TheCholulaKid Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 I bet your left leaning views made you dead against these debates 5 years ago WTF does that even mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 WTF does that even mean?the sort of thing the bonehead right come out with ..lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 (edited) who from this thread said this in 2010 but now calling cameron 'scared'...... I think Brown made a big mistake going on that debate, giving Clegg an equal standing to the other parties have made the Lib Dems a much more credible option and... I can't stand the idea of televised 'leader debates'. Too Americanised Edited 6 March, 2015 by Batman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 Jamie, just for the record, would you mind providing us with what you mean by left-leaning views? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 great the tv company's have a backbone have issued a ultimatum ,good for democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 Don't know who I'll be voting for if Left Unity don't field a candidate in the constituency. Liverpool tends to be Labour parachutee central, or at least my Labour MPs have been. It's difficult to get too excited for either of them, really. The new constituency is even more of a Labour stronghold. Majority of over 18K in the last election, so I've got two choices. Vote for Twigg and have my vote "count", even though Labour are a load of shíte these days, or express a personal preference. What fúcking value for money, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 (edited) Don't know who I'll be voting for if Left Unity don't field a candidate in the constituency. Liverpool tends to be Labour parachutee central, or at least my Labour MPs have been. It's difficult to get too excited for either of them, really. The new constituency is even more of a Labour stronghold. Majority of over 18K in the last election, so I've got two choices. Vote for Twigg and have my vote "count", even though Labour are a load of shíte these days, or express a personal preference. What fúcking value for money, eh?thats the trouble in most seats ,its not worth voting has its a fore gone conclusion who will win,you could put a potato up with the party name and it would win in those seats lol.. the only seats that seem to matter are the marginals to the politicians under our outdated voting system. Edited 6 March, 2015 by solentstars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 thats the trouble in most seats ,its not worth voting has its a fore gone conclusion who will win,you could put a potato up with the party name and it would win in those seats lol.. the only seats that seem to matter are the marginals to the politicians under our outdated voting system. Southampton Test and Southampton Itchen are both marginal seats, so at the very least Sotonian residents should feel like they're going to be meaningful in the contest. This election is all about the UKIP effect though. I don't know if they'll gain many seats, but I do think they are going to get a good whack of the popular vote. Many of those voters will come from other parties. It may be a case of who gets hurt the least by UKIP winning the election. I also reckon Farage and co will get votes from people that don't normally vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Lion Tamer Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 Southampton Test and Southampton Itchen are both marginal seats, so at the very least Sotonian residents should feel like they're going to be meaningful in the contest. This election is all about the UKIP effect though. I don't know if they'll gain many seats, but I do think they are going to get a good whack of the popular vote. Many of those voters will come from other parties. It may be a case of who gets hurt the least by UKIP winning the election. I also reckon Farage and co will get votes from people that don't normally vote. It's actually all about the SNP, Labour are going to be decimated in Scotland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 SNP are the most interesting aspect of this election. I can't work out what's going to happen. Part of me is convinced 40 SNP seats will mean chaos - the SNP will be able to cause some trouble and trigger another election in 6 months claiming that the 'westminster elite' and Scotland just don't mix and that the second election will be treated by the SNP as a 'referendum' on another referendum. But then I think, which parties can actually support another election? Probably only the conservatives. In terms of a deal, Labour and the SNP hate each other so much I'm not sure it could be functional, and a bind with the tories for the SNP would be catastrophic for them unless they did a 'referendum for referendum' supply and confidence deal. I'm just not sure, and all I see is a lot of chaos and another general election before 5 years is up. Could be wrong though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 As said on QT. If labour made a statement that they would not entertain any form of deal with the SNP. That would immediately make the SNP irrelevant. But Ed won't. He would be that desperate to be PM he would do a deal with a party that really does not have the UKs best interests anywhere near their heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 As said on QT. If labour made a statement that they would not entertain any form of deal with the SNP. That would immediately make the SNP irrelevant. But Ed won't. He would be that desperate to be PM he would do a deal with a party that really does not have the UKs best interests anywhere near their heart No sure on that one - the SNP are v. popular at the moment of their own accord. You might be correct on some voters who would vote tactically, but I do think there is a fast solidifying SNP base at the moment in Scotland - and whilst it's not in the numbers to win an election, under first past the post it causes landslides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Lion Tamer Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 As said on QT. If labour made a statement that they would not entertain any form of deal with the SNP. That would immediately make the SNP irrelevant. But Ed won't. He would be that desperate to be PM he would do a deal with a party that really does not have the UKs best interests anywhere near their heart But nothing would make a Scottish breakaway more likely than another Tory government. A Labour - SNP coalition could be the only way to save the union Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 (edited) But nothing would make a Scottish breakaway more likely than another Tory government. A Labour - SNP coalition could be the only way to save the union Really? There won't be another referendum for 30 years. SNP in any form of power sharing will mean they get