Whilst I'm fairly confrontational and up for debate, I guess it's best that if I ask such a sensitive question I keep it confidential, so I shan't say who I support or post anymore... Unless someone asks me at least

But I'd be interested to see poll results!

Probably Conservative.

Though I am so sick of them all (politicians, not any particular party of itself) I might spoil my paper instead.


*waits for the "your spoilling your paper already if you vote conservative" jokes*

I cant vote

Spoiling my paper.

.
I vote on who can best act on my behalf in my constituency then with an eye on what party I believe represents my interests better.

I'm leaning towards the Conservatives, again, maybe Lib dems. Conservatives are probably the better bet out of the two, both local and national IMO.

Conservative

Spoiling whe I'm old enough to vote.

The OC-D

What the heck does "spoiling the vote" mean?

Sounds like you are going to take the ballot, and then proceed to take a large dump on it.

Or maybe its just me.

Altered_Soul wrote:What the heck does "spoiling the vote" mean?

Sounds like you are going to take the ballot, and then proceed to take a large dump on it.

Or maybe its just me.

Pretty much.

Though traditionally it means casting a ballot paper where you have done something invalid - such as doodling on it, writing on it, multiple ticks/crosses, or doing anything which goes against the "mark this paper in the following way" guidelines.

Some people do this to protest against the availability of someone they want to vote for (to distinguish themselves from the people who just don't want to vote).

HOW is labour that high?!!

Honestly. After 12 years of this?! Jesus.

Ive argued with MGS on here before after i suggested out that almost any labour voters remaining are brainwashed at birth like suicide bombers.

I am from the North-East, and just like Liverpool, and half of Wales, the utter utter fuckwits that make up most of my town will STILL vote labour, despite the country being in tatters and us essentially being bankrupt simply because mummy and daddy made them via a sustained brainwashing campaign as a child.

I am grudgingly voting Conservative, if only because ive seen the books and they terrify me. Brown talks about fiscal resonsibility but throws money around like a desperate gambler. If he isnt gone inside 18 months we are going the way of Iceland.

A Scythe must be taken to the public sector, and i fear that Cameron may be the only man with the stones to do it...

Yet.. i wonder about him as well. But who else is there?!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sad to see the BNP got one as well, still.... thats Labours fault as well. Just makes my choice easier.

I can't believe I'm even saying this, but Cameron.

His speech the other day was the final nudge I needed to go Conservative.

I still call Brown a coward, he should have taken his election just after coming into power, he would have lost a few seats but won. Because of that thought of losing seats he chickened out, and that isn't the kind of fella I want leading the country. Also the fact he seems to vanish everytime there is a minor crisis doesn't help in restoring much faith in him.

I also view both parties as pretty much in the middle these days, with a step or so either side depending on the party.

At least the Conservatives might actually do something regarding crime and the prison situation.

So aye voting blue, oh the horror.

I can't vote yet. But.....Erebus for Prime minister!

I didn't realise the UK had much of a Green Party at all. If I lived there, I'd vote for them.

Are they as craptacular as our greens?

Brits vote?

I thought the last EU election proved that they didn't.

EU elections are often low in turnout, especially in Euroskeptic areas (which the UK is).

AFAIK the UK is pretty standard for turnout for General Elections and so on.

Tbh I only voted in the EU elections as I have a postal vote set up.

Pretty sure the average Brit has zero interest in what happens in Europe, unless it envolves a large grassy pitch and some kind of ball.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Pretty sure the average Brit has zero interest in what happens in Europe, unless it envolves a large grassy pitch and some kind of ball.

You mean a cannon ball and a battlefield?

Ahhh... those were the days

And I personally can't see how anyone could vote Labour after the track record of the last decade of Labour power.

SilverMK2 wrote:
You mean a cannon ball and a battlefield?

Ahhh... those were the days

I Lol'd.

SilverMK2 wrote:
And I personally can't see how anyone could vote Labour after the track record of the last decade of Labour power.

Aye, I'm sure plenty will, but the thought of another four years of Brown mortifies me. Okay Cameron isn't much better, but it certainly feels like its time for a new set of dice.

Hrm to those who are going to spoil their papers... I can only ask why they'd bother going to the polling station: Willingly giving up your democratic right to vote really does the establishment more of a favour than anything, in my opinion at least...

If you believe the promise (as he says it will happen after the election) Gordon Brown has claimed that he'll introduce electoral reform after the election... That promise is quite motivating for me but I'd say but I'd still vote out of party loyalty and the simple fact that it really is picking the corrupted Third-Way Labour Party over those who are even worse; the Conservative Party, who will cut our public services, probably sell off everything they can get their grubby mitts on, reintroduce fox-hunting and favour the rich. I watched Boris Johnson down here with interest and I think his scrapping the increase of the congestion charge on SUVs really showed where their loyalty lies (I am using this as more of an example than an indicator of what led me to my current thought ).

At any rate, I don't blame the recession on Labour, I think any incompetence demonstrated can be found in any government... I ultimately feel that nothing can stop boom/bust and really the crisis showed that *more* regulation is needed... Unfortunately I doubt Labour is in the mood for nationalising the economy, but like I said; it's the lesser of two evils.

People who come out with the "bloody politicians... the last decade has been hell..." really should direct that attitude toward the establishment as a whole: WE NEED VOTING REFORM, then we might get some more diversity beyond the back-scratching political elite that frankly dominate both parties.

But still, Labour will probably lose... I can only hope the party is purged of the Third-Way proponents and bides its time until the Tories roll around in some sleaze.

I'll just throw this out there: I remember reading an interview a few years back in which Cameron was asked his favourite Prime Minister, he said Thatcher... On the One Show either last year or the year before he answered the same question with the nice ol' neutral "Robert Walpole"... This man is a coward, he adjusts what he says to suit public opinion: His true convictions? He's a Thatcherite through and through.

Fear Mongering done!

Henners91 wrote:Hrm to those who are going to spoil their papers... I can only ask why they'd bother going to the polling station: Willingly giving up your democratic right to vote really does the establishment more of a favour than anything, in my opinion at least...

But then, if there is no one you want to vote for, there isn't an option for "none of the above". The only choice you then have is to spoil your paper.

I would not want to give out a random vote to a smaller party that I didn't identify with and would rather just spoil the paper (this is assuming that the Tories do enough stupid things to prevent me from voting for them).

At least it can be assumed that a healthy number of spoiled papers are directly caused by people not wanting to vote for a party but still wanting to show that they care about having a say. And people pay attention to them, even if it is not very much.

To that, I'd say vote tactically: Cut into the majority of the party you hate most by voting for the second-most-likely-to-win party in your area.

I agree with that. Or vote independant. If enough independants get in, all parties suffer, and it may force them to be more effective.

So you would rather people vote for people that they don't actually want in power?

