Whatever the result tomorrow, Cameron has to ditch Osborne FAST

MrTomato

nickmason wrote: »

I've just read it as well. When I got to sentences like:

it did occur to me that maybe the wikipedia entry has been got at! And indeed, surprise surprise, there's no such reasoning on the Conservative website.

The link was given.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/07/general-election-2010-georgeosborne

Entertainer

I really don't know what the big deal is about hating on Osborne, what has he actually done that's so much more different than any other politician? Having a shrill voice and being posh (and young)?

chucky

Entertainer wrote: »

I really don't know what the big deal is about hating on Osborne, what has he actually done that's so much more different than any other politician? Having a shrill voice and being posh (and young)?

and making a few more mistakes compared to Darling and Mr Cable

worldtraveller

Entertainer wrote: »

I really don't know what the big deal is about hating on Osborne, what has he actually done that's so much more different than any other politician? Having a shrill voice and being posh (and young)?

Although pretty young and inexperienced, he has a lot of respect in the City & political circles.

Rochdale_Pioneers

What is making me really laugh is that we look likely to replace idiots with idiots. People are tired of Labour and don't like Brown - I get that. They're utterly unconvinced by Cameron and haven't been wowed by an awful contradictory Tory campaign. They were turned on by a bit of Clegg ankle, like Cable and want change, but for some reason are under the impression that the LibDems get 1 seat per 50m votes and are afraid that they will get Brown/Cameron if they vote yellow.

And just to add to the fun we have the money markets - the same traders who crashed the world economy - opening for business at 1am so that they can profit from betting on whether or not we vote for the result they would like.

Personally, I'm going to bed at 10pm tomorrow. The fun and games won't start until Friday afternoon once we get the daytime counts declared.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I'm merely making the point that politicians maybe lack the experience or knowledge to run what is basically a billion pound turnover corporation. Vince Cable is an economist by profession not an accountant.

Often the right people for roles such as chancellor may not have public charisma. As thats not what is required to fufill the job.

The "nanny" state thats been created over recent decades expects the incoming chancellor to wave his (or her) wand. Then the problems will magically disappear. Whereas its Joe Public thats going to have absorb the medicine something all parties have been recitent to say during the campaign.

I get what your saying.


This is one of the reasons I have a problem with the cons.

Cameron hasn't got a clue.......

nickmason

MrTomato wrote: »

The link was given.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/07/general-election-2010-georgeosborne

No - the link that was referenced was:
^ "'Conservative Party News'". http://www.conservatives.com/News/SpeechList.aspx?SearchType=NewsAuthor&SearchTerm=e13c8b46-fe2e-47fb-8efd-ff04f9d95f2e. Retrieved 2009-04-28.

The link that you gave was a reference to:
"During the 2010 general election campaign Osborne is considered to have been sidelined due to his perceived unpopularity and perception as a 'weak link' by both the LibDems and Labour strategists" which seems fair, even if quoting the Guardian is hardly non-partisan.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

What is making me really laugh is that we look likely to replace idiots with idiots.

Sums it up pretty well, although I would of said

we look likely to replace big idiots with bigger idiots.

Entertainer

chucky wrote: »

and making a few more mistakes compared to Darling and Mr Cable

Like what?

chucky

Entertainer wrote: »

Like what?

his call on the banks... his inappropriate comments about sterling which Cameron didn't back