their main goal. Another referendum. Much like if farage was in that position Edited 6 March, 2015 by Batman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Lion Tamer Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 Really? There won't be another referendum for 30 years. Won't there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 this great strategic move isn't winning him any PR When staunch Tory Adam Boulton tweets: tvdebates @DavidCameron doesn't want to speak to 22m people when he's asking them to elect him for 5 more years, draw your own conclusions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 By calling him Red Ed you are giving yourself away as not much of a thinker. Bet you just hate paying taxes So presumably all the bile and name-calling against Maggie Thatcher would condemn those who used it to the same conclusion from you, that they were not much cop as thinkers either? I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes and have been doing so all my working life. Often though, my idea of a fair level of taxation and Labour's left-wing have very different ideas about what is fair. You infer that you love paying taxes, is that correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 6 March, 2015 Share Posted 6 March, 2015 this great strategic move isn't winning him any PR When staunch Tory Adam Boulton tweets: tvdebates @DavidCameron doesn't want to speak to 22m people when he's asking them to elect him for 5 more years, draw your own conclusions Won't there be any party political broadcasts? Can't he speak to the electorate in them? And where does this figure of 22 million people come from? That's more than double the number who watched the TV debates last time around. Do they add up all the viewing figures from each prospective debate, even though it will mostly be the same people watching them each time? A bit like the left's proposed Mansion Tax being the funding answer to three different policy funding needs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Won't there be any party political broadcasts? Can't he speak to the electorate in them? And where does this figure of 22 million people come from? That's more than double the number who watched the TV debates last time around. Do they add up all the viewing figures from each prospective debate, even though it will mostly be the same people watching them each time? A bit like the left's proposed Mansion Tax being the funding answer to three different policy funding needs? I think it's hilarious you are defending Cameron on this. I mean I'm much more likely to vote Tory in this election than anyone else at the moment but even I think he is being ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 (edited) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxQ6L3kN4n8 Edited 7 March, 2015 by saintbletch Embedding video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 The sheer arrogance of Cameron knows no bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 I think it's hilarious you are defending Cameron on this. I mean I'm much more likely to vote Tory in this election than anyone else at the moment but even I think he is being ridiculous. Was I defending Cameron, apart from saying that he must have his strategic reasons for declining further TV debates beyond the one with the 7 leaders? When you put up my quote, I thought the purpose was to argue the toss on what on what I said. Anybody care to justify the figure of 22 million that Adam Boulton claims will be the audience for the TV debates? It is a bit like saying that the viewing figures for Eastenders equates to virtually the entire population of the UK each week, when it is the same 7-8 million viewers every night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 7 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Cameron is doing what his strategists believe is in his best interests. Miliband's is doing what his strategists believe is in his best interests. So, given they're both acting in self interest, why is all the flack aimed at Cameron and none at Miliband? Unless there are some naive people out there who believe that Miliband wants the debates to go ahead because he's acting in the public interest rather than his own.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 cameron not wanting to get into this is the same as brown not really wanting to and blair completely ruling it out. The one in power simply has the most to lose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 TV debate involving Cameron & Miliband to take place? 8/13 NO; 6/5 YES. #tvdebates http://t.co/lXGDiWNsah William Hills odds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 cameron not wanting to get into this is the same as brown not really wanting to and blair completely ruling it out. The one in power simply has the most to lose I agree. Main difference there though is that Cameron has done a complete u-turn. Something like this should be enshrined in law by an independent body so no one can back out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 7 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 7 March, 2015 I agree. Main difference there though is that Cameron has done a complete u-turn. It depends how you look at it... Leader of opposition:"debates are good". Prime minister: "debates are nor so good" If Cameron had flipped his opinion whilst still in the same roll then, yes, that's a u-turn. I don't see conforming to the typical response depending on what position you hold a uturn per we, if anything he's being consistent with his predecessors.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Blimey Lord T - what have you been drinking? #somanytypos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Reported in the Telegraph:- In a letter to Downing Street, the broadcasters urged the Prime Minister to reconsider his decision not to take part in two of their proposed debates. The letter said: “The debates were enormously well received by 22 million viewers in 2010 and our research has shown that there is a public desire and a public expectation for debates in 2015. I repeat, there were not 22 million viewers of the debates in 2010. There were three TV debates and it is rather disingenuous for the broadcasters to insinuate that 22 million people watched them, when it was in reality probably 7 million or so of the same people who watched all three debates. Furthermore, the majority of that audience almost certainly comprised viewers who had already made up their minds which way they would vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 7 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Blimey Lord T - what have you been drinking? #somanytypos Typing on a phone whilst having a wee coz late for kids footie game syndrome I'm afraid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 7 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Now, here's