And what happens if enough people actually vote for the "monster raving loony party" or the "everyone should smoke dope party" for them to get into power? I would imagine it would be an even bigger disaster than things stand now.

As I say, why vote for something just because it is not as bad as other options, or just to take votes from another party? That is not exactly something to recommend it in my eyes. Voting tactically and/or voting for radical change due to being fed up with the main parties is probably what got the BNP seats in some areas. I would rather not repeat that if I can do something else.

mattyrm wrote:HOW is labour that high?!!

Sad to see the BNP got one as well, still.... thats Labours fault as well. Just makes my choice easier.

I agree on both those posts, if i knew someone who voted for the BNP for any reason (including 'well at least we would get a debate on immigraton' idiots) i would never speak to them again. (some pepole forget that when you vote for a party you vote for all their policies not just the ones you like )

I vote in every election I am allowed to, it shames me that others don't, people need to realise that democracy isn't a right, its a responsability of every citizen

So wanting a healthy debate on immigration makes one an idiot? Burying our heads in the sand will NOT make our social problems disappear overnight, pal. Hell, even Labour are starting to caution against the marginalisation of the white working class in this country.
But voting BNP? No thanks. I could never vote for fascists.

I'm going to either vote UKIP or Conservative.

vote spoiling = because none of the above are worth voting for.

It sounds like spoiling is a way of doing nothing but feel like your doing something. Does the 'protest' actually change anything? Has it made the government/parties stop or pause in a meaningful way? A protest with no impact isn't really a protest is it? I don't know UK politics in detail so I am asking.

Ahtman wrote:It sounds like spoiling is a way of doing nothing but feel like your doing something. Does the 'protest' actually change anything? Has it made the government/parties stop or pause in a meaningful way? A protest with no impact isn't really a protest is it? I don't know UK politics in detail so I am asking.

Simple answer: No

Slightly longer answer: No, because a spoiled ballot is simply not counted. The polling stations dont have the time or resources to investigate why that ballot is spoiled. For all they know, your protest of scribbling on the ballot is because you are illiterate.

filbert wrote:Slightly longer answer: No, because a spoiled ballot is simply not counted. The polling stations dont have the time or resources to investigate why that ballot is spoiled. For all they know, your protest of scribbling on the ballot is because you are illiterate.

While true they are not investigated, the number of spoilt ballots are counted (as far as I am aware) and thier relative number can give some evidence to voter dissatisfaction.

Although sadly, some people are also unable to follow simple written and spoken instructions and so will spoil their papers by mistake. The rest of them obviously vote Labour by mistake

SilverMK2 wrote:
While true they are not investigated, the number of spoilt ballots are counted (as far as I am aware) and thier relative number can give some evidence to voter dissatisfaction.

Spoilt ballots are indeed counted in the UK. Indeed, they should be counted as accounting for the total number of votes cast at a given polling station is key to avoiding election fraud.

dogma wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:
While true they are not investigated, the number of spoilt ballots are counted (as far as I am aware) and thier relative number can give some evidence to voter dissatisfaction.

Spoilt ballots are indeed counted in the UK. Indeed, they should be counted as accounting for the total number of votes cast at a given polling station is key to avoiding election fraud.

I don't think the point they are trying to make is that the government isn't doing enough to make sure there is less voter fraud. I also imagine Political Scientists find it interesting but that again isn't really why they are 'spoiling' their votes: to amuse professors. The question is do they actually impact the politics/parties they are supposedly protesting against?

Albatross wrote:I'm going to either vote UKIP or Conservative.

Were I a citizen of Britannia that is indeed the way I would go. I hope your own common sense will prevail throughout Her Majesty's realm. I raise my glass of Scotch to you!

I think I'll wait until the manifestos are released before deciding.

Looking forward to some ace pisstaking though.



http://www.mydavidcameron.com/

Ahtman wrote:The question is do they actually impact the politics/parties they are supposedly protesting against?

Probably not, no. But then again, how many protests do actually do anything to change how the government acts?

I don't think enough people would spoil their papers in order for the government to look seriously at the issue, other than saying "more people should vote, etc, etc..." as they usually do. I am sure that voting for smaller parties and "any party but that party" is "more effective" in that parties see lost seats and are hurt by it, I personally don't want to vote for a random party, or one which does not reflect my thoughts on how the UK/my area should be run.

If there were a political party which I agreed with more than the main parties, I would be voting for them anyway. As it stands, there are very few politicians and political parties which I would want to vote for, and even fewer which reflect what I believe (and that i would trust to actually carry out their usually empty campaign promises).

Albatross wrote:So wanting a healthy debate on immigration makes one an idiot? Burying our heads in the sand will NOT make our social problems disappear overnight, pal. Hell, even Labour are starting to caution against the marginalisation of the white working class in this country.
But voting BNP? No thanks. I could never vote for fascists.

I'm going to either vote UKIP or Conservative.

That isn't what i ment at all, I was giving an emample that was told to me by someone that voted for BNP in the europe elections, then i said 'so you voted for a racist load of holes that want a fascist goverment and destroy freedom' never speak to him again. A debate on the subject is fine, and in a democracy it should happen. but voting BNP will not lead to a dabate just hate (sorry i had to)

I vote by candidate, so it depends on who's standing. Our current MP is one of Cameron's buddies* so will probably vote Lib Dem.

*i.e. an arse

I am not commenting on UK voting other than to say its really refreshing to see so many parties in play. I am sure several are minor but its a nice change from the
Vote Republican or Vote Democrat or waste your vote thing we have here.

Frazzled wrote:I am not commenting on UK voting other than to say its really refreshing to see so many parties in play. I am sure several are minor but its a nice change from the
Vote Republican or Vote Democrat or waste your vote thing we have here.

We sometimes enjoy it too

The big two are Labour and Conservative though. Lib Dems form probably the closest contender and were formed from a group of parties to create a party which could run with the main 2.

The other parties are mostly too small to get into real power.

This ios for Parliament correct? Do the minority parties manage to get seats in Parliament?

Spoiling my ballot paper. Can I have an option for that please or do I have to spoil the poll?

Apparently this time around there is a very real possibility of a hung parliament, or at least, more chance than normally, given that first past the post voting systems are supposed to prevent hung parliaments. If that is the case then the so-called 'small' parties will find they have disproportional amounts of power and influence given that the big boys will need to form a coalition to govern.

Frazzled wrote:This ios for Parliament correct? Do the minority parties manage to get seats in Parliament?

