Support NeoGAF

[J Tourettes]

as i said above about the young generations. I dunno, just saying what I see from I've seen. Not very conclusive, but as I said it'd interesting as someone did research.

I think it's a good idea but I can't see any party having the balls to implement it.

Edit Goddamn stealth edit! I was referring to the Robin Hood tax.

 

[Chinner]

how many of you are aware/support the robin hood tax?
http://robinhoodtax.org.uk/

Quote:
The Robin Hood Tax is a tiny tax on banks, hedge funds and other finance institutions that would raise billions to tackle poverty and climate change, at home and abroad.

It can start as low as 0.005 per cent – and average 0.05 per cent . But when levied on the billions of pounds sloshing round the global finance system every day through transactions such as foreign exchange, derivatives trading and share deals, it can raise hundreds of billions of pounds every year.

Been getting quite allot of support and frankly I think it owns.

 

[sohois]

Our Tories are less conservative than your Republicans. However, this is only because the British population is more liberal than America's and most of us are highly protective over our culture (Mostly the NHS and BBC) that any mention of any cuts will generate a large out roar from the paper's and general public.

Most don't really believe them when they say they won't cut it for a numerous reasons: All you have to do look at Thatcher's reign in the 80's: As I said in the OP, she knocked the shit out of the unions (I know in the US unions are not generally viewed in a positive light), and she butchered allot of British industry basically forcing us to rely on finance and banking as our main revenue. The Tories also let the NHS go to shit.

In particular, one of the main reasons why nobody doesn't believe the Tories when it comes to the NHS, is that last year while your health care wars were raging on, Daniel Hannan, a Tory MEP, went onto Fox news and completely rubbished the NHS and advocated American style health care. Cameron eventually and poorly denied everything he said, but it makes everyone feel uneasy.

The fear, which I think someone mentioned above, is that most of the younger generation (teens, people in their early 20s like me) weren't alive during the 80s and didn't know how bad things got when the Tories were in power. This has given the Tories (I suspect) a boost from the younger population, and that most of the younger generation are anti-labour/left. I wish someone would do research into it cause it's genuinely interesting question.

Would you expect people who lived through the 70s to all be conservative voters, given the horrific labour governments of that era? I find it foolish to judge parties based on events that happened years before most of their respective cabinets were in power.

 

[Chinner]

Would you expect people who lived through the 70s to all be conservative voters, given the horrific labour governments of that era? I find it foolish to judge parties based on events that happened years before most of their respective cabinets were in power.

That's not what I said, I didn't say everyone who lived throughout the 70s, I'm referring specifically to the younger generation who are born into party's dominance. As I said, it's an anecdote which doesn't contain much weight to it. Obviously there's going to be external factors that will influence people but it'd be interesting if you did see a voting preferences flip flop as you went through the generations.

 

[sohois]

That's not what I said, I didn't say everyone who lived throughout the 70s, I'm referring specifically to the younger generation who are born into party's dominance. As I said, it's an anecdote which doesn't contain much weight to it. Obviously there's going to be external factors that will influence people but it'd be interesting if you did see a voting preferences flip flop as you went through the generations.

True, my comment was kind of directed at everyone and i didn't mean to single you out, its just i see i lot of posters expressing the sentiment that they won't vote for the tories because of their actions from years ago. You can judge an incumbent party on their previous term but anything more seems stupid to me.

 

[gerg]

This thread reminded me that I'm a first time voter this year, and so I was wondering if any of your more knowledgeable peoples might be able to educate me about the main parties and what they stand for; at the moment, they all seem remarkably similar to each other, and I'm having a very hard time distinguishing between them. I guess it doesn't help that I'm not really sure what I stand for, but I imagine that that will become clearer once I know what's on offer.

Thanks in advance.

 

[J Tourettes]

This thread reminded me that I'm a first time voter this year, and so I was wondering if any of your more knowledgeable peoples might be able to educate me about the main parties and what they stand for; at the moment, they all seem remarkably similar to each other, and I'm having a very hard time distinguishing between them. I guess it doesn't help that I'm not really sure what I stand for, but I imagine that that will become clearer once I know what's on offer.

Thanks in advance.

You could try filling this out for a start: http://www.politicalcompass.org/test nad then try and find a party that matches most of your ideals

EDIT: Just did mine

 

[gerg]

You could try filling this out for a start: http://www.politicalcompass.org/test nad then try and find a party that matches most of your ideals

EDIT: Just did mine

Thanks.

