Dan Hodges on why Labour will probably loose the election.

toby3000

Generali wrote: »

Do you honestly believe that Tories would vote UKIP at a General Election and risk getting a Labour Government? It's a ridiculous idea IMO.

They'll do it in the European elections next year and the usual halfwits will get excited about how UKIP has got ~30% of the vote. When it comes to the General election people vote for leaders not to make a point.

Logically I'd agree with you, but they seemingly ARE willing to vote for them in by-elections. I know that they're not the same as a General Election, but I still find it surprising.

But I agree that UKIPs share if the vote will be much lower in 2015. It just depends on the spread I guess. The real unknown is former Lib-Dem 'protest' voters. I'm sure there was a piece somewhere that said that significant number of UKIP voters had previously voted Lib Dem, which shows it had nothing to do with policy and everything to do with 'protest'.

Moby

Generali wrote: »

It's funny how often pedantry of this sort contains an error. You seem to like to play the man rather than the ball which is a shame. IMHO it shows the paucity of your argument.

Some people are easily pleased I see! Did you see the Hodges interview.....I mean the whole thing? Conrad selectively quoted from it. IMHO I therefore think you are doing what you accuse me of.

Generali

Moby wrote: »

Some people are easily pleased I see!

You're the one calling people on this stuff. I'm just calling you because I like to call grammar pedants on their mistakes.

Moby wrote: »

Did you see the Hodges interview.....I mean the whole thing? Conrad selectively quoted from it. IMHO I therefore think you are doing what you accuse me of.

Nope. I've seen none of it.

NB the word therefore is superfluous in your sentence and ending a sentence with a preposition is dodgy at best.:eek:

seven-day-weekend

woodbine wrote: »

if you look at recent election history you learn a number of important things
the tories missed an open goal in 2010,and to move forward to a majority govt they needed 4% more than last time,something no other party in govt has acheived EVER

the tories have no gone 21 years since they last won an election(and then only narrowly)

of the 4 million votes the lib dems seem to have lost it now looks like 3 million of them will go to labour
the right of uk politics are divided at a time when the left are united

the tories in recent opinion polls are almost at rock bottom(25-28%)the numbers that will always vote for them

ukip will take votes from the tories costing them some marginal seats

add all that up and there can only be one winner

And who might that be, if we somehow manage to get Miliband as PM?:eek:

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

Do you honestly believe that Tories would vote UKIP at a General Election and risk getting a Labour Government? It's a ridiculous idea IMO.

They'll do it in the European elections next year and the usual halfwits will get excited about how UKIP has got ~30% of the vote. When it comes to the General election people vote for leaders not to make a point.

A sizable UKIP presence in Brussels is worth voting for. As its European level politics are a different matter to domestic ones. The waste of money in the EU is enormous.

Moby

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A sizable UKIP presence in Brussels is worth voting for. As its European level politics are a different matter to domestic ones. The waste of money in the EU is enormous.

....but they are full of xenophobes! That's hardly going to help us in the corridors of power in Europe?

Generali

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A sizable UKIP presence in Brussels is worth voting for. As its European level politics are a different matter to domestic ones. The waste of money in the EU is enormous.

Perhaps. Clearly if many countries sent a large number of anti-EU politicians to the European Parliament then something would have to change. I suspect that something would be powers being removed from the parliament until voters voted correctly. There is form there.

In a General Election there is no point in voting UKIP if you really want a Tory or Labour Government so people won't vote UKIP at that point I think.

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

Perhaps. Clearly if many countries sent a large number of anti-EU politicians to the European Parliament then something would have to change. I suspect that something would be powers being removed from the parliament until voters voted correctly. There is form there.

In a General Election there is no point in voting UKIP if you really want a Tory or Labour Government so people won't vote UKIP at that point I think.

Form on that one as well, think LibDem at the last election.

Devon_Sailor

BobQ wrote: »

Cameron's policies are not working and ordinarily the austerity and the divisiveness that Cameron is inflicting (by emulating his late hero and indeed trying to take out the NHS too) should do for him. But Labour lacks imagination and policy as Hodges said.

QUOTE]

Bob,

The Thatcher government actually provided a boost to the NHS, ending the previous four years of Labour rule that tightened real terms spending to its lowest ebb for nearly 40 years.

http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/data-and-charts/history-nhs-spending-uk

You can also see that real terms spending increased throughout the Conservative years in office (despite all the propaganda that has entered the collective psyche that they were cutting faster than a logger in the Amazon!). Also, the years 1989-93 saw the sharpest rise in spending (both real terms AND as a % of GDP) in the organisations history up until that point.

Regards,

D_S

Moby

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

BobQ wrote: »

Cameron's policies are not working and ordinarily the austerity and the divisiveness that Cameron is inflicting (by emulating his late hero and indeed trying to take out the NHS too) should do for him. But Labour lacks imagination and policy as Hodges said.

QUOTE]

Bob,

The Thatcher government actually provided a boost to the NHS, ending the previous four years of Labour rule that tightened real terms spending to its lowest ebb for nearly 40 years.

http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/data-and-charts/history-nhs-spending-uk

You can also see that real terms spending increased throughout the Conservative years in office (despite all the propaganda that has entered the collective psyche that they were cutting faster than a logger in the Amazon!). Also, the years 1989-93 saw the sharpest rise in spending (both real terms AND as a % of GDP) in the organisations history up until that point.

Regards,

D_S

Devon,
So why did the Blair Govmt have to spend shed loads of money on hospitals and schools...especially on the buildings...to say nothing of reducing the waiting lists?