jpg


The Guardian's 1 April revelation that Labour was planning to embrace Gordon Brown's reputation for anger and physical aggression with an aggressive poster campaign sparked a flurry of tweets, replicas, comments, a Facebook page ... and even a T-shirt.

However, it seems not everyone was amused by the April fool, which "revealed" a series of Labour posters bearing pugnacious messages such as "Step outside posh boy".

Lucy, a school pupil from Derbyshire (whose full name I've withheld for fear of reprisals), has been warned that she could quite literally be the one asked to "step outside" if she continues to wear a T-shirt bearing an image from the faux-election campaign.




She emails:

Dear editor,

I am 14 years old and attend a school where we have no uniform.

I have an interest in politics, and I loved the "Step outside posh boy" T-shirts so much so, on failing to win one, I bought one for myself.

However, today I have been told if I wear it again I could be sent home.

Your T-shirt is apparently "offensive" and politically biased.

This is ridiculously unfair as I bought it purposefully for school. PLEASE HELP, I want to wear my T-shirt next Thursday!

Lucy




Lucy is not the first to have fallen foul of the authorities while wearing a "posh boy" T-shirt.

Last month a teenager was reportedly told he could not enter a Q&A session with David Cameron in Brighton unless he removed the offending item of clothing or turned it inside out.

Once inside the venue, however, the determined youngster turned the garment the right way round and was abruptly spotted by Cameron himself, who shouted words to the effect of: "I want one. But they won't let me wear it."

So there are the options, Lucy: smuggle it in, or gain the backing of the leader of the Conservative party.

Or perhaps switch T-shirts to this more topical "anti-bigot" offering.
Click to expand...
 
B

blazinglord

Member
Dark Machine said:
The Economist is a good magazine, and as a reader of it I applaud much of the stuff it has, however I object to this, it shouldn't take a side at all, but rather analyse and comment, the Tory's have enough propaganda. Either way, if they DID back someone I knew it'd be the Tories, since the Economist believes wholeheartedly in the market being able to solve nearly everything given the chance, and the tories being the most Privatisation/market friendly party traditionally. Though if the mag's Liberal, surely they should support the Lib Dems? :D Contradiction much?

Edit: Looking at the comments below the article, it seems much of their readership disagrees with them.
Click to expand...
I think it's because it was linked on the Guardian liveblog. As a long-term reader of The Economist too, I can assure you that the natural readership of The Economist is very economically liberal/libertarian. I remember a lot of them railing at the magazine for supporting Obama over McCain! And they are definitely not the type to fret about 'public services' and use terms like 'slash and burn'. :lol
 
G

Gary Whitta

Member
Posted? Just saw this on the Guardian's pre-election liveblog:

7.12pm: If you haven't already read the story about Mervyn King's thoughts on whether the election is worth winning, you should. David Hale, an American economist, let the cat out of the bag in an interview on Australian television. Hale said:

I saw the governor of the Bank of England [Mervyn King] last week when I was in London and he told me whoever wins this election will be out of power for a whole generation because of how tough the fiscal austerity will have to be.
Click to expand...
 
M

Mr. Sam

Member
Wes said:
Guardian Live Blog said someone confirmed on their twitter that there will be an immigration question from the audience.
Click to expand...

But they covered that last week, and the week before!

Economics really just whooshes over my head, but if the Sky debate is anything to go by the questions will have little to do with the economy.

"What do you do, personally, with all your left over one and two pence coins? Do you support the Monster Raving Loony Party policy of introducing 99p coins?"
 
S

Shanadeus

Banned
Newscientist article on the election:
Psychologists: Tories to win UK general election

...
The research team believes that some voters will be swayed by a simple rule of thumb.

There are many pundits who are trying to do the same thing with traditional methods, such as opinion polls.

However, the team is so confident about their idea that they are publishing their prediction for the outcome of the election in the latest issue of New Scientist.

And to show how confident they are of success, the psychologists have placed bets with bookmakers and will reveal precisely how they came to their conclusions - and whether they were borne out by the results of the election - in the issue of New Scientist dated 15 May.

To test their prediction, the team focused on candidates standing in 59 marginal seats, and then called on the help of more than 200 people to work out who had the best chance of winning.

"This study follows on from other research that has been conducted in America," commented Dr Rob Jenkins. "That work correctly predicted the winners and runners-up for the Senate about 70% of the time."

The researchers also used their data to determine the outcome of the entire election - predicting a hung parliament, with 290 seats going to the Conservatives, 247 to Labour, 70 to the Liberal Democrats, and 25 to other parties.

"This prediction assumes that seats widely considered to be 'safe' will not change hands, and that the findings from our sample of marginal seats will scale up to the other marginals," remarked Tony McCarthy.

"Lots of psychological research carried out after elections has examined the factors that may have influenced voters but, to our knowledge, this is the first piece of work to be carried out prior to the election," added Wiseman.

"We will reveal just how we did it when we know the outcome of the election and publish our analysis in the New Scientist of 15 May."
Click to expand...
 
E

Empty

Member
Mr. Sam said:
But they covered that last week, and the week before!
Click to expand...

