Jump to content

Local and mayoral elections


pap
 Share

Recommended Posts

I did vote for him...lets be honest. we vote for our PM when we vote

I have no idea who my local MP is.. I voted conservative in the last election as I liked dave more than the others

 

Seriously, how can you not know who your local MP is? That's just mental.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he was kicked out after the war wasn't he.....? (yes I know he came back)

 

ed is a nerd...a complete nerd and the public simply won't have a complete nerd run the country.....like it or not

 

Keep up, mate. This isn't 1983.

 

Nerds and geeks are cool now. We grow in number each day.

 

Lower your shields and prepare to be assimilated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. 'Youth unemployment' went up 40% under Labour (IIRC).

 

I'm not sure who has the biggest history wiping airbrush....Pompey or the Labour Party :-)

 

P.s. I think the Tories could be doing better too...

 

Low turnouts again , councils do not really have any real power and all we seem to have more thatcher.Blair clones in all partys and same policies.

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very poor given how TDD debates on here. I would have thought he were more knowledgeable.

why does it matter...I never ever EVER hear from them. I have no idea where their office is.

I vote for the PM.....I know it does not work like that but that is how it is...Im sure many do the same

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why does it matter...I never ever EVER hear from them. I have no idea where their office is.

I vote for the PM.....I know it does not work like that but that is how it is...Im sure many do the same

 

Oh I agree with you, but you do come on here and preach a lot about stuff. I just thought it'd be something someone like you would know.

 

What do you think of a Presidential system if you just vote for the PM? It'd allow the HoC a bit more independence, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I agree with you, but you do come on here and preach a lot about stuff. I just thought it'd be something someone like you would know.

 

What do you think of a Presidential system if you just vote for the PM? It'd allow the HoC a bit more independence, no?

could not give a shyt......nigel Farage will get my vote (and his party) as long as he is leader

 

I really like him a great deal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, I'm just saying he uses his personality to mask his politics. It's hardly revolutionary analysis of this contest.

 

But if people are clever enough they'll be able to see through this personality facade and the policies will shine through... ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if people are clever enough they'll be able to see through this personality facade and the policies will shine through... ;-)

 

People aren't stupid, they just don't vote on policy ;)

 

HERE'S A STORY OF PEOPLE'S MOTIVATIONS:

 

I know someone who told me they wanted to vote BNP because their dad did and he got a card, and they wanted a card as well.

 

We need some re-engagement in British politics to get people excited again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did vote for him...lets be honest. we vote for our PM when we vote

I have no idea who my local MP is.. I voted conservative in the last election as I liked dave more than the others

 

not really, voting like this means we end up with a system rigged by the party offices and whips, so we get scores of yes men getting into power and the campaign is fought around the personality of the leader and not on the issues faced in ur local area, or well suited the candidate is to represent u in parliament.

 

and because of this in Winchester we now have a young conservative minister who is nicely, nicely, but doesn't get anything done, whereas oaten got **** sorted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't the nation already say 'no thanks' to changing it?

 

They voted no to AV, not no to electoral reform. And that campaign was ridiculous and unfair as well.

 

But anyways, it is hardly relevant to the question I asked TDD, as it was directed to him personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just did one of those Peter Snow-esque "What if?" scenarios on the BBC election coverage and they demonstrated that IF the Tories were to get 42% of the national vote and Labour 31% (in a general election) then the Tories would only just get a majority (by 20 seats) whereas if Labour were to poll 42% and the Tories 31% then Labour's majority would be 100 seats.

 

I knew the balance of votes vs seats was in Labour's favour but I didn't realise it was so significantly biased against the Tories.

 

Not an intentionally partisan view on my part, just passing on an observation from our friends at the BBC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devil's Advocate alert...

 

Given Labour planned to cut £8 for every £9 that the ConDems have cut, how would things have panned out radically different? I thought this ongoing economic crisis was global, or was it only 'global' when Labour were at the helm and now it's just domestic...?

 

Correct, Labour is being completely dishonest about this. The Torys and Darlings plan had a ciggie paper between them. I watched Harriot Harperson on QT last night and it was a woeful performance. Praising the leftie in France, despite his policies being completely opposite to Labour's. Complaining about every cut and every job loss, despite the fact that Labour planned to cut jobs. Blaming the Tories for all the woes now, but the American banks for all the woes when they were in office. Theo Paphitis hit the nail on the head. The "rich" give away more money than they try to "hide" in tax aviodence and the reason he gives money away is because if you give it to Governments, they waste it.

 

What the Country needs to wake up to is that the word "cut" is being distorted by everyone. If I spent £1,000 on beer this year and then spend £850 on beer next year, that is a cut in the amount of money I spend on beer. If I spend £1000.10p on beer, that is not a cut, it is a below inflation increase. I dont think Mrs Duck will accept the arguemet that I have cut the money I spend on beer, despite it going up 10p. The opposition, the BBC and the unions are making out there are severe cuts in state spending, there are not. There needs to be, but nobody has the balls to do it. Slowing down spending increases is not a cut.

 

You can bet your bottom dollar that by the end of the parliament state spending will have been cut by about 2%, and yet the Labour party will be deceiving everyone into believing that we have suffered severe "cuts".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just did one of those Peter Snow-esque "What if?" scenarios on the BBC election coverage and they demonstrated that IF the Tories were to get 42% of the national vote and Labour 31% (in a general election) then the Tories would only just get a majority (by 20 seats) whereas if Labour were to poll 42% and the Tories 31% then Labour's majority would be 100 seats.