This is me, apparently: http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-2.38&soc=-6.41

I remember taking it a while ago. I'll see if I can find my old results on Facebook, and see if they compare.

 

[Chinner]

alright, who is the wise guy who signed up the lib dem adverts?

 

[J Tourettes]

alright, who is the wise guy who signed up the lib dem adverts?

:lol I've been seeing them all day.

 

[Empty]

Thanks.

This is me, apparently: http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-2.38&soc=-6.41

I remember taking it a while ago. I'll see if I can find my old results on Facebook, and see if they compare.

If you are very liberal socially and around the centre economically, you'll probably like the Lib Dems.

quick rundown of policy here

 

[Mr. Luchador]

Economic Left/Right: -4.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.13

Do we all swing the same way? :lol

 

[Cindres]

Done it like 3 times before and i always get what you guys are getting too.

 

[Chinner]

you guys are not left enough

 

[radioheadrule83]

Political Compass

Iraq

the evidence for Iraq was blatently cherry-picked and misleading even then. If they believed that dossier than it shows poor judgement that led to the deaths of thousands. they all bear responsibility for it.

The entire British case for war was a case of believing what they wanted to believe, perhaps what they needed to believe. The feeling I got from it was that our government just really wanted to be on-side with the Americans, possibly out of some geo-political strategic belief that it would be better for us in the long run. I believe Blair genuinely believed Saddam should be removed as well, with horrendously stubborn conviction -- but I think the bigger element was that he felt the UK government should back the USA.

The French, Germans and Russians all had dealings with the Ba'athists and the Chinese didn't want to see anyone go into Iraq either. Saddam had dragged things along in defiance of the UN and inspection agencies for 11 years, and with all those permanent members keeping him safe, I'm sure he could have done it 11 more... Unfortunately for him, with lots of good-will and political captial to spend in the wake of 9/11 - Rumsfeld and co were taking America into Iraq no matter what, and we had to decide on which side we fell: that of our European friends or with our old pal and 'special relationship' - the USA. It won't surprise me if in 100-150 years its disclosed that the UK got something substantial out of joining the invasion.

I sympathise with everyone who feels they were misled and lied to about the case for war, but I think the sad truth is that Conservative votes helped take us to war, they would have done no different and if anything - given the way the voting panned out - they would have been even more gung-ho. Imagine if everything had gone to plan straight away, and post-war planning had been flawless - opinions would obviously have been more favourable. And that's probably what they were counting on. Although the Lib Dems are the only party that can authoritatively claim to have opposed the war, in the hypothetical parallel universe where they were in power instead - I'm sure they would have felt the external pressures to join the campaign as well. Its no excuse of course, but I think we'll learn a lot more in the passage of time. And sadly, history will judge it on how it turns out, not on what we thought of it at the time.

Iraq still plays into the public distrust of the Labour party and distrust of our politicians generally, but it seems to be less of a major issue in this election than it was in 2005 - probably because Afghanistan has remained so much more lethal and we've had a slew of scandals affecting all sides since.



On the subject of cutting the deficit

We've talked a lot about debt so far, where do people really think cuts should fall?

I posted earlier in the thread that I believe (with good reason) that unemployment and housing benefit are a drop in the ocean, that actually make previously economically immobile people, economically active and contributory in a sense - so while I would like to see a major crackdown on benefit cheats, I don't believe for a second that it would effect a particularly massive change in the public purse. I would much rather see a good hard crackdown on tax avoidance and tax exiles, and perhaps something innovative like the RobinHoodTax suggestion (although I'm not too sure on that as yet)...

I think pensions are going to become a sticking point in the coming years. Attacking contribution pension schemes could cause far worse industrial action than what we're seeing right now but its one of the things a future government might feel they have to do, I'm not sure. It may be too unpopular. I think that ring-fencing the NHS and other higher valued services is a good ideal. Primarily I want to see investments in RBS and other banks leveraged with a few to getting maximum returns - even if that means holding onto the investments for years. In the scheme of things RBS is still massive - they are the second largest shareholder in Bank of China, their subsidiaries include Natwest, Churchill, Direct Line, Ulster Bank and Citizens Financial Group - the 8th largest bank in the US. As I posted early, Virgin Money are snooping around Lloyds and RBS with a few to buying a slew of high street branches off them and putting a Virgin bank on our streets - and such a deal could be a big lift if done right.

