UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

Bizarrely, Sinn Fein have rejected the welfare reforms that they agreed to a month ago, putting into doubt the Stormont House Agreement agreed at Christtmas. Claim the DUP have reneged on commitments to protect the most vulnerable. SF wanted to cordon off some money from the block grant to give to those who'd lose out with the reforms, DUP agreed to this at the time, so I'm going to assume that is what SF claim they've reneged on.
 
Regarding a SNP/Labour coalition, I actually don't think it's very likely to happen, as long as Labour have more MPs than the Tories. The SNP's continued statements that they won't do anything to prop up the Tories mean that the SNP's biggest weapon in negotiations is gone. Labour should be able to run a minority government, safe in the knowledge that the SNP won't join with the Tories on anything, and if they do, then Labour can use that to immense political gain.
 
Uzzy said:
Regarding a SNP/Labour coalition, I actually don't think it's very likely to happen, as long as Labour have more MPs than the Tories. The SNP's continued statements that they won't do anything to prop up the Tories mean that the SNP's biggest weapon in negotiations is gone. Labour should be able to run a minority government, safe in the knowledge that the SNP won't join with the Tories on anything, and if they do, then Labour can use that to immense political gain.
Click to expand...

A minority government isn't exactly a gleaming example of a political mandate.
 
Yen said:
Bizarrely, Sinn Fein have rejected the welfare reforms that they agreed to a month ago, putting into doubt the Stormont House Agreement agreed at Christtmas. Claim the DUP have reneged on commitments to protect the most vulnerable. SF wanted to cordon off some money from the block grant to give to those who'd lose out with the reforms, DUP agreed to this at the time, so I'm going to assume that is what SF claim they've reneged on.
Click to expand...

Electioneering bai.
 
Dan27 said:
A minority government isn't exactly a gleaming example of a political mandate.
Click to expand...

It pretty much does work though, mostly. When there was one in scotland the other parties threatened to vote down the govt but it would never happen since it was probably electoral suicide, and at budget time you throw a few sweeteners for the other parties in order so you vote for it.

It looks good for the governing party if they can make it work and also if the opposition take things seriously (for the perfect example in how not to do minority govt opposition, see the scottish labour party).
 
kmag said:
Ed Balls pretty much is the most inept and loathsome politician on any side.


This attack on the Conservative spending plans might be completely true, but it begs the question what are you going to do?
Click to expand...

You would be surprised how different the majority of MP's are when a camera isn't on them. I have met alot which have really surprised me upon meeting them. The ones that I have also corresponded with (though haven't met personally), regularly are passionate and compassionate regarding their constituents

Guess what, Ed Balls is none of the above. Without doubt the most detestable prick I have ever had the misfortune of being stuck in a room with.
 
Ding-Ding said:
You would be surprised how different the majority of MP's are when a camera isn't on them. I have met alot which have really surprised me upon meeting them. The ones that I have also corresponded with (though haven't met personally), regularly are passionate and compassionate regarding their constituents
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's my experience too. And it makes sense - whilst power may corrupt and the constantly being surrounded by help, wealth and privelege might skew ones view, I can't imagine there are too many who choose to spend ~25 years climbing a greasy, greasy pole just to get that stuff. I think most go into it for the right reasons. We also have a media culture that crucifies anyone for their mistakes or misteps, so obviously politicians will put a front of being a sort of shell of a human that can't reasonably exist.
 
CyclopsRock said:
Yeah, that's my experience too. And it makes sense - whilst power may corrupt and the constantly being surrounded by help, wealth and privelege might skew ones view, I can't imagine there are too many who choose to spend ~25 years climbing a greasy, greasy pole just to get that stuff. I think most go into it for the right reasons. We also have a media culture that crucifies anyone for their mistakes or misteps, so obviously politicians will put a front of being a sort of shell of a human that can't reasonably exist.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if they really want unfettered power most of them could just be bankers, and get stinking rich at the same time.

And no one cares where a banker sticks a satsuma.
 