 

I knew the balance of votes vs seats was in Labour's favour but I didn't realise it was so significantly biased against the Tories.

 

Not an intentionally partisan view on my part, just passing on an observation from our friends at the BBC.

 

You also need to factor in the number of Labour MP's in Scotland & Wales that are allowed to vote on devolved issues.Had it been the other way round, with less Tory votes needed, and English Tory MP's voting on issues that only affect Scotland the BBC, Labour Party and the Unions would be up in arms about it. I would love to see some of our resident lefties try and defend this unfairnness with the same passion they attack FPTP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theo Paphitis hit the nail on the head. The "rich" give away more money than they try to "hide" in tax aviodence and the reason he gives money away is because if you give it to Governments, they waste it.

 

I must admit to emitting a small yelp of delight when Theo said that last night. He echos my thinking entirely on that one. Why anyone trusts politicians and public servants to spend their money more wisely than they can themselves is beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also need to factor in the number of Labour MP's in Scotland & Wales that are allowed to vote on devolved issues.Had it been the other way round, with less Tory votes needed, and English Tory MP's voting on issues that only affect Scotland the BBC, Labour Party and the Unions would be up in arms about it. I would love to see some of our resident lefties try and defend this unfairnness with the same passion they attack FPTP.
i take it your not a independant voter then going by your postings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also need to factor in the number of Labour MP's in Scotland & Wales that are allowed to vote on devolved issues.Had it been the other way round, with less Tory votes needed, and English Tory MP's voting on issues that only affect Scotland the BBC, Labour Party and the Unions would be up in arms about it. I would love to see some of our resident lefties try and defend this unfairnness with the same passion they attack FPTP.

 

I do love the way that you think anyone on the left has to defend the opinions of anyone else on the left.

 

It's cute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not even going to be on the agenda for years and years so not really worth discussing.
i agree hence why alot of voters don,t bother voteing has its a wasted to vote labour in the south and tory in the north under fptp and only about 120 seats in the country matter in elections.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i take it your not a independant voter then going by your postings.

 

Not quite sure what an "independant voter" is. Is it someone who votes for an independant or is it someone who goes to the polling station alone?

 

As an independant poster, I think it's unfair that the electrol system favours one party over the other, and I also think it's unfair that Scottish and Welsh MP's vote on matters that are devolved .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do love the way that you think anyone on the left has to defend the opinions of anyone else on the left.

 

It's cute.

 

It's because they see "the left" as a single entity.

 

Thankfully we on the left don't view the right in the same way otherwise the tories would be lumped in with the BNP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also need to factor in the number of Labour MP's in Scotland & Wales that are allowed to vote on devolved issues.Had it been the other way round, with less Tory votes needed, and English Tory MP's voting on issues that only affect Scotland the BBC, Labour Party and the Unions would be up in arms about it. I would love to see some of our resident lefties try and defend this unfairnness with the same passion they attack FPTP.

 

Ok hooked... Cant defend the disproportionate way in which the votes cast = seats gained between the Tories and Labour, but that's due to the vagaries of the first past the post system, which most of our resistent Tories were vehemently defending during the last years referendum ;).... the swing vote impact is simply the result of the existing balance in those marginals and seats that ever have a chnace of shifting Left to right or vice versa....

 

Re the Scotish MPs voting on things that impact on England only - thats simply because Westminster is a UK parliament not an English one - Until you have an English parliament to address English issues, rather than a UK one - that wont chnage - and lets not forget, that on non devolved issues (and for years before devolution) English Tories were always voting on issues that only impacted Scotland (The original Poll tax) - which always played into those SNP w@nkers hands...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labour won Chipping Norton!! In your face Cameron, Brooks, Clarkson. Hahaha.

 

Not the only Labour win in Dave's patch! My local candidate, for whom I pounded the streets delivering leaflets, also won, as did two more Labour candidates (plus the Chippy result as well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is almost looking as bad for Cameron as it did for Blair in the council elections of 1999....

 

I don't know, trousers. Tony Blair did at least win the election that preceded those results, and won the next one too.

 

Hopefully, Cameron and pals didn't spunk their best ideas onto the political Kleenex prematurely - otherwise I can see them have trouble getting it up for the next election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. The Tories did equally badly in the 1981 council elections...

 

So all Cameron needs to stay in office is another Falklands conflict? :D

 

I'm well aware that local elections don't necessarily translate to national success, and that they represent a protest vote. However, I don't think that the Conservatives will win an election with Cameron in charge. There's a piece on the Guardian site, Thatcherism with a posh accent is a toxic proposition, supporting the notion that Cameron's cabinet is out of touch in a way that Thatcher's government was not.

 

Thirty years ago, when its project was piloted by politicians who had a keen sense of how millions of Britons thought and lived, the party was on to a inspired kind of politics that won it four elections. But Thatcherism with a posh accent is a potentially toxic proposition, revealing Conservatism not as the empowering, aspirational force that once seized so many imaginations but a tangle of cynical ideas that shores up the same old elites

 

How does Cameron put the class genie back in the bottle?

Edited by pap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...