Saintandy666

Liberal Democrats shouldn't HAVE to side with anyone really... they should represent the people who voted for them in a perfect world. Clegg won't go into formal coalition with conservatives or even an unofficial pact I don't think(not without substantial voting reform anyways).

Brilliant I could love him if not for the Digital Economy Act.

I was at the declaration and his speech was epicness(But he was wearing a pompey shirt!!!!). Maria Miller won though , but that was always going to happen.

I love him, but hate him at the same time. He is a political genius though, owns Jeremy Paxman every single time.

'I agree with Nick' is a good one.

Shut up. I respect your view, I understand views in different people are different, something you are incapable of. You sound like the arrogant **** who always insists he is right no matter what. Well, wakey wakey... not everyone thinks the same as you. 'Goodnight'

Oh yawn... I hate the arrogance of older people who just say they are right because they are older. It's patronising and just because you are 17 it does not mean you don't have legitimate political views, so please with all politeness stop with the patronising. And I can assure you, your opinions will be based on absorbence of even more 'propaganda' over the decades mixed in with personal experience. No-one remains uninfluenced by others opinions. You grossly overstate the effects of what a Lib Dem and/or Labour Government would have on the pockets of the rich(though to be honest, those who can pay should have to pay). And they should pay a disproportionate amount, poll tax proves this. And I don't give a **** if one day it is me paying a bit more either.

Nick Robinson said it also. I said it also, for ****s sake, why does no one believe me?!

I thought the Big Society was Bull**** from the second it was announced. I used that video to back up my point, I realise it is 'propaganda', but so is the information that was put out there to convince you of what your opinions now are. And yes, the Lib Dems will do it best, it's basically redistribution of taxes(or tax the rich more), it's makes sense.

And what a great speech he gave in response. And shush, under the tories, we wouldn't even have a minimum wage, let alone a living wage.

I'm glad Gordon Brown just got recognition of how good his speech was on BBC news. Oh, and the Guardian... http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/03/gordon-brown-citizensuk-leadership-debate For those who mocked my judgement!

At present, thursday looks rainy.

He most likely is, but it is a shame really. I think in 20 years time, people will reflect on him much nicer than they do now, they will see how his actions saved our arses during the recession and how the Tories cowardly said nothing. Just you wait and see.

How polls are conducted has changed a lot since 1992, it's all explained on http://ukpollingreport.co.uk in the faq section. Basically, they are a lot more accurate. Oh, and people who say Gordon Brown can't be passionate, I seriously suggest going and watching that speech to the Citizens UK conference if you can.

Maybe, but the parallels are there, all I'm saying is there could be an unexpected result. Either way, the BS is still... BS and won't work. I'm going back to my History now, the Korean war is so much fun.

F*ck that sh*t! See... it just isn't going to work

In a way this election has many parallels to John Majors on 1992. Government had been in for 13 years, John Major had never been elected and had taken over from Thatcher two years ago. The UK was in a recession that they largely blamed on the Tories. The polls indicated a Labour win(though of course this time they don't but for the tories) There's lots of similarities, the big difference is the Liberals and they are strong now. They polled 22.4% at the last election, we shall have to see how that factor plays in. In my opinion, it is very possible that the public may decide 'better the devil you know'. One thing is sure though, while Brown isn't popular, neither is Cameron. I'm hoping for some sort of Lib/Lab coalition.

Yes, and the charities are made up of the minority of people. For the BS to work, the majority must partake. It isn't going to happen.

Oh yes, I'm sure many people say they will partake in it, but when the **** hits the fan, it just ain't gonna happen. Most people will not wish to move their fat arses if it doesn't benefit them in some way. How many people do you think vote on what is best for society rather than themselves? Anyway, this is one of the reasons if I could vote(because I'm not old enough ) I would vote Liberal Democrat as they offer a true route to a fairer system.

Most people don't give a **** and won't contribute. End of.

I fully understand the Big Society, people will not play their part, mark my words, it will fail. Most people have no interest in helping others or helping run stuff. Most people have no interest in charity, and those that do are just cheque participants and for the Big Society to work, everyone or at least the majority need to take some sort of action. Come on now, 39% of people couldn't even be bothered to vote at the last election, let alone help run the local hospital.

So's the Big Society, come on... people are ****ing lazy and those that aren't have jobs already to do without running the schools and the hospitals. You'll just get the same guy who already runs the local Parish council running the Public Sector. It'll decrease fairness and increase the amount of power in the hands of the few. Same old Tories, same old ****.

http://www.daily-news.org.uk/video Everyone should watch this to see the dire the consequences of Cameron's Big Society. Yes, it is over exaggerated, but the point remains, inexperience and not enough time given to groups where experience and dedication are key. Also, if anyone saw it today... Gordon Browns speech at Citizens UK conference was stunning, such passion I have not seen from him yet, one of his best speeches to date. If you haven't seen it, you should watch it, he walked all over Cameron's speech.

Allegedly it's gonna be one of the Miliband brothers, so will be interesting to watch some siblingly rivalry. I hope it is Jack Straw though, I always liked him.

Look, let me explain it simpler. 1. Everyone ranks as many candidates as they like.(it takes place in multi member constituencies, so say Hampshire could be 1 constituency) 2. There is a threshold for winning a seat, if you pass this threshold on first choice, you are elected. 3. Then the 'excess' votes on the person elected are redistributed proportionally. By this I mean they look at all the 2nd choices of that person and redistribute them proportionally to the amount of excess votes received. 4. If another person has passed the threshold then, the same happens to their 2nd choice votes, if not then you eliminate the bottom person and redistribute their 2nd choice votes. And basically you repeat those steps. This is Politics A level revision for me. Also, they already use it in Ireland, Northern Ireland, Australian Senate elections to name a few... so it does work!!!