There is a Defence Review due this year and I think whoever is in power is going to make some symbolic gestures in the realms of defence. They've talked up partnering on equipment and projects with allies like France and so forth, so I could see announcements like that taking shape, I can see some of the costlier big flagship projects coming under threat, and the trident renewal programme being shrunk or something. I can see potential redundancies and restructuring in the MOD, and possible promises / timeframes for drawdown to lower numbers in Afghanistan and Iraq. Another possibility is that they go the other way and create MORE work in Defence to bolster manufacturing / jobs. Who knows? I'll be interested to see whether they're going to expand aid to the car industry with the largely successful scrappage scheme over with..

They really oughta take an axe to as many advisory quangos as possible. They've just failed the government to hell and back anyway...

I'm inclined to think people lean towards wanting cautious remedial action and alternatives to the harshest, bitter medicine that might be needed. We ARE going to have to sacrifice some things to come out the other side of this as best we can - what would you sacrifice?


Has anybody elses behaviour changed markedly since this time in 2009? My behaviour has certainly changed over the last year. I've been going out less, making sure I have plenty of cash for essentials rather than splashing out on luxory items like games etc. I've been repaying Uni debt, and a bank loan with a mindset that I no longer want anything like that on my shoulders ever again. Has anyone else felt that sort of mental attitude change?


And finally,


what do you assess the concerns of the British public to be at this moment?

I feel as though whats really worrying people at the moment is less who holds sway in the corridors of power and more about wanting to feel confident in the future. People don't want to lose services and safety nets they hold dear (NHS, support for parents / families / unemployed), even though they know the deficit has to be cut in the coming years. They know theres going to be a high burden to achieve that and I think there'll be a fair bit of acceptance when whoever wins ushers in their 'age of austerity' as its been coined. All people really want to know is how long people will have to be living pay cheque to pay cheque, and how long they'll have the fear of becoming unemployed. A lot of the attempts at populist spin-politics and personality assassination politics are actually the things a lot of Britain are actually kinda sick of. People have a fairly good sense of when a government or shadow cabinet policy announcement is just a cynical ploy to win their support, they're dizzy from the spin on all sides, and they want to hear something to vote for instead of the predictable sniping, punch and judy farce most of them seem to love to engage in.

 

[J Tourettes]

So... anyone watch dispatches?

 

[Bleepey]

What does British gaf think the role the NHS will play in the elections? I am waiting for Labour to bring up the Daniel Hannan trump card of this guy is a first class tool:lol

 

[Empty]

i'm further left than the others who have posted theirs.

What does British gaf think the role the NHS will play in the elections? I am waiting for Labour to bring up the Daniel Hannan trump card of this guy is a first class tool

I'd imagine not a huge amount, given that the Tories have ring-fenced it from any cuts, as they'll fucking lose if they don't; the public sector debate will probably be contained to the other areas.

On Hannan, did you guys see that he tried to set up a british tea party?

 

[The Librarian]

Thanks for the replies everyone.

 

[Subliminal]

You could try filling this out for a start: http://www.politicalcompass.org/test nad then try and find a party that matches most of your ideals

[

 

[jas0nuk]

Daniel Hannan is such a complete nutcase.

A more pressing issue: apparently Geoff Hoon, Patricia Hewitt and Stephen Byers have just been suspended from the Labour party after the Dispatches "cash for influence" revelations.
Lovely Labour sleaze.

 

[ghst]

Daniel Hannan is such a complete nutcase.

A more pressing issue: apparently Geoff Hoon, Patricia Hewitt and Stephen Byers have just been suspended from the Labour party after the Dispatches "cash for influence" revelations.
Lovely Labour sleaze.

hoon and hewitt?

uncanny.

 

[Salazar]

I think it's also time for Mandelson to be slapped for repeatedly trying to parachute Tristram Hunt into a seat. It's been comically futile, but a public slicing-up over it—not to mention his fucking higher ed cuts—is overdue. It's stomach-turning when a rank beneficiary of cronyism acts in turn for cronies of his own.

 

[jas0nuk]

hoon and hewitt?

uncanny.

It is said that this is a Brownite plot to get rid of some unsavoury Blairite individuals. I wouldn't be surprised. The Labour party is clearly very divided - even today in the commons there were protestations from Labour MPs about their own colleagues about this "cash for influence" nonsense.

edit: Confirmed now. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8582093.stm

Hilarious. The PLP has suspended them but Gordon Brown has rejected calls for an inquiry? They must be innocent then...!