Yep, and there really is nothing more to cover. The three parties have explained their policies, Labour focusing on the points system; the Lib Dems adding a regional element to the points system and adding a new one off amnesty for certain illegal immigrants; and the Tories adding a yearly migration cap to the system. That's really all there is to it, what on earth are they else meant to say, except talk about yesterdays story and that really doesn't add anything substantial to the debate. sigh.
 
D

Dabookerman

Member
Empty said:
Yep, and there really is nothing more to cover. The three parties have explained their policies, Labour focusing on the points system; the Lib Dems adding a regional element to the points system and adding a new one off amnesty for certain illegal immigrants; and the Tories adding a yearly migration cap to the system. That's really all there is to it, what on earth are they else meant to say, except talk about yesterdays story and that really doesn't add anything substantial to the debate. sigh.
Click to expand...

Clegg can mention the whole 14 year thing that has been around for some time.
 
B

blazinglord

Member
Lol @ Adam Boulton's character assasination of Dimbleby on Sky News before he has even started! I rather like Dimbleby myself, he will probably be better than the other moderators.
 
J

J Tourettes

Banned
Mr. Sam said:
But they covered that last week, and the week before!

Economics really just whooshes over my head, but if the Sky debate is anything to go by the questions will have little to do with the economy.

"What do you do, personally, with all your left over one and two pence coins? Do you support the Monster Raving Loony Party policy of introducing 99p coins?"
Click to expand...

It's only the first half an hour of each show that relates to the topic. after that it's a free for all.
 
V

Varion

Member
J Tourettes said:
It's only the first half an hour of each show that relates to the topic. after that it's a free for all.
Click to expand...

Oh it's that again? Sigh.

I'm looking forward to hearing about their immigration policies and how they're going to clean up politics then!
 
B

blazinglord

Member
Empty said:
Yep, and there really is nothing more to cover. The three parties have explained their policies, Labour focusing on the points system; the Lib Dems adding a regional element to the points system and adding a new one off amnesty for certain illegal immigrants; and the Tories adding a yearly migration cap to the system. That's really all there is to it, what on earth are they else meant to say, except talk about yesterdays story and that really doesn't add anything substantial to the debate. sigh.
Click to expand...
Aren't the questions selected by the volume of questions from a particular category? Presumably the question of immigration keeps coming up and anyway Labour will probably welcome the chance for Brown to 'clarify' his 'concerns' about immigration.
 
E

Empty

Member
blazinglord said:
Aren't the questions selected by the volume of questions from a particular category? Presumably the question of immigration keeps coming up and anyway Labour will probably welcome the chance for Brown to 'clarify' his 'concerns' about immigration.
Click to expand...

Possibly, i'm not entirely sure about the rules, but that'd make sense. Maybe avoiding repetition between the three debates is something they could look at for the debate rules next time round.

Gary Whitta said:
That is the best idea I've ever heard :lol :lol :lol
Click to expand...

MRLP are pretty hilarious in general.

post-1756-1272544921_thumb.jpg
 
B

blazinglord

Member
Empty said:
Possibly, i'm not entirely sure about the rules, but that'd make sense. Maybe avoiding repetition between the three debates is something they could look at for the debate rules next time round.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the next Prime Minister will agree to leadership debates in the next general election though. I hope so because I think they're a good addition to the election campaign instead of the usual daily press conference crap we use to get. But I have a feeling that if Cameron is the next PM, he probably won't agree to these types of debates again.
 
P

painey

Member
this will be the first debate where I miss the end, instead of the start.. which sucks because the end and all the spin and rush for first poll results is the best bit.
 
D

DECK'ARD

The Amiga Brotherhood
For those who haven't seen it before, Guido Fawkes has a live 'Anti-spin Room' which is quite amusing to follow during the debate for how things are going down with journalists and political bloggers:

http://order-order.com/

You get lots of behind-the-scenes stuff as well.
 
J

JonathanEx

Member
Chinner said:
i doubt thing i have to tell you guys where to watch the debate, do i
Click to expand...
Is there a way of watching it in HD online?

Edit: forget that - I'm now splitting my screen for maximum online comment space.
 
V

Varion

Member
Chriswok said:
OK, this one HAS to be better - right?! Its the Economy, that covers everything. Jobs, Banking, Benefits, Taxes...
Click to expand...
Except for it only being on the economy for the first half, which means four questions :( Probably two of which will suck.
 
V

Varion

Member
"It's no good to borrow from the Chinese, and to buy goods from China."

Indeed, especially after you're done nuking them!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
5K
ManaByte replied
Satya Nadella: Annual letter to stockholders. Content on new platforms will continue
4 5 6 7 8
352
21K
noob smokes replied
Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision, Interested in Buying Tik-Tok
2 3
143
12K
Gameplay Gods Bless replied
Big Business and Government: Grand conspiracy or ramblings of a mad man?
3
2K
Soodanim replied
  • Locked
UK General Election - 8th June 2017 |OT| - The Red Wedding
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
chromatic9 replied
Top Bottom