Uzzy said:
Regarding a SNP/Labour coalition, I actually don't think it's very likely to happen, as long as Labour have more MPs than the Tories. The SNP's continued statements that they won't do anything to prop up the Tories mean that the SNP's biggest weapon in negotiations is gone. Labour should be able to run a minority government, safe in the knowledge that the SNP won't join with the Tories on anything, and if they do, then Labour can use that to immense political gain.
Click to expand...

There's not going to be coalition. I know it can be a bit naive to listen to what politicians say, but Sturgeon has done everything but tattoo it to her own forehead, she'll consider a confidence and supply arrangement with Labour but is not interested in a formal coalition. The SNP are too wary of doing anything major to upset the current state of Scottish politics, they're certainly not going to rehabilitate Labour up here by playing nicey nice with them. There's still a crap ton of extremely difficult decisions which the next Government will have to take, far easier to leave Labour to it.
 
Four point Tory yougov lead tonight, populous 1 point was the only labour lead I saw today.

Thought March would be when the polls start to settle into a pattern and I think it's starting to happen.
 
Nicktendo86 said:
Four point Tory yougov lead tonight, populous 1 point was the only labour lead I saw today.

Thought March would be when the polls start to settle into a pattern and I think it's starting to happen.
Click to expand...
Even a 4 point lead would only give the tories five more seats than labour. One thing that seems to be messing lots of polls up is the SNP votes. Nobody seems sure just how many seats they will win etc.
As for it being budget week I think we'll see the usual bounce for the tories and then things will return to where they are.
 
pulsemyne said:
Even a 4 point lead would only give the tories five more seats than labour. One thing that seems to be messing lots of polls up is the SNP votes. Nobody seems sure just how many seats they will win etc.
As for it being budget week I think we'll see the usual bounce for the tories and then things will return to where they are.
Click to expand...

I think the SNP will be lucky to get 40 seats at the most. Even that would take such a huge national swing that it's almost beyond belief. Some of Labours majorities in Scotland are gigantic. A lot of the local SNP offices are starting to manage expectations with their volunteers.
 
Every poll seems to show that sort of massive swing though in Scotland. Nothing I am seeing or hearing indicates that labour are clawing back some of those seats.

I sort of think the entire thing insane, and my other half who is Scottish is watching what is happening horror struck (as are most scots we know in London), but for whatever reason Scotland is going to be SNP land after the next election. Whether that's a temporary thing, or will become the norm will be interesting to see.

(It now seems like the UK won the battle but lost the war when it came to the independance vote...).
 
New yougov poll tonight has cons at 33 and lab at 31. Seems a more realistic poll. Apparently there was a "Cock up" in the previous poll that gave the cons a 4 point lead. A point or two lead wither way is probably accurate and not nearly enough for either to form any non-coalition government.
In balance I think we see a fairly settle electorate. The hard core percentage for either side seems to be around 32 percent, sometimes a little more and sometimes a little less. Unless someone makes a total balls up during the election I don't think there will be much to separate both sides.
 
kmag said:
I think the SNP will be lucky to get 40 seats at the most. Even that would take such a huge national swing that it's almost beyond belief. Some of Labours majorities in Scotland are gigantic. A lot of the local SNP offices are starting to manage expectations with their volunteers.
Click to expand...

I think that one factor that some may not be factoring in is that while the referendum saw a massive turnout (espicelly the young) it is not nearly as likely to be as big during the election and it tends to be the old who go out and vote. The SNP has done a superb job of appealing to the young but can they get them motivated to vote in a general election. Personally I doubt it. General elections just aren't as sexy as a vote to decide the very future or your country.
I think 40 seats would be a very good result for the SNP and it would certainly upset the apple cart in Westminster. Would they have enough to form a coalition with Labour though? Probably but it could be close.
I do find it funny though to hear the papers harp on about the SNP like they are the devil incarnate. They find it disgusting that a democratically elected party that takes part in britains democratic process should be allowed to help form a government. Perhaps the papers need reminding for how democracy works and that people can have a voice.
 
