General Election 2015

[CB Saint]

So what if one of the undecideds was a Tory all along. The fact is Milliband should be able to deal with all types comfortably. With this lady he struggled and th Labour media machine are making the usual noise to hopefully drag the attention away from this fact.

 

all parties do it.

[CB Fry]

My word. Your comprehension skills are woeful.

Not as woeful as your grasp of how this is going to play out for the SNP.

[Torres]

Not as woeful as your grasp of how this is going to play out for the SNP.

 

Thank you for proving my point so swiftly.

[Jonnyboy]

Tories have sunk to a new low:

 

 

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/04/30/sick-conservative-poster-compares-miliband-to-stroke-victim-mirror-online/

Edited 1 May, 2015 by Jonnyboy

[Wade Garrett]

I can't see many undecided voters being swayed by QT. I can see a few of the Scots going back to Labour though.

[CB Fry]

Thank you for proving my point so swiftly. [emoji106]

Keep frothing.

[Wade Garrett]

Tories have sunk to a new low:

 

 

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/04/30/sick-conservative-poster-compares-miliband-to-stroke-victim-mirror-online/

 

Blimey, that's poor.

[Torres]

Keep frothing.

 

Chortle.

 

By the way, did you see the Gus O'Donnell interview on Newsnight last night? Laura Kuenssberg asked him if this would be the last General Election for the UK and for some inexplicable reason he evaded giving a direct answer rather than saying

 

There will be no independence referendum for at least a decade (at least) so they are going to have to get on with it.

 

It was all very odd

[shurlock]

Chortle.

 

By the way, did you see the Gus O'Donnell interview on Newsnight last night? Laura Kuenssberg asked him if this would be the last General Election for the UK and for some inexplicable reason he evaded giving a direct answer rather than saying

 

 

 

It was all very odd

 

You think the ultimate civil servant is going to wade into something as contentious and political as the referendum. On record?

 

How odd

[CB Fry]

Chortle.

 

By the way, did you see the Gus O'Donnell interview on Newsnight last night? Laura Kuenssberg asked him if this would be the last General Election for the UK and for some inexplicable reason he evaded giving a direct answer rather than saying

 

 

 

It was all very odd [emoji38]

There will not be a referendum in the next five years you utter plum.

[CB Fry]

You think the ultimate civil servant is going to wade into something as contentious and political as the referendum. On record?

 

How odd [emoji38]

Torres's comprehension skills truly are woeful.

[Hockey_saint]

There will not be a referendum in the next five years you utter plum.

 

I still find it brilliant that the Tories are fighting a campaign on something they signed up to in the first place. Sure, Labour let the A8 countries in but it was the Tories who took us into europe whilst Enoch Powell shouted "Vote labour" -- the irony.

[CB Fry]

I still find it brilliant that the Tories are fighting a campaign on something they signed up to in the first place. Sure, Labour let the A8 countries in but it was the Tories who took us into europe whilst Enoch Powell shouted "Vote labour" -- the irony.

We were talking about a Scottish referendum not a European one. That may well happen in the next five years.

[Hockey_saint]

We were talking about a Scottish referendum not a European one. That may well happen in the next five years.

 

Fair enough.

 

Every group of people have a right to choose their own destiny but I just wish they'd see that independence within the EU is no independence at all.

[Special K]

I have to say, Special K, that the two hospital PFI schemes I worked on were judged by the Treasury's own PFI unit to have robust business cases (under both governments). Perhaps the naivete was the inability of the Treasury to recognise just how unscrupulous (as you say) the SPVs were. When Labour had settled in, the rules were changed so that the SPVs' renegotiations with their own funders that resulted in cheaper funding was shared with the NHS Trusts.

 

In the main PFI delivered on time and on budget - something that rarely happened with D & B contracts. The main problem was that those specifying from the NHS side were hit with unreasonable RfIs for example. The highly experienced NHS Estates staff that used to deal with contractors had all been made redundant when services were market tested in 1991 and onwards. Ironically, they were snapped up by the developers to lead the private sector bidding!

 

Perhaps they were naive, BTF but they were also rather silly in inviting the foxes from firms like Price Waterhouse into the chicken house that was PUK. It surprises me not that PFI schemes were seen to be completed "on time and on budget" as I guess both the programme and the price were favourable as they were being negotiated with the Employer, whose advisers just happened to belong to organisations that were part of the bidding team!