Occasionally, quite often an independent candidate will get through based entirely on a local issue (eg Save local institution X/Y/Z ) . Current breakdown is :

Conservative (193)
Democratic Unionist (8)
Independent (5)
Independent Conservative (1)
Independent Labour (1)
Labour (349)
Liberal Democrat (63)
Plaid Cymru (3)
Respect (1)
Scottish National (7)
Sinn Fein (5)
Social Democratic & Labour Party (3)
Ulster Unionist (1)
Speaker and Deputies (4)

linky

..so.. they're there and, I guess, can make a difference perhaps on particularly contentious of whip free votes.

We do have a fair few "joke" or novelty parties that run. Yogic Flyers ran a few years back and there's normally some topless/nude model gets persuaded to run somewhere by some downmarket tabloid or pseudo porn mag too.

Plaid Cymru (3) ?

A party named after a clothing pattern? Count me in!

Welsh Nationalists

http://www.plaidcymru.org/content.php?nID=14;lID=1

Alas the Hawaiian Shirt Mafia didn't quite get in.

Dude I would so vote for me fellow brothers, er the Hawaian Shirt Mafia if they had a party, and I could vote in the UK of course.

I choose not to vote for anyone at the moment, There is not a single politician out there that I don't think is a total douche-bag at the moment, and so will save my voting for one that is, as a soon-to-finish student with a minimum-wage job and likely to be taxed for rest of life come october, they are all gonna crap on me anyway.

Frazzled wrote:Plaid Cymru (3) ?

A party named after a clothing pattern? Count me in!

This made me laugh.

the Conservative Party, who will cut our public services, probably sell off everything they can get their grubby mitts on, reintroduce fox-hunting and favour the rich.

Yeah, because apart from the fox hunting thing, that's absolutely nothing like the Labour Party at the moment, is it? Hang on, wait a second.....sell everything...check....favour the rich....check...cut public services....check...

I'm voting Conservative. Not because I like them, but for tactical voting. I want Labour out. Simple as that.

http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/Economy.aspx

Just so that people can get information on the Conservative plans for the economy from the horses mouth, so to speak.

Although as with all things political, they are not exactly going to spell things out for the public when it means they will be worse off, and again, as with all things political, it is just as likley to be lies as truth anyway.

Leigen_Zero wrote:I choose not to vote for anyone at the moment, There is not a single politician out there that I don't think is a total douche-bag at the moment, and so will save my voting for one that is, as a soon-to-finish student with a minimum-wage job and likely to be taxed for rest of life come october, they are all gonna crap on me anyway.

As i say 'if no one represents you, represent yourself' and 'if you don't vote, shut the hell up you, if you don't take part in the democratic process you have no right to complain'

as long as you have done a relevent degree with actual job prospects after the resesion you'll be fine

Labour resort to..



DO YOU WANT THATCHER BACK?

WELL DO YOU, THE NORTH?

sA

smiling Assassin wrote:

DO YOU WANT THATCHER BACK?

WELL DO YOU, THE NORTH?

sA

Yes we do, you portly cycloptic viper.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Henners91 wrote:Hrm to those who are going to spoil their papers... I can only ask why they'd bother going to the polling station: Willingly giving up your democratic right to vote really does the establishment more of a favour than anything, in my opinion at least...

If you believe the promise (as he says it will happen after the election) Gordon Brown has claimed that he'll introduce electoral reform after the election... That promise is quite motivating for me but I'd say but I'd still vote out of party loyalty and the simple fact that it really is picking the corrupted Third-Way Labour Party over those who are even worse; the Conservative Party, who will cut our public services, probably sell off everything they can get their grubby mitts on, reintroduce fox-hunting and favour the rich.

Drivel and Nonsense. Im from a working class background and my family got far more out of the Conservatives than they ever did out of Labour, my grandmother got two grants to help pay for her house out of Thatcher. She has had NOTHING from 12 years of these bastards.

Let me spell it out for you hand wringing labour lot who insist on making a class war out of everything. (Honestly, Fox Hunting?! What the feth has that got to do with anything?)

Labour are left wing, they favour people that DONT WORK at all. Immigrants, the sick, the lazy. Granted, we should pay to help the genuinelly needy, but Labour has set its stock in an overly abused and easily cheatable benefits system. The same party that said "nobody deserves dragging though the coals" after they didnt deport convicted criminals and then 6 of them RAPED people on release. Yes thats right, violently penetrated several women and then said "lets not get too upset about the whole thing"

If you actually WORK, even if you just earn 12k a year packing crisps in a factory, you will have more money in your pocket under the Tories than you do under Labour. Fiscal Conservatives dont need to stealth tax the gak out of us to pay for their utterly insane public expenditure. Only if you never intend to pay a single penny in tax can you be better off under Labour than the Tories.

I am working class, my family was poor, and they had far more money in their wage packets each month under the Tories than they ever did under these bastards, and frankly im sick of you lot lying about it. And before you start, who cares what school Cameron went too?! I want a bloke with a good education running things, not some semi literate gakker who went to a comprehensive in Middlesbrough.

Actually Matty, you're thinking of Old Labour when you describe Labour as being Left. New Labour is actually more centre right in most things I find. One of the reasons I find them so distasteful, is that they pretend to represent the working man when they're all rolling in cash, went to good schools (remember the grammar schools?), and have done nothing but promote obscene excess in the wealthier parts of the nation whilst making it harder for the poorer of us.

Ketara wrote:Actually Matty, you're thinking of Old Labour when you describe Labour as being Left. New Labour is actually more centre right in most things I find. One of the reasons I find them so distasteful, is that they pretend to represent the working man when they're all rolling in cash, went to good schools (remember the grammar schools?), and have done nothing but promote obscene excess in the wealthier parts of the nation whilst making it harder for the poorer of us.

True that mate, my auld grannie always uses the "no true sctosman" argument (she is typical Boro Labour zealot) and constantly says "Oh Blair and Brown arent Labour.." but.. well.. leopards dont change their spots if you ask me.

In full agreement with the rest, the thing that annoys me most about the whole class thing is when you get labour gakkers slagging off Cameron for goin to Eton and then it transpires they went to a 16k a year private school in Kent themselves! I know all politicians suck, but its that hypocricy which makes me turn to Blue over Red. At least if a posh tory scratches some backs for cash then you expect it, the labour lot do the exact same thing and then talk about looking after the "common" people!

If i have to pick between a liar or a hypocrite and a liar ill pick the bloody former!

I feel I have to elaborate on the motives behind me spoiling my ballot.

I understand that people have fought and died for me to have the oppurtunity to vote in a Democracy so I will fully support their motives by going to the Polling Stations. However, in this current political climate, all Politicians are basically money-grabbing meaning the choice is a Hobson's choice meaning there is no element of Democracy at all. Henceforth, spoiled ballots form The OC-D until a party comes along that does not lie and honestly reflect what the British public, not the British ruling elite, want.

The OC-D

Ahtman wrote:
I don't think the point they are trying to make is that the government isn't doing enough to make sure there is less voter fraud. I also imagine Political Scientists find it interesting but that again isn't really why they are 'spoiling' their votes: to amuse professors.