Danny Alexander receives last kick at the despatch box

The brutality of the coalition’s austerity programme has now reached the Commons itself. There on the front bench was a 42- year-old man called Danny who had spent the past five years rolling up his sleeves and trying to do the right thing. Danny had worked hard to provide for his family and had even taken on two jobs to give them a good start in life. But now Danny was a broken man. Within weeks Danny faced losing not just one job but both of them, and being left to get by as best he could with only the hope of a peerage or a City directorship to sustain him.

The opinion polls in his own constituency of Inverness are far from reassuring for Danny Alexander, and the chief secretary to the Treasury is likely to have a great deal of free time on his hands come 8 May.

He looks as if he might appreciate the time off; not even a sharp new haircut can disguise his obvious sense of despair. The swagger that came from being a member of the Osborne in-crowd has vanished: he has been dumped by the Tories and he now knows he is about to get dumped on by the electorate.
Click to expand...

The whole article is worth a read, because it's just pathetic. Couldn't happen to a bigger asshole though.
 
WayneMorse said:
Danny Alexander receives last kick at the despatch box



The whole article is worth a read, because it's just pathetic. Couldn't happen to a bigger asshole though.
Click to expand...

777d86d3-c4f9-41bf-a6c5-bc3f55e8e606-620x372.jpeg


What's with this sinister-looking photo??
 
Dan27 said:
A minority government isn't exactly a gleaming example of a political mandate.
Click to expand...

The electoral mandate from a minority government is that the population want the government to do as little as possible in reality.

Agree that the current "hardcore" bloc for the two main parties is about 31%, but what must worry them is that a sizable amount of those people still believe in the "vote red or get blue/vote blue or get red" rhetoric. After two or three coalitions even the dimmest voter is going to realise that's not true any more, and both parties could collapse.

Labour would unquestionably meltdown first - progressive politics has always been keen self immolate, and crucially the Labour party is on the point of financial collapse anyway, but the Tories won't be far behind.

At that point we're going to see some mighty eating crow on the supposed superiority of FPTP.
 
Who is front runner to replace Danny as Lib Dem "money guy"? Vince is a daft old fucker and if the LDs don't get enough seats for a coalition, Clegg will be for the Lords. That's a lot of change at the top. Maybe just what they need tbf
 
pulsemyne said:
I think that one factor that some may not be factoring in is that while the referendum saw a massive turnout (espicelly the young) it is not nearly as likely to be as big during the election and it tends to be the old who go out and vote. The SNP has done a superb job of appealing to the young but can they get them motivated to vote in a general election. Personally I doubt it. General elections just aren't as sexy as a vote to decide the very future or your country.
I think 40 seats would be a very good result for the SNP and it would certainly upset the apple cart in Westminster. Would they have enough to form a coalition with Labour though? Probably but it could be close.
I do find it funny though to hear the papers harp on about the SNP like they are the devil incarnate. They find it disgusting that a democratically elected party that takes part in britains democratic process should be allowed to help form a government. Perhaps the papers need reminding for how democracy works and that people can have a voice.
Click to expand...

They're not going to go into a coalition with Labour, short of Labour offering proper devo-max which they will not do.

As to the youth vote, there's still an a palpable anger amongst Yes voters about how the Better Together conducted its campaign (that's somewhat lost in England, the local campaigning on both sides but primarily the Labour activist led BT campaign was pretty nippy). That's feeding into the SNP support for the polling, the question is will that anger be enough to get people to vote. I think the turnout will probably be higher in Scotland but not by that much. If the turnout in Scotland is really high then the SNP could get a lot of seats. If not they'll get a decent return.

The other thing which is harder for the opposition to admit is frankly even by the limited standards of what Holyrood can actually do (and in general governing in Scotland is pretty easy given you are basically spending pocket money), the SNP have been a pretty good government. The only blotches on their record are a Labour-esque centralisation of services (I have some sympathy here, 7 police forces were too much, but I'm not sure one massive one is the answer), a failure to find the magic bullet to get around , and the general performance of their (now ex) Justice Minster (the draconian anti-sectarian football law and a botched attempt to redo Scottish criminal law on the fly with the floating of removing corroboration as the underpinning of the system).