 

It seems depressing that the NHS has never really got to grips with a lasting procurement procedure. Mainly, it has to be stressed, because of flippin' central government influence and meddling. Procure 21+ no longer offers the work opportunities it used to and is being abandoned in favour of good old fashioned competitive tendering, because that (surprise, surprise) delivers more value for money (this from the CCG's consultants - not me!). It's gone full circle and will presumably start another cycle soon!

[Lord Duckhunter]

Fair enough.

 

Every group of people have a right to choose their own destiny but I just wish they'd see that independence within the EU is no independence at all.

 

Spot on .

[Ex Lion Tamer]

For the record. I do think a late swing to the tories is still very much on the cards.

 

For all the complaints about the QT audience, labour has not won the economic argument or even really made it properly

[Unbelievable Jeff]

For the record. I do think a late swing to the tories is still very much on the cards.

 

For all the complaints about the QT audience, labour has not won the economic argument or even really made it properly

 

It's up in the air.

[Torres]

There will not be a referendum in the next five years you utter plum.

 

A decade is five years, is it?

 

Torres's comprehension skills truly are woeful.

 

Oh dear son, oh dear.

Edited 2 May, 2015 by Torres

[Torres]

You think the ultimate civil servant is going to wade into something as contentious and political as the referendum. On record?

 

How odd

 

Actually, I'll ignore the lol and treat you like an intelligent individual who simply forgot that O'Donnell has actually retired and so has absolutely no reason at all not to comment on it. The fact that he was doing the interview for Newsnight in the first place, during purdah, should have made that perfectly clear.

Edited 2 May, 2015 by Torres

[shurlock]

You do know he's retired, right?

 

Yep -and even more of a reason he wouldn't be drawn into firm predictions, endorsements or recommendations -anything that might tie incumbents hands. A serving civil servant -let alone the head of the civil service- wouldn't give an interview. Full stop.

 

This real world business - bit of a strain for you, isn't it?

 

Edited 2 May, 2015 by shurlock

[Torres]

Yep -and even more of a reason he wouldn't be drawn into predictions or endorsements. Do you have any idea how things work?

 

 

More than you, evidently. There's no reason why he wouldn't make predictions - in fact he spent most of the interview doing just that.

[shurlock]

More than you, evidently. There's no reason why he wouldn't make predictions - in fact he spent most of the interview doing just that.

 

You know exactly what I mean - hence why you changed the subject.

Keep flailing away, sunshine.

[Torres]

You know exactly what I mean

 

Well, yes, because our only point of difference is whether O'Donnell can or would make any predictions. You say he wouldn't, and yet he spent the the interview predicting what could happen in parliament over the coming weeks, months and years.

 

Yet, when asked whether this might be the last GE for the UK, he refused to answer the question when apparently the answer is so very clear (other than Fry's confusion about how long a decade is,of course).

[CB Fry]

Well, yes, because our only point of difference is whether O'Donnell can or would make any predictions. You say he wouldn't, and yet he spent the the interview predicting what could happen in parliament over the coming weeks, months and years.

 

Yet, when asked whether this might be the last GE for the UK, he refused to answer the question when apparently the answer is so very clear (other than Fry's confusion about how long a decade is,of course).

You seem to be confused about how often general elections happen.

 

Clue: they happen every five years. Hence my reference to five years. Because that's when the next election will be. In five years time. Five years. Understand?

 

Anyway there won't be a referendum in the next decade anyway. I'll happily stand by that sunshine.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Apparently the BBC is biased but I cant remember when they've made an apology like this from the Times

[Ex Lion Tamer]

The Tories has given us the longest fall in wages in the last 150 years

Edited 2 May, 2015 by Ex Lion Tamer

[CB Fry]

Secondly I like the idea that you think you have caught me out. A Champagne moment for Torres.

 

But, to help your woeful comprehension, Torres:

 

If someone says they think something won't happen in the next decade, the idea they also think it won't happen in the next five years is what normal people call "a given".

 

Clue: the next five years are going to run, you know, kinda within the next ten years. That's, like, how time works. Weird, huh?

 

But yeah, you've right caught me out good and proper.

Edited 2 May, 2015 by CB Fry

[Torres]

You seem to be confused about how often general elections happen.

 

Clue: they happen every five years. Hence my reference to five years. Because that's when the next election will be. In five years time. Five years. Understand?

 

Anyway there won't be a referendum in the next decade anyway. I'll happily stand by that sunshine.

 

Hey, it's alright to say that you made a simple mistake you know. It's far more dignified than squirming like that.

[CB Fry]

Hey, it's alright to say that you made a simple mistake you know. It's far more dignified than squirming like that. [emoji106]

What mistake?