Clearly not.

Ahtman wrote:
The question is do they actually impact the politics/parties they are supposedly protesting against?

No. Even if politicians are upset by a high preponderance of spoilt ballots the ballots themselves say little beyond general disapproval. There's no incentive to change simply because statements of "I don't like you" provide no instruction as to what the targets should change into.

In general I imagine that a bad ballot is taken to be roughly tacit to a non-vote in that it represents a sense of disenfranchisement, or unhappiness.

I still refuse to vote Conservative on several counts.

1. I'm perfectly aware of what they did last time.
2. I am utterly unconvinced they have changed.
3. Cameron is little more than tenuous charisma.
4. To my knowledge, they are yet to campaign on anything besides 'we're not Labour'
5. I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.
6. Their leader claims to be a man of the people, yet is just another condescending toffee nosed git from Eton who wouldn't know the real world if he was bummed by it.

Labour for me. At least I'm familiar with their exact level of incompetence. Either that or I'll go Lib Dem.

Bluntman wrote:A debate on the subject is fine, and in a democracy it should happen. but voting BNP will not lead to a dabate just hate

Except that the increased profile of the BNP HAS lead to a debate on the matter, increasing numbers of BNP voters is the main reason for this. Other people have voted for them, so we didn't have to - you can't pretend that New Labour would ever even release a statement that refers to white people specifically, let alone a policy. It has taken the horror of otherwise well-meaning British citizens voting for a National Socialist party to get to this point, as no other party was willing to talk about the white working-class community for fear of being branded racist. I fully expect to attract to attract the same criticism for this post.

@MDG

Well, allow me to retort!

1. New Labour is a Thatcherite party in all but name, and social policy. There is no reason to expect The Tories to be as socially conservative as they were in the 80's - the genie is out of the bottle in that respect.
2. See above.
3. Tony Blair, anyone? Obama, Anyone? An incoming Prime Minister with charisma will be good for British confidence and national positivity - feth knows we could use some of THAT!
4.http://www.conservatives.com/policy.aspx There's some good stuff in there, give it a read.
5.But you DO trust Brown, Darling, Balls, Milliband and Milliband? In that case, I recieved a very generous email from a lovely Nigerian chap who seem to have come into a bit of money - I'll Fwd it to you!
6.THIS is the real reason you won't be voting Tory - you're a class-warrior. Good for you, just don't pretend you're voting Labour for any rational reasons.

MDG. Cameron is posh so im voting for labour despite them being ABSOLUTELY fething gak for 12 years.

Did labour MPs not take the piss outrageously with the whole expenses thing? Ashok Kumar (Labour MP for Middlesbrough) and Vera Baird (Labour MP for Redcar) both took the piss massively, and yes, the labour monkeys up here will still vote for them.

Honestly, i cannot disguise my loathing for my fellow northerners. As i said, it hurts more getting fethed over by a family member than a stranger, and these fething Labour vermin that pretend to be all working class and "for the people" whilst simultaneously raping every lower class tax payer and swindling their expenses fill me with utter disgust. At least if a Tory does it you expect it!

Im voting in this order Tory, Lib Dem, Green, UKIP, any fether else at all, throw electoral votes in the fire, labour.

I think id rather have a giant inflatible penis in charge than Brown. He is actually such a thundercu*t im starting to think he is a bigoted SNP spy and he is purposely fething us so he can go back to Scotland and claim a victory.

Off topic, if by some miracle Labour do win, i shall buy you a pint In Nottingham to congratulate you on your doggedness. I can always respect that, even if i do think you are utterly delluded.

....

I do of course reserve the right to gloat uncerimonously if Dave brings the trophy home!



Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh yeah sorry just read albatross.. he basically said exactly what i was thinking in a much more sensible and less swear filled way.

Albatross: UKIP? Really? My experience of them was that they were a complete bunch of eejits. From their behaviour in our Lisbon Referendum (which is what brought them to my attention) I'd say they're actually LESS trustworthy than Labour.

I'd love to see a coalition government in the UK. The last few over here have been coalitions and I reckon that's healthier than a split down the middle. It's a shame the Lib Dems seem so incompetant. I'm depressed about the situation in Ireland politically at the moment, but I feel like the UK is worse (in terms of voter choice. I reckon your politicians are probably better educated and less corrupt).
I'll be following the elections with interest though. British politics is interesting, and there're some pretty decent orators in the house of commons.

UKIP passes themselves off as the more friendly to the people party, but they're not really that much less extremist than the BNP. They just do a better job at hiding it.

Albatross wrote:Except that the increased profile of the BNP HAS lead to a debate on the matter, increasing numbers of BNP voters is the main reason for this. Other people have voted for them, so we didn't have to - you can't pretend that New Labour would ever even release a statement that refers to white people specifically, let alone a policy. It has taken the horror of otherwise well-meaning British citizens voting for a National Socialist party to get to this point, as no other party was willing to talk about the white working-class community for fear of being branded racist. I fully expect to attract to attract the same criticism for this post.

A large majority of immigrants are white, the whole 'sponging-immigrants' think is load of , i'm white working-lower middle class, immigration helps the econamy, the majority of people that vote for the BNP or think immagration is crazy are not white working class but white lay about class. i go to uni in hull, the ones getting dole money every monday are of that group not so called 'spodging immigrants' they do jobs that no one wants for pay, then pay taxes and spend money in the UK, if you think that that is wrong you need to look at the big picture not the obscure detail the mail has put as a headline.

A large majority of immigrants are white

I think if you looked at the proportion of immigrants, you'd find more of them were of black, arabic, or asian origin than white. Sorry, but its true. There has been a large influx of Eastern Europeans of late, but half of them only work here for half the year and then go home. The sad fact is that the worse off countries in the world are those geographically located in the Middle East, and Africa. As such, the numbers of people from these areas willing to risk life and limb to attempt to smuggle themselves into the country are far greater than those of unemployed Poles.

i'm white working-lower middle class

Great, so am I.

immigration helps the economy

In a sustained, controllable environment, I would agree with you. As social groups move up the ladder, a new influx of immigrants is required to do all the jobs the other groups don't want to. This does not mean however, that throwing our countries borders open to all and sundry is good. Why?
1. Money being sent out of the country back to immigrants families in other nations.
2. A strain on the welfare, educational, and medical establishments, which aren't designed to cope with vast numbers of new families.
3. The possibility of creating racial tension.
4. The creation of a labour pool far excessive of what is required, leading to many unemployed people and a further strain on the welfare system.

the majority of people that vote for the BNP or think immagration is crazy are not white working class but white lay about class.

