Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

1997 the first horrible voting mistake i made and 2009 my naughty vote.. BNP

last time I ever bother with politics I actually hid behind the sofa cringing when Nick Griffin was on Question Time damn right embarassing....

But *sigh* we need someone to run the country....

You want Nick Griffin to run the country?



Give me an incompetent Labour government over the facists any day.

Downloading music illegally is kind of like touching another person's models; sure, you don't think you're doing harm, but when someone tells you not to mess with it you should quit regardless. That said though, it's no excuse to be enacting this sort of sweeping legislation; I'd be mad at them too.

Question for people in the UK: how is "chav" pronounced? Does it rhyme with "have"? "Pave"? Is it a hard "ch"?

I'd vote for the SNP. That way the UK can be rid of those damn useless Scotts and save Billions of Pounds.

Ketara wrote:You want Nick Griffin to run the country?



Give me an incompetent Labour government over the facists any day.

Me.....??? NO WAY! it was a naughty vote.....

Orkeosaurus wrote:Downloading music illegally is kind of like touching another person's models; sure, you don't think you're doing harm, but when someone tells you not to mess with it you should quit regardless. That said though, it's no excuse to be enacting this sort of sweeping legislation; I'd be mad at them too.

Question for people in the UK: how is "chav" pronounced? Does it rhyme with "have"? "Pave"? Is it a hard "ch"?

"Ch" (as in Church) and then "av" (as in Have).

Gwar! wrote:I'd vote for the SNP. That way the UK can be rid of those damn useless Scotts and save Billions of Pounds.

Are Scottish people really heavy?

If the BNP get voted in, I'm blaming you.

Gwar! wrote:"Ch" (as in Church) and then "av" (as in Have).

Excellent! Time to call some people "chavs"!

Ketara wrote:If the BNP get voted in, I'm blaming you.

Thats fine....

Demonslayer82 wrote:1997 the first horrible voting mistake i made and 2009 my naughty vote.. BNP

last time I ever bother with politics I actually hid behind the sofa cringing when Nick Griffin was on Question Time damn right embarassing....

But *sigh* we need someone to run the country....

I'm not convinced we do, actually.

A lot of the trouble we are in now is because of strong governments over the past 30 years pushing through a lot of legislation which has turned out to be a bad idea.

A hung parliament which forces two different parties to make a compromise to do anything may result in legislation being examined more rigorously and adapted to a variety of proper ideas rather than just what the Daily Mail was on about last week.

Demonslayer82 wrote:1997 the first horrible voting mistake i made and 2009 my naughty vote.. BNP

last time I ever bother with politics I actually hid behind the sofa cringing when Nick Griffin was on Question Time damn right embarassing....

But *sigh* we need someone to run the country....

When I was sighing I was actually being sarcastic I couldnt give two tosses who ran this country now.....

Id Vote Rupert Bear....... there you go. (No Trolling)

Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not convinced we do, actually.

A lot of the trouble we are in now is because of strong governments over the past 30 years pushing through a lot of legislation which has turned out to be a bad idea.

A hung parliament which forces two different parties to make a compromise to do anything may result in legislation being examined more rigorously and adapted to a variety of proper ideas rather than just what the Daily Mail was on about last week.

Or we just have 5 years of absolutely no legislation going through, and, let's be honest, what do you think is more likely considering the complete morons that inhabit the commons?

Its waaaaaay too much legislation to be honest not enough politics Labour are like the uncool kids who when suddenly cool (circa 1997) went batgak with it and made up loads of stupid gak...

In a lot of areas five years of no government meddling is exactly what is needed to sort things out.

For example the NHS has undergone a major reorganisation of some kind roughly every 18 months for the past 20 years.

Kilkrazy wrote:A lot of the trouble we are in now is because of strong governments over the past 30 years pushing through a lot of legislation which has turned out to be a bad idea.

A hung parliament which forces two different parties to make a compromise to do anything may result in legislation being examined more rigorously and adapted to a variety of proper ideas rather than just what the Daily Mail was on about last week.

If I recall, we were doing pretty well with Clinton and a Republican congress.

Gwar! wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not convinced we do, actually.

A lot of the trouble we are in now is because of strong governments over the past 30 years pushing through a lot of legislation which has turned out to be a bad idea.

A hung parliament which forces two different parties to make a compromise to do anything may result in legislation being examined more rigorously and adapted to a variety of proper ideas rather than just what the Daily Mail was on about last week.

Or we just have 5 years of absolutely no legislation going through, and, let's be honest, what do you think is more likely considering the complete morons that inhabit the commons?

I went into this in another UK politics thread (can't remember which one and I can't be bothered to search right now) but the pros and cons of a hung parliament largely depend upon the political system in question. The Israeli government, the Knesset I think it is called, is deliberately set up to ensure that coalition governments must form and therefore it creates a kind of balance to political power and ensures that no one party is all-powerful. The downside is that the smaller parties have disproportionately large amounts of power since law can stand or fail on their vote alone. In the UK, our system is set up as first past the post and is extremely adversarial. It is largely for this reason that coalition governments in the UK historically tend to be weak and short lived. I expect this to continue. In terms of the UK political system, coalition governments are a bad thing - I hope the next election doesn't come to that.