 

[avaya]

I general regard any one who votes for the Tories who does not fall under the following category.

1. Is rich as fuck.

To be a delusional individual.

It isn't the young people that will hand Tories the victory. Cretin's aside, it is actually older white women. This is their base. Yes you all know the person, the old woman down the street who complains when the kids play ball games.

Social Conservatism from the same people who said "There is no society". :lol :lol

Hoping for a hung parliament. All of them are cunts.

 

[Cindres]

So how about that Merrie England guys?
Fuck their overpriced shit.
Hadfields all the way.

EDIT: Providing it is Hadfields that they have everywhere, there's also a Hartley's near me but i can never remember which is which.
Fuck i could eat a beef salad sandwich right now.

 

[Wes]

Me, Gandhi and Nelson Mandela are tight.

 

[Empty]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8582093.stm

disgusting. no investigation is doubly so.

 

[defel]

Is anyone else watching newsnight? If not check it out on iPlayer, there was a fantastic duke out between Mandelson and Clarke. imo they just both dug eachother's graves and let the lib dem guy win the debate without saying anything :lol

 

[jas0nuk]

Anyone "right authoritarian" yet? Actually nvm they wouldn't be on NeoGAF, they'd be busy protesting about the US healthcare reform going through.

 

[Salazar]

Social Conservatism from the same people who said "There is no society". :lol :lol

You're attributing to a multitude (unknown to you) the statement and implied beliefs of an individual, and you're calling other people delusional ?

 

[industrian]

There would be genuine riots if they scrapped the NHS - from the public, from the Doctors and all the support staff it hires. Not to mention the Unions.

I would like to believe that scrapping the NHS is one of the things that would lead our country to a revolution. But knowing the UK, we'd be talked into it by our government and feel too weak and helpless to do anything about it, and then we'd convince ourselves "it's the right thing" and let the government win. You know, just like with everything the government does to us.

I wasn't alive when Thatcher was in power, and I live in Scotland, and no one I know of a similar age remotely want the Tories in power. Most here seem to support Labour, the Lib Dems or the SNP.

Maybe an England thing. I know from living here all my life that you get drummed into you as a kid that Thatcher was the devil, and to never vote Conservative.

Scotland is a Labour heartland because most of Scotland (read: Glasgow and Strathclyde) used to be a heavily working-class area full of ship building, coal mining, and all that other good stuff. Scots are loyal people and we've largely kept that loyalty to the Labour party. A lot of Scottish Labour MPs/MSPs are still loyal to their constituents too and not just to their careers. It's too bad they've got a bunch of assholes leading them (McConnell, Alexander, et al).

 

[industrian]

I see that Stalinist phase I went through in university has wound down a bit.

 

[Omikaru]

Can't say I'll miss Hoon; he's a jackass. But the removal of the whip from him, Hewitt and Byers screams of Brown exacting his revenge on them.

Oh, and...

Pretty much the same as when I took it last year.

 

[Zutroy]

how many of you are aware/support the robin hood tax?
http://robinhoodtax.org.uk/

Quote:
The Robin Hood Tax is a tiny tax on banks, hedge funds and other finance institutions that would raise billions to tackle poverty and climate change, at home and abroad.

It can start as low as 0.005 per cent – and average 0.05 per cent . But when levied on the billions of pounds sloshing round the global finance system every day through transactions such as foreign exchange, derivatives trading and share deals, it can raise hundreds of billions of pounds every year.

Been getting quite allot of support and frankly I think it owns.

I like the sound of that.

The thing that currently annoys me most by all the parties is that none of them have the backbone to tell the mega corps that enough is enough.

The banks just cost us billions of pounds for us to bail them out and financially ruined a lot of peoples lives, and what do they do? They have the cheek to give themselves multi-million pound bonuses! The bastards need taxed to hell and back. Every so often the government will say they are going to do something about it to get some public support, but they'll never really do anything to stop such sicking acts of greed. It would bring a big smile to my face if the public went vigilante style and burned the cunts houses down.

Same thing can be said with petrol. From what I've read the price of petrol has stayed around the same for about 3 years now, yet the gas companies are slowly creeping the prices for the public up higher and higher. There's nothing that the public can really do because we rely on it too much. It's up to our government to stand up to them for us, but they're just enjoying getting the extra VAT and won't do anything to stop it.