Whilst they garner a lot of their support from such areas, I think it would be foolish to label them all as such. You're decieving yourself if you think members of the upper and middle class can't be just as racist, sexist, anti-semitic, and homophobic as the 'layabout class'.

the ones getting dole money every monday are of that group not so called 'spoodging immigrants' they do jobs that no one wants for pay, then pay taxes and spend money in the UK

Whilst no doubt many immigrants pay their way, the simple fact is that many more do not. Especially in a recession where there are not even enough jobs for the native population, there is no guarantee a newly arrived family is able to find work, even should they be so inclined. As to spending money in the UK, see above point about sending money out of the country.

if you think that that is wrong you need to look at the big picture not the obscure detail the mail has put as a headline.

I read the Independent. And too often do the liberals relegate any kind of other thinking to the rubbish tip with a wave of the hand and a snide comment about the Daily Mail, as if that automatically proves the opposing argument wrong.
I read the Mail occasionally whilst at my parents, and it's a decent paper. It waxes lyrical about some unimportant issues, and inflates others at times, but when it comes to catching the government doing what it shouldn't be doing, I daresay there is no paper better. You should take what you read with a pinch of salt, but that applies to everything you read. The reason I prefer the Independent is because half the articles from there seem to be copypasta'd into the Mail the following day with a more right wing slant. But that far from makes it a bad paper, on an intellectual level it is miles above the Sun.

@katera- i have no problem with tighter control of illegal immigration.

immigration does not cause native unemployment
natives not wanting to do certain important but gak jobs causes unemployment.

also a lack of skill in certain areas requires immigration, if we needed nurses now we would get them from abroad instead of spending 3 years training people who have just been fired from a factory

Sorry Bluntman, but i have to coincur with Ketara, pretty much everything you wrote was absolute bollocks.

Sensible immigration helps the economy, importing people from some of the worst trouble zones in the world and paying for their upkeep when they cannot work does not.

filbert wrote:

Ahtman wrote:It sounds like spoiling is a way of doing nothing but feel like your doing something. Does the 'protest' actually change anything? Has it made the government/parties stop or pause in a meaningful way? A protest with no impact isn't really a protest is it? I don't know UK politics in detail so I am asking.

Simple answer: No

Slightly longer answer: No, because a spoiled ballot is simply not counted. The polling stations dont have the time or resources to investigate why that ballot is spoiled. For all they know, your protest of scribbling on the ballot is because you are illiterate.

wrong and wrong. Spoiled votes are counted in the UK. And if a significant number of them are counted beyond to point where they can't say was just a few numbskulls who didn't know where to write on the voting slip, there are serious repercussions.

@mattyrm i actually agree, i was talking about working immigrant, if the immigrants or refugees are not working then natives won't lose jobs will they. empoyment of certain groups of poeple will fall in the future, as production plants get more streamlined to save money, so if you want more labours in the working class with jobs you'll have to pay more for stuff, but then the vast majority of people will start to buy foreign cheaper products at the cylce will start again.

we can all go 'you can't close the rover plant, these people need jobs' but when no one wants a rover car there is no point employing them. Same as in the US they have been over producing cars for decades, now no one wants a new car and the US market is full of cheap second hand cars there is no reason for factory workers to be employed.

Henners91 wrote:Hrm to those who are going to spoil their papers... I can only ask why they'd bother going to the polling station: Willingly giving up your democratic right to vote really does the establishment more of a favour than anything, in my opinion at least...

At any rate, I don't blame the recession on Labour, I think any incompetence demonstrated can be found in any government... I ultimately feel that nothing can stop boom/bust and really the crisis showed that *more* regulation is needed.

Vote for Labour or Conservative is a wasted vote.
We haven't had a decent goverment in decades, The recent expences crap has proved that
Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler.
At least he left us with an industry base to work from.

loki old fart wrote: Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler.

Riiiiight.

Sorry, i tend to try and steer away from generic insults and give a sensible well rounded argument, but being as that is without doubt the most ridiculous thing i have ever read it does not require or deserve an answer, so i shall merely retort with /facepalm

mattyrm wrote:

loki old fart wrote: Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler.

Riiiiight.

Sorry, i tend to try and steer away from generic insults and give a sensible well rounded argument,

SINCE WHEN ?

but being as that is without doubt the most ridiculous thing i have ever read it does not require or deserve an answer, so i shall merely retort with /facepalm

Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler

That was said somewhat tongue in cheek, but I think the point was made.
A lot of the problems we face today were the result of decisions made back then.

@Loki - Give it up, man. Your statement was just a load of tosh - accept it. Thatcher hurt our country more than the Second World War? What a creative way to insult those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom. Thatcher actually did quite a lot for the UK in terms of our economy and standing in the world. That's not to say that I agree with everything she did, but to compare her to Hitler?

Oh dear.

loki old fart wrote:
Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler

That was said somewhat tongue in cheek, but I think the point was made.
A lot of the problems we face today were the result of decisions made back then.

Thatcher is a woman that is either loved or loathed depending on the opinion of the person that happens to be writing about her, im rather well versed on this subject after reading an amusing back and forth between two journalists in the Telegraph about a year ago.

In a nutshell, you are attempting to make a very complicated subject sound simple, when it is far from simple. Even the most anti-Thatcher writer (people that actually have some idea about politics and economics) would not come out with such a ridiculous statement.

Putting aside personal feelings for the woman, i think she had some extemely tough decisions to make. The point is, smarter men than i (and certainly you judging by your last few posts) would say that she may have been misguided with some of her policies, but she clearly had a wish to make the country fiscally conservative.

"somewhat" Tongue in cheek?

Mentioning Hitler in this way is extremely crass and i have little interest in educating you as to why.

I respect what our fighting men gave and are giving for us.
I have no respect for anything maggie did


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seems hitler means more to you than me

Turning London into a financial powerhouse again?
Defeating the Argentinian invasion of The Falklands?
Breaking the stanglehold of the unions on British industry?
Sustaining Britain's status as a major world power?
Helping to defeat the Soviet Union?


Mate, you need to stop watching Ben Elton's live DVDs.

When i reach voting age (one year now) i shall most likely be voting tory or spoiling my vote, probably the latter because none of the major parties seem to pay any attention to the problem of our aging population...

With our current healthcare and benefits system we need the majority of the population to be of working age otherwise the government goes into debt - this is why immigration is needed, to bring in more working age individuals to make up for the disproportionate amount of pensioners.

However immigration isnt a stable solution, as we have seen, and so one of five things needs to happen:
1. taxes for working age people go up to compensate for the decrease of people.
2. the working age goes up, you cannot retire until a later age
3. State pensions are removed
4. Older than working age people are "removed"
5. Larger families are encouraged, possibly leading to overpopulation in the long run.

All of these options solve the aging population but none of them are pretty (which is why no polititions want to talk about them).

Ah Ben Elton.. now there's a fething chisler.