[Verbal]

Was it all a dream?

 

Anyway, if this sounds like a good idea, could the mods, or someone who knows how to do this, put up a separate thread and poll so we can have a wholly representative Saintsweb general election?

 

To cover it, voting intentions for the following parties should be included: Labour, Lib Dems, Greens, UKIP (don't want to leave Kipper Tender out in the cold, although I suspect there are more than a few kippers on here), SNP, PC, BNP (this will be interesting), Left Unity (for the one genius who tells others not to vote), plus a party called Spoiled Ballot Paper.

 

One person, one vote and whichever party is first past the post (of 10pm 7 May) wins.

 

Missed anyone?

 

We all have to have voted by the close of the real poll on 7 May (so will need locking then) – and we should be able to see who’s voted for what.

[hutch]

Do we have to be over 18?

[bridge too far]

A lot of recent stuff seems to be missing from this thread!

 

:suspicious:

[badgerx16]

A lot of recent stuff seems to be missing from this thread!

 

:suspicious:

 

This is currently post #5 on the main board 'Weekend's other games' thread :

But but but haven't they helped to get a million billion people back into work? Oh wait, that was mostly part-time and zero hours work? On less than the living wage? And they haven't got rid of the deficit like they promised? Barely even halved it? Or reduced levels of immigration to "tens of thousands" like they said they would? The national debt is WHAT?! How many people had to use food banks last year?!?!

 

Honestly not sure how anyone can sit and defend the Coalition's reign over the last 5 years - it's been a catastrophic failure. Quality of life has suffered, tens of thousands have been shoved over the poverty line by cuts and our public services are stretched so thin that they can't take another 5 years of austerity and spending cuts.

[pap]

Left Unity (for the one genius who tells others not to vote), plus a party called Spoiled Ballot Paper.

 

When your parents spunked out for your education, did they ever imagine they were funding a third rate liar?

 

And if the state paid, do you think that you could be the first legitimate use of retroactive tuition fees?

[Verbal]

When your parents spunked out for your education, did they ever imagine they were funding a third rate liar?

 

And if the state paid, do you think that you could be the first legitimate use of retroactive tuition fees?

 

Honestly, I try to be nice and look what happens. I was simply assuming that your simpering over Brand meant you endorsed his every word.

 

Okay then, how about this?

 

Can we have a choice of Left Unity for the genius (for how could he be anything else?) who thinks that UK voters are all 'morons'?

 

And why did you edit out your being at the Left Unity conference that debated the 'progressive character' of ISIS? That's a source of pride, surely?

[pap]

Honestly, I try to be nice and look what happens. I was simply assuming that your simpering over Brand meant you endorsed his every word.

 

Okay then, how about this?

 

Can we have a choice of Left Unity for the genius (for how could he be anything else?) who thinks that UK voters are all 'morons'?

 

And why did you edit out your being at the Left Unity conference that debated the 'progressive character' of ISIS? That's a source of pride, surely?

 

Well, it's good that you're finally admitting to be a purveyor of strawman slop. Your "simply assuming" has gotten you into a lot of trouble over the years.

 

Simply assuming the worst is what you do.

 

Let's take the way you've twisted my phrase "the moronic British public" into "UK voters are all 'morons'". Now presumably, if I'd said "the stoic British public" or "the heroic British public", I presumably wouldn't be providing you with (heh) "ammunition" for your frequent, unsolicited salvos (obsess, much?).

 

Of course, the non-moronic element of the British public would know that in all cases, I'm referring to a general trait, rather than saying "all x are y". Everyone knows that despite our reputation as a stoic race, we've got a few that'll lose their shít. Same thing with heroic. We've had plenty of our compatriots, past and present, that have put their lives on the line. Plenty of chickenshíts too. Yourself included.

 

So using that fairly reasonable treatment of how broad traits might not apply to the entire British public, let's examine the one about morons. We're an advanced nation, and we've obviously had some thinkers roll up over the ages, but at the same time, we live in a civilisation where people are easily led, mostly by fear of self-interest, and may end up moronically acting against their best interests. This election is a case in point.

 

You're special. You're intelligent enough not to be moron, but have spent the past five years proving that you are one anyway. That is top work. I could make a bunch of simple assumptions about why that is, but that's really your gig. Never forget "Marshall Law"

[Verbal]

So is ISIS a 'progressive' force? Really, I'd like to know. And why do you keep avoiding this issue?

