Cons Lost Election 2015 Already Says Telegraph

Moby

PaulF81 wrote: »

Would laugh hard if ukip replace the lib dems and the next coalition (conservative/ukip) is more right wing than the Conservative party currently is. Labour would be dead in the water.
Ironically, Pr would have helped the conservatives in this situation yet they campaigned against it.

Can't really see the attraction of having a party with racist tendencies, (as David Cameron said) having such a large role in our political discourse...it would be quite ugly to watch?

DecentLivingWage

Moby wrote: »

Can't really see the attraction of having a party with racist tendencies, (as David Cameron said) having such a large role in our political discourse...it would be quite ugly to watch?

The irony is in what Clegg is playing at? Surely it cant be complete idiocy to get his party's rating s up by slagging the Cons, then coo cooing with them in high profile CameRonseal moment? oing to be interesting today to see if he's lost the double-figure rating he only just got back and badly craved!

BertieUK

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

So the Bookies Have It? Very thoughtful and analytical piece by Tory Lord Ashcroft says a Cons majority is looking further away than ever, and that the bookies,who stand to risk real cash when deciding-unlike pollsters have made up their minds,or punters have, that Labour will win and they are favourites to win. Lo, he does advise us against betting as (presumably a miracle is not ruled out?)

He called it right over the Corby by-election....

If Lord Ashcroft considers that his party of whom he may be a major donor, is looking further away than ever from winning a next term in office, maybe look at the reasons why they are slipping in that direction and come up with a solution because he is a very clever and wealthy man....as stated...

.....Ashcroft is an extremely powerful man. His net worth may well be equal to Belize's entire GDP. He is nobody to cross....

Many voters do not have the trust that they had in governing figures anymore, more people in the street, where the voters are to be found have access to the internet and can find out a lot about a persons background before deciding whom to vote for, example in Lord Ashcroft who has revealed...

On 1 March 2010, after 10 years of holding his tax status as private, he revealed that he did not pay tax on his overseas earnings in the UK...

When Joe Public reads comments like this they automatically cast doubts about his character which is propably as clear as the drifted snow and doing no wrongs at all.

So I think that more PR is needed all around to earn the peoples trust.

DecentLivingWage

BertieUK wrote: »

If Lord Ashcroft considers that his party of whom he may be a major donor, is looking further away than ever from winning a next term in office, maybe look at the reasons why they are slipping in that direction and come up with a solution because he is a very clever and wealthy man....as stated...

.....Ashcroft is an extremely powerful man. His net worth may well be equal to Belize's entire GDP. He is nobody to cross....

Many voters do not have the trust that they had in governing figures anymore, more people in the street, where the voters are to be found have access to the internet and can find out a lot about a persons background before deciding whom to vote for, example in Lord Ashcroft who has revealed...

On 1 March 2010, after 10 years of holding his tax status as private, he revealed that he did not pay tax on his overseas earnings in the UK...

When Joe Public reads comments like this they automatically cast doubts about his character which is propably as clear as the drifted snow and doing no wrongs at all.

So I think that more PR is needed all around to earn the peoples trust.

Yes, you make a very good point!

Maybe 'waverers' will on General Election 2015 Eve, just use the internet to make a final snap decision! Maybe the Cos should have chosen a less toxic leader - and team? In the old days , people would have had very little info about MPs financial status.

BertieUK

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

Yes, you make a very good point!

Maybe 'waverers' will on General Election 2015 Eve, just use the internet to make a final snap decision! Maybe the Cos should have chosen a less toxic leader - and team? In the old days , people would have had very little info about MPs financial status.

You also have made a good analogy of their major problem at the moment, his followers will deny this, well thats expected but I will say that David Cameron is only connected to his own party followers as is his team.

They do not know how to speak to the populas at ground root level because they are so far up the social ladder that they cannot see the people below them.

robmatic

BertieUK wrote: »

You also have made a good analogy of their major problem at the moment, his followers will deny this, well thats expected but I will say that David Cameron is only connected to his own party followers as is his team.

They do not know how to speak to the populas at ground root level because they are so far up the social ladder that they cannot see the people below them.

Doesn't really matter, Ed Milliband is hardly a working class man of the people, is he?

BertieUK

robmatic wrote: »

Doesn't really matter, Ed Milliband is hardly a working class man of the people, is he?

Well then he is going to change his ways I'm afraid, these people forget that there are millions of us out there and we all have one vote and they have to earn it.

Coming back to the Conservatives for a moment, they should be asking themselves as to why their performance has from gone from a figure in 1955 when it was attracting almost 50% of the electorate to a modest 42% in 1992 and now well your guess is as good as mine.

They are too ready to play the game of tennis and knock the blame in another direction instead of ignoring opposition and getting their heads removed from the clouds and return to earth.

angrypirate

robmatic wrote: »

Doesn't really matter, Ed Milliband is hardly a working class man of the people, is he?

Personally, Ive always found the way Labour talk very patronising. Almost like a champagne socialist style "we know whats best for you". Diane Abbot is the worst of the lot for this.

BertieUK

angrypirate wrote: »

Personally, Ive always found the way Labour talk very patronising. Almost like a champagne socialist style "we know whats best for you". Diane Abbot is the worst of the lot for this.

So we have one which is patronising and one toxic and arrogant, not very impressive is it?