Albatross wrote:Turning London into a financial powerhouse again?
Defeating the Argentinian invasion of The Falklands?
Breaking the stanglehold of the unions on British industry?
Sustaining Britain's status as a major world power?
Helping to defeat the Soviet Union?


Mate, you need to stop watching Ben Elton's live DVDs.

Turning London into a financial powerhouse again / Deregulating banks and starting the ball rolling on our present problem.
Defeating the Argentinian invasion of The Falklands / Causing the falklands war, by removing ships (that the falklanders wanted to patrol there. And against all advice from the navy)
Breaking the stanglehold of the unions on British industry / And giving every company the green light to gak on people.
Sustaining Britain's status as a major world power / Now who's taking the piss?
Helping to defeat the Soviet Union / They did that themselves

loki old fart wrote: Helping to defeat the Soviet Union / They did that themselves

Oh yeah, if we all just ignore our antagonists they will "defeat themselves"

What is that? The fething "Ostrich" approach to international diplomacy?

I think this calls for another /facepalm ..

Turning London into a financial powerhouse again / Deregulating banks and starting the ball rolling on our present problem.

Really? I thought is was more to do with the US mortgage market. Labour took the UK to brink of bankruptcy - Thatcher made us one of the richest nations on the planet again.

Defeating the Argentinian invasion of The Falklands / Causing the falklands war, by removing ships (that the falklanders wanted to patrol there. And against all advice from the navy)

Not an aggressive act - how is Argentina deciding to invade sovereign British territory Thatcher's fault? The Falklands contains potentially one of the largest oil fields on earth - I think the decision to hang onto them has been vindicated.

Breaking the stanglehold of the unions on British industry / And giving every company the green light to gak on people.

You want to go back to 3-day weeks and blackouts? Cool - move to the Ukraine or Belarus then.

Sustaining Britain's status as a major world power / Now who's taking the piss?

The willingness and ability to project force in the south atlantic (or indeed, anywhere else in the world) is nothing to be sneered at. Neither is recovering from near-bankruptcy. Neither is maintaining our position as a nuclear power, and tightening our alliance with the US - to levels of co-operation unprecedented in military history.

Helping to defeat the Soviet Union / They did that themselves

Funny, I was starting to think the same thing about you.

mattyrm wrote:

loki old fart wrote: Helping to defeat the Soviet Union / They did that themselves

Oh yeah, if we all just ignore our antagonists they will "defeat themselves"

What is that? The fething "Ostrich" approach to international diplomacy?

I think this calls for another /facepalm ..

If you think the soviets were worried by british industrial might or armed forces, compared to what the americans can produce or have available. Your deluded

As for facepalming carry on you must be good at it by now

I will vote Conservative, as always.

I no longer believe in them, but Brown must go. However to my credit I never believed Labour

Ok so BNP is one vote behind Labour here. actually I am not suprised allowing for the democgraphic, and some people might have been BNP voting as a joke to see what happens.

Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler.

That comment is soo stupid... Im not going to even bother.

Lord-Loss wrote:

Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler.

That comment is soo stupid... Im not going to even bother.

The luftwaffe tried to crush the british, and all they did was make us stand together.
With pride

maggie split the people into factions. The haves and the have nots.

And only one o in so[u]

loki old fart wrote:

Lord-Loss wrote:

Maggie thatcher did more damage to us than adolf hitler.

That comment is soo stupid... Im not going to even bother.

The luftwaffe tried to crush the british, and all they did was make us stand together.
With pride

maggie split the people into factions. The haves and the have nots.

And only one o in so[u]

Considering you have butchered the English language this entire thread i really dont think you should be dressing people down for the use of extra letters in a sentence. Or are you going to educate us all with regards to MP's "expences" again?

Touche lol

Adolf Hitler: Killed 6 million Jews, started World War 2, lied and decieved the German people to get power, killed millions for his own selfish reasons.

Marget Thatcher: Stuff.

Lord-Loss wrote:Adolf Hitler: Killed 6 million Jews, started World War 2, lied and decieved the German people to get power, killed millions for his own selfish reasons.

Marget Thatcher: Stuff.

Would have been better if Adolf was killed at birth. IMHO

Marget Thatcher: Stuff = Pensioners deciding if to eat or freeze, people dying in hospital corridors, because of no beds.
A generation without jobs. All because of her ideas or the knock on effects.

loki old fart wrote: Pensioners deciding if to eat or freeze, people dying in hospital corridors, because of no beds.
A generation without jobs. All because of her ideas or the knock on effects.

Er.. isnt that now? You know, after almost 13 years of Labour?

24th of May 2008, 32,000 NHS beds have gone in a decade. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/2022572/NHS-hospitals-lose-32000-beds-in-a-decade.html

13th May 2009, Young jobless figures soar. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/young-hit-hardest-as-jobless-figures-soar-by-244000-1684030.html

January 14th 2010 Elderly miss out on cold weather payments. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/consumer_affairs/article6987788.ece

You are a short sighted fool. Learn something about politics before you come on here and parrot whoever is spoon feeding you this tripe.

New labour is thatcherism in drag

I was there when the jobless totals were rolling on news at ten.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
When maggie put forward her new vision for the NHS


Automatically Appended Next Post:
When blair carried on with the same crap

So New Labour is Thatcherism in drag, fine. A No True Scotsman argument it is then.

Its rather easy to poke holes in political parties statements, but ill give you that one for the sake of not banging the same drum over and over.

Who then Loki, in your wisdom, will you be voting for if not Conservative OR Labour? The Lib Dems?

I like to vote for someone who will make all of them sit up and pay attention to the electorate.

But not the BNP heaven forbid they get into power.

So not a lot of choice really.

According to this poll now, the BNP have as many votes as the Labour Party. I pray to God that's just Americans all reading this thread and voting it for a good chuckle.

I really wouldn't worry about that Ketara, there is less that 50 votes right now.

Here.

http://www.general-election-2010.co.uk/

A much more substantial poll, by the distance between me and the moon.

* Labour Party (35.3%) (20.77%, 2,941 Votes)
* Conservative Party (32.3%) (22.97%, 3,253 Votes)
* Liberal Democrats Party (22.1%) (15.64%, 2,214 Votes)
* UK Independant Party (UKIP) (2.2%) (6.36%, 900 Votes)
* Green Party (1.0%) (3.79%, 537 Votes)
* British National Party (BNP) (0.7%) (17.46%, 2,472 Votes)

I refuse to vote at this years election as I feel that nobody really knows how to run this country.

Wrexasaur wrote:A much more substantial poll, by the distance between me and the moon.