 

And, no, you can't wriggle out of it with this silly, hair-splitting sophistry - you called UK voters 'morons'. That surely has implications for how you'll cleverly use your vote, no? Or will you after all take the Brand way out? As morons we're all looking to you for guidance.

[pap]

So is ISIS a 'progressive' force? Really, I'd like to know. And why do you keep avoiding this issue?

 

And, no, you can't wriggle out of it with this silly, hair-splitting sophistry - you called UK voters 'morons'. That surely has implications for how you'll cleverly use your vote, no? Or will you after all take the Brand way out? As morons we're all looking to you for guidance.

Lordy. You're still going there? I didn't address your point because I don't remember it happening at the LU party conference. The entire thing is up on the Internet, start to finish. You'll have to link the part where that was discussed, proposed and passed as a motion.

 

I think you'll have a hard time, personally. I don't recall anything being discussed on the subject. The one motion we voted for that was even in that ballpark was whether we should (as a party) support arming the Kurds, voted down quite strenuously, as I recall.

 

Produce the goods Verbal. Let's see the bit where LU was praising ISIS. Let's see the part where I say all UK voters are morons. We won't, of course, because you are a moronic liar.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I'm thinking of switching to labour, at least I can sit with the lads when I attend meetings. Who wants silly little women sat next to you nagging whilst you're listening to Harriets hubby going on about empowering women.

 

 

[pap]

I'm thinking of switching to labour, at least I can sit with the lads when I attend meetings. Who wants silly little women sat next to you nagging whilst you're listening to Harriets hubby going on about empowering women.

 

 

The Labour vote is a good idea, Lord D, especially with people that are prone to sudden and complete changes of heart. I remember a few years ago when you used to extol the virtues of those plucky Eastern European people you employed, saying they were much better than English peeps and all that.

 

Who is to say that you are not going to have another complete volte-face, and end up wanting to employ loads of immigrants again instead of sending them all back on the nearest Squeezyjet?

 

Vote Labour for Lord D's inexplicably resurgent Eastern European Army! (of unskilled minimum wage workers).

[Lord Duckhunter]

I'm sure I've been through this before , but as you seem incapable of taking it in I'll try once more. I worked for a big multi national company that had very strict rules around recruitment . These rules were based on employment law. One of these rules was that I , as a manager, had to give any jobs to the best candidates regardless of race, colour , age or sexual persuasion . Had I given these jobs to White British people who were not as qualified as the Poles I took on, I would be sacked and would be breaking the law. They were extremely hard working and pleasant people , a credit to their country and fully justified my choices . There were also HR people present during assessments and interviews ensuring complete and utter compliance with any legislation . However, the simple fact is that some British people didn't get those jobs.

 

Doing what is legally required whilst disagreeing with the law , is in no way " changing my mind" or being two faced . I may think speed limits are too low and want them increased to 100mph on the motorway , does driving around at 70 mean I can't voice that opinion ?

[Wes Tender]

Was it all a dream?

 

Anyway, if this sounds like a good idea, could the mods, or someone who knows how to do this, put up a separate thread and poll so we can have a wholly representative Saintsweb general election?

 

To cover it, voting intentions for the following parties should be included: Labour, Lib Dems, Greens, UKIP (don't want to leave Kipper Tender out in the cold, although I suspect there are more than a few kippers on here), SNP, PC, BNP (this will be interesting), Left Unity (for the one genius who tells others not to vote), plus a party called Spoiled Ballot Paper.

 

One person, one vote and whichever party is first past the post (of 10pm 7 May) wins.

Missed anyone?

 

We all have to have voted by the close of the real poll on 7 May (so will need locking then) – and we should be able to see who’s voted for what.

 

You seem to have forgotten the Conservative Party, although that doesn't surprise me at all. I am touched that you thought of me, but I am edging towards voting Tory again in Eastleigh, as a tactical vote for UKIP might end up letting in the Lib- Dumb Thornton, by splitting the Tory vote. Additionally, despite my support for the two key UKIP policies of a EU referendum and immigration curbs, Cameron is now making the right noises by stating categorically that axeing the referendum is a price that he would not consider in return for support in a coalition.

[pap]

I'm sure I've been through this before , but as you seem incapable of taking it in I'll try once more. I worked for a big multi national company that had very strict rules around recruitment . These rules were based on employment law. One of these rules was that I , as a manager, had to give any jobs to the best candidates regardless of race, colour , age or sexual persuasion . Had I given these jobs to White British people who were not as qualified as the Poles I took on, I would be sacked and would be breaking the law. They were extremely hard working and pleasant people , a credit to their country and fully justified my choices . There were also HR people present during assessments and interviews ensuring complete and utter compliance with any legislation . However, the simple fact is that some British people didn't get those jobs.

