Voting Intentions since the Spending Review

Graham_Devon

Charlton_King wrote: »

So, having read through the thread, I make that a more than adequate drift away from the coalition such as to give Labour a landslide.

Dunno what your reading, but most people seem to have intentions to vote tory or lib dem.

Charlton_King

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Dunno what your reading, but most people seem to have intentions to vote tory or lib dem.

Here's one who won't...

... and enough have said they'll abstain or suchlike so as to ensure a considerable Miliband landslide. Yes, even here in National Socialist stormtrooper central.

I hear very little said in favour of what the LDs have done in the social circles I move in - and these are not rabidly red places. They have become a music hall joke or similar.

bo_drinker

A._Badger wrote: »

They are (almost) all unspeakable liars and morons.

I agree but not said in such a polite manner.......:cool:

kabayiri

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Dunno what your reading, but most people seem to have intentions to vote tory or lib dem.

Yes, that's the impression I got, especially the way the earlier posts started.

It's a bit early to be talking about voting anyway, isn't it?

We all know that in Condems final year they will have squirrelled away enough money to offer some juicy bribes to a gullible electorate with a short memory.

A._Badger

bendix wrote: »

That's why it's always a mistake to vote for a party without principles.

Really? So perhaps you can tell us which of them has any? Or even understands the very concept.

bendix wrote: »

Love them or loathe them, you can at least rely on the Tories to be what it says on the wrapper.

Like Call Me Dave's 'cast iron guarantee' that he would hold a referendum on the EU? Reintroducing the compulsory storage of all electronic communications? Child benefit?

That's where tribal thinking gets you. They lie in your face and yet you still believe them - unable to face the fact that you've been conned again by yet another set of greasy politicians.

Charlton_King

kabayiri wrote: »

Yes, that's the impression I got, especially the way the earlier posts started.

It's a bit early to be talking about voting anyway, isn't it?

We all know that in Condems final year they will have squirrelled away enough money to offer some juicy bribes to a gullible electorate with a short memory.

I doubt that an increase in the personal tax allowance will cut much ice with people who have lost their jobs and houses. I suppose it could make for a good laugh while queuing to sign on, if that's what you mean.

Charlton_King

Oh and by the way - whilst I respect the acronym 'condem', I suspect that the alternative 'Lib con' is beginning to resonate more with the prevailing ethos.

Graham_Devon

Charlton_King wrote: »

Oh and by the way - whilst I respect the acronym 'condem', I suspect that the alternative 'Lib con' is beginning to resonate more with the prevailing ethos.

I doubt it.

And I'm now bored of labour fanatacists in complete denial getting excited over changing words around and coming up with creative names for MP's.

Charlton_King

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I doubt it.

And I'm now bored of labour fanatacists in complete denial getting excited over changing words around and coming up with creative names for MP's.

What the hell's a 'fanatacist'? As a clear, pro-Tory fanatic/fantasist I'm sure you can enlighten us.

'Those who don't agree with our method of solving the problem are 'in denial' of the existence of the problem.'

Yes, right. There's Lib con logic for you. Like the rest of the electorate, I won't swallow that one, thank you very much.

Roll on the forthcoming massacre of the LDs in next year's local elections.

StevieJ

kabayiri wrote: »

We all know that in Condems final year they will have squirrelled away enough money to offer some juicy bribes to a gullible electorate with a short memory.

By 2011