* Labour Party (35.3%) (20.77%, 2,941 Votes)
* Conservative Party (32.3%) (22.97%, 3,253 Votes)
* Liberal Democrats Party (22.1%) (15.64%, 2,214 Votes)
* UK Independant Party (UKIP) (2.2%) (6.36%, 900 Votes)
* Green Party (1.0%) (3.79%, 537 Votes)
* British National Party (BNP) (0.7%) (17.46%, 2,472 Votes)

This poll seems off....and frankly wrong. During the past two trips I have taken to the land of St. George I found nothing but disdain, even in London, for the Labour Party. I don't recall meeting even one supporter of theirs in my travels...not to mention the fact that Labour is led by a bumbling fool. I highly doubt that Labour is beating the Tories in the hearts and minds of the people, much less the polls.

Affinity doesn't necessarily guide voting behavior. I don't like the Democratic Party, but I vote for them because I dislike them less than the Republican Party. Right now, anyway.

Supporters of parties with little going for them tend to get much quieter, but they don't often change their vote. There's also a lot of folk who'll write their party off, but come election day find themselves voting the same as the always do.

I mean, I don't think for a second that Labour will win, but long time family support doesn't just go away. They'll take their licks in opposition, rebuild their party around someone untarnished by Blair's New Labour, and wait until the Tories screw up bad enough.

Oh, and the BNP are doing well in the Dakka poll because its an on-line, voluntarily poll and those things always skew towards the crazy.

Maybe Sebster, but I find that argument to be severely lacking. The Conservative Party is the largest party in the UK by number of registered voters. So it they vote the way they have always done, Labour should not have such a commanding lead in the HoC, especially in the FPTP system.

JEB_Stuart wrote:Maybe Sebster, but I find that argument to be severely lacking. The Conservative Party is the largest party in the UK by number of registered voters. So it they vote the way they have always done, Labour should not have such a commanding lead in the HoC, especially in the FPTP system.

The problem is that most Tory seats are in quite safe locations, so in order for them to actually advance and gain more seats, they actually need more votes per gained seat than other parties as the number of Tory voters in other areas is comparatively low.

At least, this is what I recall from a political special program I saw a while ago.

SilverMK2 wrote:
The problem is that most Tory seats are in quite safe locations, so in order for them to actually advance and gain more seats, they actually need more votes per gained seat than other parties as the number of Tory voters in other areas is comparatively low.

At least, this is what I recall from a political special program I saw a while ago.

This is quite pertinent and one of the reasons that many political commentators are predicting a hung parliament this time around. Judging by most of the opinion polls being run, Conservatives have a lead on Labour; however, most of the bedrock Conservative support comes from constituencies where they already have a comfortable majority. This extra swing to Conservative in these seats is effectively wasted; the seat is already won and Conservative controlled and so any additional votes make no odds. If the Conservatives are to win the next election then they need to make inroads into Labour territory, traditionally the North as Mattyrm has referred to earlier.

I grew up during the Conservative mismanagement of this country, so despite the utter awfulness of Labour and my massive dislike of what they're doing, I honestly believe the Conservatives would do worse.

So, with a heavy heart, I will either vote Labour or just not turn up at the Polling Station if there's something remotely interesting on TV. Though something tells me that if enough people do that, the BNP will sneak yet more seats, which would be worse than anything any of the other parties could do.

I'm not brainwashed into voting Labour, I just truly feel they're the best of a truly awful, immoral bunch.

How you can say that they are the best of a bad bunch is utterly beyond me.

Tell me in one way they are better. The way i see it, all of the politicians swiped money off the taxpayer, but the Labour party told everyone they were different, told everyone they were looking out for the working classes, and really they were feathering their own fething nests the whole time.

The Tories tell lies, the Labour party tell lies as well, but they are back stabbing basely disgusting lies of the most hypocritical way.

Id rather get fingered by a rich guy who i have nothing in common with than a poor guy who made good and then stuck his fething nose in the trough with the rest of them. Im voting Tory, much to the shame of my brain-dead northern family, neighbours and friends!

Unless of course the good folk of the North East finally see the light, then i shall praise them as sensible well read individuals, and start picking on the fething scousers instead!

I think the north east will be one of the last places to forget the last time the Tories were in power, so I can't really blame them.

Yeah truth in that mate, lets be honest though, the whole thing goes way above the heads of most of the people that merely rant about Thatcher.

You need a real grasp of economics and politics to understand the complex social and economic issues at the time, and most people dont read nearly enough.

Proof of that is evident, look how many people think that evolution is "just a theory"?

Anyway, not only do i read a great deal, my Dad wasnt a miner.

All science is theory. it is just that a lot of that theory has quite a few observable proofs behind it, which make it as close to "fact" as it is possible to get, given our current understanding of the universe.

mattyrm wrote:How you can say that they are the best of a bad bunch is utterly beyond me.

Tell me in one way they are better. The way i see it, all of the politicians swiped money off the taxpayer, but the Labour party told everyone they were different, told everyone they were looking out for the working classes, and really they were feathering their own fething nests the whole time.

The Tories tell lies, the Labour party tell lies as well, but they are back stabbing basely disgusting lies of the most hypocritical way.

Id rather get fingered by a rich guy who i have nothing in common with than a poor guy who made good and then stuck his fething nose in the trough with the rest of them. Im voting Tory, much to the shame of my brain-dead northern family, neighbours and friends!

Unless of course the good folk of the North East finally see the light, then i shall praise them as sensible well read individuals, and start picking on the fething scousers instead!

You've obviously made up your mind on this and I have been reading a lot of what you wrote... I'll throw in my two-cents but I guess it's not necessarily covering what you've been writing about but I'd like to address the most vocal conservative supporter here directly.

I'll start by perhaps somewhat foolishly tarring your opinion on me by stating that I am an anti-capitalist socialist, the only thing that seperates me from a Marxist is my cynicism toward the possibility of a utopian state, I probably sit with what your ilk would term the "Looney Left".

Obviously as a member of that aforementioned group I should not support Labour, not even Old Labour, but the problem with the UK as I view it is the complete lack of Democracy. We have an unfair electoral system which will effectively invalidate any support a party has that isn't geographically centred, then, once a government is actually formed in Parliament they'll control their guaranteed majority to effectively guarantee the passage of legislation (just look up the fail rate on government legislation, it's shocking). All of this is done without any form of public check beyond opinion polls; it is the governing party that decides when it wishes to stand for re-election.

If I had my way within the democratic framework we already have, I'd hope we could establish a secular republic much like the USA.

Although I disapprove of the entire system, I will still support any progressive liberal and leftist party... which unfortunately is the Labour Party. To be honest what you said earlier, "leopards never change their spots" is a bit offensive to me when it comes to the LP. I wouldn't have been overjoyed to support them in their previous incarnation but now they are essentially new-age conservatives, they sit on the centre-right.