 

Doing what is legally required whilst disagreeing with the law , is in no way " changing my mind" or being two faced . I may think speed limits are too low and want them increased to 100mph on the motorway , does driving around at 70 mean I can't voice that opinion ?

To be fair to you, you probably have, and I'm probably a wee bit incapable of taking it all in, but I certainly didn't detect this resigned air of "only following orders, guv" wafting from the posts of the day.

 

You were using the Poles as a stick to beat supposedly feckless British workers with. Besides, it's too bloody delicious not to serve a few times. Eastern European Pokemon Trainer Lord D becomes fierce UKIP advocate. That's what they call a character arc.

[Lord Duckhunter]

You seem to have forgotten the Conservative Party, although that doesn't surprise me at all. I am touched that you thought of me, but I am edging towards voting Tory again in Eastleigh, as a tactical vote for UKIP might end up letting in the Lib- Dumb Thornton, by splitting the Tory vote. Additionally, despite my support for the two key UKIP policies of a EU referendum and immigration curbs, Cameron is now making the right noises by stating categorically that axeing the referendum is a price that he would not consider in return for support in a coalition.

 

Is it a " cast iron guarantee " ? If so, I think we've been there before .

 

It's a con . To get meaningful changes to the eu the change people seem to want , will require treaty change . There is already a law guaranting a referendum in the even of treaty change . Thus proving Cameron is just showboating and will only tinker around the edges , but try and pull the wool over the publics eyes .

[Lord Duckhunter]

To be fair to you, you probably have, and I'm probably a wee bit incapable of taking it all in, but I certainly didn't detect this resigned air of "only following orders, guv" wafting from the posts of the day.

 

You were using the Poles as a stick to beat supposedly feckless British workers with. Besides, it's too bloody delicious not to serve a few times. Eastern European Pokemon Trainer Lord D becomes fierce UKIP advocate. That's what they call a character arc.

 

You do realise that UKIP support immigration , they just want every nationality treated equally . Who does someone who wants to leave the EU, supports Grammar Schools and wants control of our borders decided by west minister , vote for . Labour? I don't think so , however appealing their " all male" section is .

[pap]

Is it a " cast iron guarantee " ? If so, I think we've been there before .

 

It's a con . To get meaningful changes to the eu the change people seem to want , will require treaty change . There is already a law guaranting a referendum in the even of treaty change . Thus proving Cameron is just showboating and will only tinker around the edges , but try and pull the wool over the publics eyes .

The funny thing is that the EU can keep expanding without a treaty change.

 

When countries have unified or absorbed in the past, there has traditionally been some kind of treaty marking the event. The EU can decide to expand without a treaty, and according to the terms of the Maastricht Treaty, no member state can reject expansion.

 

That's a worrying development for any nation trying to manage provision for its citizens, and I think that the EU has been dangerously eager to expand. Not only have we provoked Russia, but we've also made a lot of ethnic Russians, some of them probably as p!ssed off as Putin, EU citizens with the right to live and work anywhere in the Union. Unthinkable thirty years ago, but obviously not a problem now

[whelk]

The funny thing is that the EU can keep expanding without a treaty change.

 

When countries have unified or absorbed in the past, there has traditionally been some kind of treaty marking the event. The EU can decide to expand without a treaty, and according to the terms of the Maastricht Treaty, no member state can reject expansion.

 

That's a worrying development for any nation trying to manage provision for its citizens, and I think that the EU has been dangerously eager to expand. Not only have we provoked Russia, but we've also made a lot of ethnic Russians, some of them probably as p!ssed off as Putin, EU citizens with the right to live and work anywhere in the Union. Unthinkable thirty years ago, but obviously not a problem now

 

I don't know much about the EU working but how come Turkey's application got rejected?' Presumably somebody votes?

[Lord Duckhunter]

I don't know much about the EU working but how come Turkey's application got rejected?' Presumably somebody votes?

 

There is absolutely no chance of Turkey becoming a member whilst there is free movement of people , and as that's a cornerstone of the EUSSR youve more chance of Elvis serving you fish & chips than them joining.

[View From The Top]

Shock horror, who would have guessed.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-tory-election-chief-lynton-crosbys-firm-planned-to-expand-role-of-private-healthcare-in-the-uk-10223112.html