 

[jas0nuk]

I like the sound of that.

The thing that currently annoys me most by all the parties is that none of them have the backbone to tell the mega corps that enough is enough.

The banks just cost us billions of pounds for us to bail them out and financially ruined a lot of peoples lives, and what do they do? They have the cheek to give themselves multi-million pound bonuses! The bastards need taxed to hell and back. Every so often the government will say they are going to do something about it to get some public support, but they'll never really do anything to stop such sicking acts of greed. It would bring a big smile to my face if the public went vigilante style and burned the cunts houses down.

Same thing can be said with petrol. From what I've read the price of petrol has stayed around the same for about 3 years now, yet the gas companies are slowly creeping the prices for the public up higher and higher. There's nothing that the public can really do because we rely on it too much. It's up to our government to stand up to them for us, but they're just enjoying getting the extra VAT and won't do anything to stop it.

On banks:
http://playpolitical.typepad.com/uk...cameron-announces-plans-for-a-bank-levy-.html
Labour said they will support this too, as long as other countries also introduce it. The Conservatives want to introduce it regardless of international support, which I can't say is a particularly good idea since it just encourages mass-movement of wealth overseas, but apparently a lot of other countries are already considering it.

On petrol:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/18/petrol-prices-lindsay-hoyle
Most of the increase is due to government tax increases and the collapse of the pound against the dollar. Not the oil companies.

 

[wave dial]

wtf British people this fits right in with our stereotype of you guys

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/world/europe/23britain.html?hp

LONDON — What could be more embarrassing for a party trying to change its elitist image than the existence of someone like Sir Nicholas Winterton? A Conservative member of Parliament for the last 39 years, Sir Nicholas wandered disastrously off message recently when he decided to share his thoughts on why legislators should be allowed to travel first class to avoid exposure to the common man.

“They are a totally different type of people,” Sir Nicholas declared in a radio interview, speaking about the relative ghastliness of people in standard-class train cars. “There’s lots of children, there’s noise, there’s activity. I like to have peace and quiet when I’m traveling.”

As Labour supporters gleefully disseminated “LOL”-annotated links, David Cameron, the Conservative leader, moved swiftly to register his lack of appreciation for Sir Nicholas’s philosophy. Still, with an election looming, it was a reminder yet again of how difficult it has been for the Tories to shake off a past that a fair number of them still seem to embrace.

Mr. Cameron, whose party is leading Labour in the most recent polls, has made it his mission to drag the Conservatives — kicking and screaming, if necessary — away from their old chilly image as a stuffy bastion of the elite, the mean-spirited, the entitled and the clueless.

All this matters because many Britons, when confronted with privilege, are still deeply ambivalent about whether to mistrust, envy, celebrate, despise, aspire to or undermine it.

“In many ways, class differences have remained very stable over the last 20 years,” said Mike Savage, director of the Center for Research on Socio-Cultural Change at the University of Manchester.

Mr. Cameron has done a good makeover job in some ways, starting with himself. Answering to “Dave” and wearing jeans and open-necked shirts, Mr. Cameron comes across as modern, sympathetic and approachable.

He supports gay and minority rights, changes (or claims he does) the diapers of his young children and rides a bicycle around town (although his limousine was once spotted being driven behind his bicycle, carting his briefcase).

At the same time, Mr. Cameron cannot overcome the fact that his own background of easy privilege fits the classic Tory stereotype, Mr. Savage said. Among the most obvious issues, Mr. Savage pointed out, are that “he speaks with a posh accent and comes from the most elite school in the country.”

That would be Eton, the traditional finishing school for the aristocracy, and the alma mater of most members of Mr. Cameron’s inner circle. Mr. Cameron also went to Oxford, where he ran in rarefied company, enjoying shooting parties at the estates of his rich friends and joining the upper-crust Bullingdon Club, whose members like to put on white tie, get spectacularly drunk and destroy things like the insides of rural pubs.

Mr. Cameron also married well: Samantha, his wife, is the daughter of Sir Reginald Adrian Berkeley Sheffield, Eighth Baronet and a descendant — reportedly in three different ways — of King Charles II; her stepfather is the Fourth Viscount Astor.

With all this as material, Labour cannot resist. Prime Minister Gordon Brown played to easy laughs in Parliament last year when he derided a Tory proposal to reduce estate taxes as having been “dreamed up on the playing fields of Eton.”