However, nevetheless they are the leftmost party. No matter what party gets elected we're screwed when it comes to the debt (the accumulation of which I'd rather blame on the capitalistic boom/bust system and the American housing bubble than any particular governing party) but at least the Labour Party isn't going to abandon the needy within the nation. The post-war consensus quite clearly established that the point our current state is to ensure everyone has a net to land on, that nobody can hit rock-bottom. If the Tories get in we'll see them leave the people out to dry to weather the recession, their promise of a marriage tax-break is already looking uncertain, what on earth is going to be so new and revolutionary about them?

I am going to wheel out the old "lesser of two evils" arguement again, I'd rather have an incompetent capitalistic leadership, schooled in grammar schools, that at least attempts to maintain public services than an incompetent capitalistic leadership that chortled along at Eaton and ate their way out of many a prestigious restaurant.

I remember George Osborne once being asked what he was going to cut back on to weather the recession... "Less books from Amazon" was his answer; is anyone impressed with that?

Oh well, to conclude this long rant that probably lost its point: Don't whine about the Labour Party, whine about the whole rotten system. I don't see the Tories promising electoral reform, I do see Brown making a desperate pledge to discuss it... as cynical as I am toward it, at least it's progress that we won't get when the sheep in the general public decide they want a change simply because they'd sooner blame every problem on the ruling party. Does nobody remember the sleaze of the '90s?

Btw, how is your referring to Brown as "Cycloptic" any different to us referring to Thatcher as "Hitler"?

Well said

I don't know a lot about politics, it really doesn't interest me, but I can see where both sides are coming from. I also agree wholeheartedly with Henners (though I'm not sure America has a better system, it is different, but I don't see that it has brought better politicians to light or made it any easier to get rid of one who wasn't obviously corrupt or sleeping around) in that the system is at fault.

It's hard to find any hope for the future in the eyes of politicians. I just hope that they keep things chugging along and don't let the whole country spiral truly out of control.

And I like your style of arguing Mattyrm, you're persuasive for sure. You should go into politics yourself

mattyrm wrote:MDG. Cameron is posh so im voting for labour despite them being ABSOLUTELY fething gak for 12 years.

Did labour MPs not take the piss outrageously with the whole expenses thing? Ashok Kumar (Labour MP for Middlesbrough) and Vera Baird (Labour MP for Redcar) both took the piss massively, and yes, the labour monkeys up here will still vote for them.

Honestly, i cannot disguise my loathing for my fellow northerners. As i said, it hurts more getting fethed over by a family member than a stranger, and these fething Labour vermin that pretend to be all working class and "for the people" whilst simultaneously raping every lower class tax payer and swindling their expenses fill me with utter disgust. At least if a Tory does it you expect it!

Im voting in this order Tory, Lib Dem, Green, UKIP, any fether else at all, throw electoral votes in the fire, labour.

I think id rather have a giant inflatible penis in charge than Brown. He is actually such a thundercu*t im starting to think he is a bigoted SNP spy and he is purposely fething us so he can go back to Scotland and claim a victory.

Off topic, if by some miracle Labour do win, i shall buy you a pint In Nottingham to congratulate you on your doggedness. I can always respect that, even if i do think you are utterly delluded.

....

I do of course reserve the right to gloat uncerimonously if Dave brings the trophy home!



Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh yeah sorry just read albatross.. he basically said exactly what i was thinking in a much more sensible and less swear filled way.

Sorry for the late reply. Not been home for a few days.

But please re-read my post. I do say that I am familiar with Labours exact level of incompetence, not praising them at all. I won't vote Tory because I genuinely do not trust them. At all.

As for the MP's expense. Meh. Pretty much every single one of them had their noses in the trough to some degree or other, and sadly apart from a major shift in who exactly stands for election, the same piggies will be round the same trough in 2011. As for who claimed what, do remember the Expenses System has been in place for a long old time, and it's only the past couple (maybe five at most) years we the public have found out about. If Labour had more snouts in the trough, I guess thats down to them having you know, more MPs, being the reigning party. I wonder how much the Tories spent in the Thatcher years for example?

As for being called a Class-Warrior, I am, to a degree. But with the Tories, I really don't think they are the right people to be taking over in this economic state. They have sod all sympathy with the common man, having rarely actually worked for anything they have.

Caught a snippet on the news today, something about 'Call Me Dave' offering to scrap Uni Debts for those who pass out with the highest marks or something. Seems good, until you realise that those most likely to get the higher grades are, you guessed it, already form a privileged background. TRied looking for it on the BBC website and turned up nowt. Might be some kind of paranoid dream I had!

And just for the record, I actually object to the Party System. Hardly democratic when it's very much 'us or them'. Roll on a sustained period of hung parliaments. Make the piggies work together for once.

Btw, how is your referring to Brown as "Cycloptic" any different to us referring to Thatcher as "Hitler"?

He has one functioning eye - it's insensitive, but then your talking about a man who helped send mattyrm to war without the proper equipment. Equipment which could have meant the difference between life and death, and has done in many cases.

Comparing Thatcher to one of the most evil men in history is not in the same ballpark, it's not even the same sport (to paraphrase Pulp Fiction).

Oh I dunno. Go ask former Mining Towns what they make of Thatcher. Won't be favourable, I can tell you.

MDG wrote:Seems good, until you realise that those most likely to get the higher grades are, you guessed it, already form a privileged background.

Balderdash. My IQ is 139 and I'm top of pretty much all of my classes by a wide margin (I AM jockeying for position in one, though! ).

I was raised by a single mother on a council estate in one of the roughest towns in the country.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MDG wrote:Oh I dunno. Go ask former Mining Towns what they make of Thatcher. Won't be favourable, I can tell you.

Go ask Holocaust survivours what they make of the comparison of Hitler to Thatcher. THAT won't be favourable either.

Congratulations, you are the exception that proves the rule!

I can remember thatcher using british police to beat the crap out of people just trying to keep they jobs.
Thatcher blair and brown have all sent our boys of with crap or no equipment.
My mate was in the falklands with leaky boots etc.
My brother was in operation Granby (Desert storm to you yanks) with a gun that wouldn't fire.
Blair you know what he gave you gak

Albatross wrote:

MDG wrote:Seems good, until you realise that those most likely to get the higher grades are, you guessed it, already form a privileged background.

Balderdash. My IQ is 139 and I'm top of pretty much all of my classes by a wide margin (I AM jockeying for position in one, though! ).

I was raised by a single mother on a council estate in one of the roughest towns in the country.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MDG wrote:Oh I dunno. Go ask former Mining Towns what they make of Thatcher. Won't be favourable, I can tell you.

Go ask Holocaust survivours what they make of the comparison of Hitler to Thatcher. THAT won't be favourable either.

So you're an Alan Sugar; a small minority that manages to do well out of a bad system, does that mean the system works for everyone? Hell no.