Ultimately the Scottish situation isn't much of a factor on the UK stage (other than what success the Tories get with their Labour/SNP scaremongering). Of the 55 you can safely say at least 45 of them (probably 52-53) will be an anti tory block in terms of the final Commons calculus.
 
Debates latest.

So if you'll remember, Guardian/Telegraph/YouTube pitched a Digital Debate between Con/Lab/Lib/Ukip/Green. Digital Debate, aren't we cool and modern. Probably to be moderated by Zoella.

No? No, most people forgot. Anyway, they've folded to Cameron's "election debates must not be held near an election because sshhh" demand - pitching March 26/27th. And it seems No10 are properly considering.


Can see accepting that debate going well for them in terms of the avoiding of them so far... they debate, on Cameron's terms, harder to throw round the chicken claims etc.
 
Maledict said:
Every poll seems to show that sort of massive swing though in Scotland. Nothing I am seeing or hearing indicates that labour are clawing back some of those seats.

I sort of think the entire thing insane, and my other half who is Scottish is watching what is happening horror struck (as are most scots we know in London), but for whatever reason Scotland is going to be SNP land after the next election. Whether that's a temporary thing, or will become the norm will be interesting to see.

(It now seems like the UK won the battle but lost the war when it came to the independance vote...).
Click to expand...

I felt this was coming (although labours complete collapse is quite spectacular in scale and speed). The no vote is secure, labour are un-voteable and the SNP (rightly or wrongly) are seen as the only party that can realistically fight for Scottish interests in the union.

If I lived in Scotland I'd probably vote for them too.
The big parties are utterly toxic.
 
JonathanEx said:
Debates latest.

So if you'll remember, Guardian/Telegraph/YouTube pitched a Digital Debate between Con/Lab/Lib/Ukip/Green. Digital Debate, aren't we cool and modern. Probably to be moderated by Zoella.

No? No, most people forgot. Anyway, they've folded to Cameron's "election debates must not be held near an election because sshhh" demand - pitching March 26/27th. And it seems No10 are properly considering.


Can see accepting that debate going well for them in terms of the avoiding of them so far... they debate, on Cameron's terms, harder to throw round the chicken claims etc.
Click to expand...

Given that the manifesto's aren't out by then what on earth are they going to debate.
 
kmag said:
Given that the manifesto's aren't out by then what on earth are they going to debate.
Click to expand...
The Tories are bad
Labour have no plans
Hey guys we're still here we have our own opinions really
See they're not taking about immigration
We like trees and are a serious contender no really stop laughing

There's all five parties main points there
 
JonathanEx said:
Debates latest.

So if you'll remember, Guardian/Telegraph/YouTube pitched a Digital Debate between Con/Lab/Lib/Ukip/Green. Digital Debate, aren't we cool and modern. Probably to be moderated by Zoella.

No? No, most people forgot. Anyway, they've folded to Cameron's "election debates must not be held near an election because sshhh" demand - pitching March 26/27th. And it seems No10 are properly considering.


Can see accepting that debate going well for them in terms of the avoiding of them so far... they debate, on Cameron's terms, harder to throw round the chicken claims etc.
Click to expand...

I hope they take some online questions with subtle trolling involved. Anyway it all got a bit nasty at PMQ's today. Cameron did his red face again.
 
For the first time in a loooong while, the polls are finally giving results where a Con/LD coalition would be able to command stable government. May2015 and ElectionForecast both showing them reaching the magic 322 with UKIP and DUP support in VoCs. Doesn't have anything to do with a Labour decline - instead UKIP are very slowly trickling back. No wonder Cameron wants to avoid the debates, he desperately needs to avoid both Miliband and Farage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
254K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
My French assistant has a thing for me...
3
6K
Yoshi replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Something wrong with the Funny post thread?
0
1K
Amakusa replied
Top Bottom