The satirical magazine Private Eye’s regular cartoon about the Tories is titled “Dave Snooty and His Pals.” The anti-Cameron insult of choice for protesters at a recent Tory conference was “Eton boy.”

Mr. Cameron understands that this can be a problem.

“Look, if the next election is about, you know, ‘Let’s not have a posh prime minister,’ I mean, I’m not going to win it,” he said in a recent television interview.

In the eyes of many Britons, the Tories’ traditional social elitism is tied to another form of elitism — what they perceive as the callous policies of the haves toward the have-nots in the Thatcher era. That was when the Conservative government cut social spending and pursued an anti-Europe, anti-immigration, anti-union agenda.

Mr. Cameron’s efforts to move past that, too, have been thrown off track by the financial crisis. Reacting to Britain’s deficit last fall by preaching fiscal austerity, the Tories found themselves once more in the position of grim spoilsports eager to cut government programs.

Realizing how poorly that message was received, they have since softened their position about the speed and depth of the cuts; their indecision contributed to a recent fall in the polls.

Mr. Cameron faces opposition from within, too. Many members of the Conservative Party — “the nationalistic, right-wing Tories who like singing ‘Land of Hope and Glory,’ ” as Anthony Seldon, a political commentator who is master of Wellington College, put it — admire its traditional image and its traditional policies, thank you very much.

With the nationalistic United Kingdom Independence Party, not to mention the ultraconservative British National Party nibbling from the right on issues like immigration, minority rights and Europe, Mr. Cameron is walking a fine line between embracing the new and alienating the old, including the old who are proud of their upper-class heritage.

Many old-time Tories are leaving Parliament this year, including the unrepentantly first-class-loving Sir Nicholas. But there are more waiting in the wings. Last year, worried about how an impeccably pedigreed Tory candidate named Annunziata Rees-Mogg would go over with the hoi polloi, Mr. Cameron suggested that she might want to campaign under the name “Nancy Mogg.”

She refused, although, to be fair, another candidate, the spectacularly named Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax, dutifully “de-toffed” himself by downgrading to “Richard Drax” on campaign posters.

Meanwhile, Ms. Rees-Mogg’s brother, Jacob, a banker who is also running for Parliament and who appears to believe he belongs to the “Brideshead Revisited” era, having once taken his childhood nanny with him on the campaign trail, went on television to denounce Mr. Cameron’s plan to get more women and minorities elected as the triumph of “potted plants” over “intellectually able people.”

 

[Chinner]

Looks like the tories are jumping in on the lobbying law
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/blog/2010/mar/23/lobbying-row-david-cameron-live

Q: How will the Tories deal with lobbyists?

Cameron says there is a role for lobbyists. But they will not get any "special access" under a Conservative government.

Again, he says he knows this will be an issue if the Conservatives win the election.

There will always be bad apples ... But you can take lots of steps ... to try to clean up the system.

Parliament can be a "great place".

It sickens me to see it dragged into the mud.

A new government could make a difference.

That was rather a good riff. I'll post the quote later. Cameron seems to know it, because he winds up here and leaves.

 

[J Tourettes]

Looks like the tories are jumping in on the lobbying law
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/blog/2010/mar/23/lobbying-row-david-cameron-live

To be fair, Cameron was actually talking about this over a month ago.

 

[Nexus Zero]

Jesus what a circlejerk

 

[moojito]

Yeah, I was down there in the bottom left as well. A bit nearer the center, mind. Maybe the questions they ask lead people in a certain direction, or maybe general apathy to most issues will end up with you being a moderate liberal lefty. And I'd imagine generaly apathy would be common with afternoon (ie bored at work) gaffers.

 

[industrian]

You could try filling this out for a start: http://www.politicalcompass.org/test nad then try and find a party that matches most of your ideals

EDIT: Just did mine

This is me, apparently: http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-2.38&soc=-6.41

Jesus what a circlejerk

The Internationale, unites the human race!

 

[Veidt]

Clean line for me.

 

[Mr. Sam]

Oh dear:

 

[Chinner]

The political compass is soo boring cause everyone is on the left

 

[industrian]

The political compass is soo boring cause everyone is on the left

Left is right.

 

[Chinner]

Down is the new up.

 

[Veidt]

I'm perplexed, what does it mean for me?

 

[industrian]

Down is the new up.

...and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!

 

[Empty]

The only people i have seen outside of the bottom left corner are lolbertarians; jibril is the closest to going across the horizontal line that i have seen.