Kilkrazy wrote:In a lot of areas five years of no government meddling is exactly what is needed to sort things out.

For example the NHS has undergone a major reorganisation of some kind roughly every 18 months for the past 20 years.

The NHS had reformed more than Marvels Avengers its crazy so much so that I might actually train myself to deliver a baby so as when Spawn of DemonSlayer comes he is prepared.....

Kilkrazy wrote:

A lot of the trouble we are in now is because of strong governments over the past 30 years pushing through a lot of legislation which has turned out to be a bad idea.

A hung parliament which forces two different parties to make a compromise to do anything may result in legislation being examined more rigorously and adapted to a variety of proper ideas rather than just what the Daily Mail was on about last week.

Well said

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Tyyr wrote:How exactly are they going to prove that music or video was obtained illegally?

They will force ISPs to provide details of anyone using 'excessive' bandwidth. So, sites visited etc. It is the invasion of privacy I principally object to, and the boundaries this removes for further legislation in the future.

That's what I figured. Sure hope you don't get a lot of video games through Steam you ing terrorist.

The secret to beating this is to open your WiFi and let anyone log in. You may get freeloaders sucking your bandwidth but you'll be able to advance the defence that "it wasn't me, guv".

On another tack, what is going to be considered excessive bandwidth use? The guvmint wants us all to join in the digital economy. That implies superfast optic fibre and massive upload/download allowances. Will the government licence every website in the world so that ISPs can compare your logins with known good and not good sites?

What if you write a script to download the entire BBC news website every 10 minutes. You will have a lot of perfectly legal data downloaded. It wouldn't be hard to mix a few MP3s into that without it being noticed.

Wow, and I thought Canada was a political toilet. Good luck, Ol'blighty.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Fine, I've tried Gordon, I really did.

I wanted to like you pack of gaks, I wanted to support you, despite you and your predecessor's policies and bills not resembling what I was expecting of the Labour Party. This goes too far, this and the creature behind it, Peter Mandelson, the habitual comeback kid, and the insidious erosion of internet anonymity and personal privacy are the reasons that, given the opportunity to deny a 'New' Labour seat, I will break the promise I made myself at 18.

I will vote Tory... And a pox on your house.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/mar/05/digital-economy-bill-pushed-through

Yeh, what that article fails to metion with...

"The Liberal Democrats forced through a surprise amendment to the bill's notorious clause 17. Instead of new powers that threatened sweeping alterations to British copyright law, the Lib Dems added a clause that gives a high court judge the right to issue an injunction against a website accused of hosting a "substantial" amount of copyright-infringing material, potentially forcing the entire site offline."

...is that senior tories were beside said lib dems in forcing the amendment through.

So I wouldn't really vote tory in protest.

Reading the BBC gets you on a government watchlist anyway, because the BBC is actually halfway unbiased sometimes occasionally.

The interesting thing about the BBC is that they pretty consistently lean slightly towards the government of the day, and the government of the day always regards them of being anti-government.

The latter to ensure the former?

Why even bother voting? Neither left nor right have anything to offer us plebs... the "conservatives" simply use different means to continue the policies of the "liberals," and vice versa. This is because they all share the same policy: protecting the elite.

Perhaps it truly is time to Rob and Mob...

Welcome into the fold MGS! Im glad you have seen the light!

I will of course be voting Tory, because under the Tories i always had more money in my pocket. Lets not even get into these "Stealth Taxes".... how many have we had the last 12 years? 345 or something?

And Fascism or Labour....

Thats a tough one, the more i see what Mandelson and Brown get up to the less difference i think there is between the two.

loki old fart wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

A lot of the trouble we are in now is because of strong governments over the past 30 years pushing through a lot of legislation which has turned out to be a bad idea.

A hung parliament which forces two different parties to make a compromise to do anything may result in legislation being examined more rigorously and adapted to a variety of proper ideas rather than just what the Daily Mail was on about last week.

Well said

Thirded. Far too much ruling and not enough governing recently. Allot of draconian crap being put through 'for our own good' and far too many violations of our privacy and civil liberties to keep us safe from all the big bad terrorists and paedophiles that are apparently lurking on every street corner ready to bring about the downfall of civilisation.

Though to be fair I don't think this is just an issue with Labour, it's an issue with Big government in general and a Tory majority will probably make things even worse than they are now. Voting tactically for me is irrelevant as I live in a very safe LibDem seat with Labour a distant 3rd. I’m buggered if I’m voting blue.

As disappointed as I am to see the Lib Dems being involved in this nonsense I will probably vote for them anyway for the reasons in the link below.

http://freedom.libdems.org.uk/

For me civil liberties are the hot issue for the election. That and the Tories plans to dismantle the Beeb, but that’s a subject for another day.