an interesting idea... http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/6821684?1425720663 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Now, here's an interesting idea... http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/6821684?1425720663 That would be funny. Then which mainstream party would we vote for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 But nothing would make a Scottish breakaway more likely than another Tory government. A Labour - SNP coalition could be the only way to save the union I don't believe the SNP will form any sort of coalition with Labour. Their whole strategy is that anything good is down to them in the devolved parliament and anything bad is from Westminster. If they have the ability to influence Westminster and vote things down , eventually this approach will fail as they can't really complain about things they could block. Their ideal scenario is clearly another Tory government but a labour majority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 I don't believe the SNP will form any sort of coalition with Labour. Their whole strategy is that anything good is down to them in the devolved parliament and anything bad is from Westminster. If they have the ability to influence Westminster and vote things down , eventually this approach will fail as they can't really complain about things they could block. Their ideal scenario is clearly another Tory government but a labour majority In your mind, does the SNP only exist to complain about things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 I don't believe the SNP will form any sort of coalition with Labour. Their whole strategy is that anything good is down to them in the devolved parliament and anything bad is from Westminster. If they have the ability to influence Westminster and vote things down , eventually this approach will fail as they can't really complain about things they could block. Their ideal scenario is clearly another Tory government but a labour majority With, say, 40 seats, they'd have to, if Labour have enough of course. Otherwise, why on earth are they standing for Westminster? If they hold the balance of power and refuse to form an functioning administration forcing another election they'd look like prize pri cks, with no reason for people to vote for them again. You're right though, being in coalition could damage them in the long run as they won't be able to just stand and point any more. It did for the LDs and could do for the SNP too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 If SNP end up being the decisive adjunct to a ruling coalition then the English, N Irish and Welsh ought to have an independence referendum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 With, say, 40 seats, they'd have to, if Labour have enough of course. Otherwise, why on earth are they standing for Westminster? If they hold the balance of power and refuse to form an functioning administration forcing another election they'd look like prize pri cks, with no reason for people to vote for them again. You're right though, being in coalition could damage them in the long run as they won't be able to just stand and point any more. It did for the LDs and could do for the SNP too. every single little thing that would not be right if the SNP were in power (sort of). you can bet the press, UKiP, Conservatives etc will ensure they are blame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 every single little thing that would not be right if the SNP were in power (sort of). you can bet the press, UKiP, Conservatives etc will ensure they are blame Salmond won't care. If the SNP get anything approaching 4-50 seats he'd be our Deputy Prime Minister. Vomit inducing for lots of us but a genuine triumph for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Salmond won't care. If the SNP get anything approaching 4-50 seats he'd be our Deputy Prime Minister. Vomit inducing for lots of us but a genuine triumph for him. you are right of course. Be interesting to see how they keep selling it to their voters. Many of which blame 'Westminster' for everything, the SNP taking the lead. if it starts to go very wrong (or worse than now) with the SNP at the very heart of 'Westminster' etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11454925/David-Cameron-People-should-have-the-freedom-to-hunt.html Good to see Dave staying relevant...what's the point in even mentioning this as the proposed vote in the Commons will never pass and public support is firmly behind the ban.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 7 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Does anyone really believe that a coalition of labour and snp will do a better job than the current coalition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Does anyone really believe that a coalition of labour and snp will do a better job than the current coalition? Regardless of policy differences, the current coalition has been a very effective government who have introduced radical reforms to tax, welfare and the NHS. I think the last 5 years has smashed the idea that coalition doesn't work. Both parties managed to get through key policies and work together. As a second to that, the economy is also growing now again (and fast) and things are looking up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Does anyone really believe that a coalition of labour and snp will do a better job than the current coalition? Well they'd struggle to do any worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Cameron is doing what his strategists believe is in his best interests. Miliband's is doing what his strategists believe is in his best interests. So, given they're both acting in self interest, why is all the flack aimed at Cameron and none at Miliband? Unless there are some naive people out there who believe that Miliband wants the debates to go ahead because he's acting in the public interest rather than his own.... Because Cameron's strategists are failing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 The Tory press are really afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Salmond won't care. If the SNP get anything approaching 4-50 seats he'd be our Deputy Prime Minister. Vomit inducing for lots of us but a genuine triumph for him. Nicola Sturgeon don't you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Nicola Sturgeon don't you mean? Well, no. I mean Alex Salmond, who will be a MP after the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 Well, no. I mean Alex Salmond, who will be a MP after the election. He won't be deputy PM though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 7 March, 2015 Share Posted 7 March, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxQ6L3kN4n8 Boom. That's some nice work from Labour there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now