The Election Section: Get Your Crystal Balls Out...

mark55man

CLAPTON wrote: »

truly a Thatcherite child of our times




one is in awe of the finely argued, logical analysis of these complicated issues.

One is forced to admit the pre Gove education was a model of learning and erudition.

Actually as a Thatcherite child of the 80s - it gives me the clarity to know that the Tories will never truly look after the interests of the 99%.

I was taking the numbers game to show its not all about the numbers.

As for Gove - doesnt everyone judge his performance by the choas in today's schools with free schools run by special interests employing unqualified teachers

As for IDS - Atos' spineless hiding behind his attack on the vulnerable, the appalling implementation of the UC approach - he's so hopeless its no surprise he had avoided the majority of hustings

And Clegg - I have never considered the LD's to be reliable in any respect except looking after their own interests.

Like I said, a fool, a !!!!!! and a lying bustard

How many levels down the political debate do you want me to go?
* the 500m extra debt that the Tories have added to our pile
* the flawed privatisation of the Royal Mail
* the education and university fees debacle
* the entirely wrong headed approach to immigration and the benefit it is and has always brought to UK
* the reversal in a single parliament of hard won improvements in the NHS
* the almost single handed marginalisation from Westminster of the whole of Scotland who voted to be part of the union and are now Pariah's - how is that going to work out for everyone then

CLAPTON

mark88man wrote: »

Actually as a Thatcherite child of the 80s - it gives me the clarity to know that the Tories will never truly look after the interests of the 99%.

I was taking the numbers game to show its not all about the numbers.

As for Gove - doesnt everyone judge his performance by the choas in today's schools with free schools run by special interests employing unqualified teachers

As for IDS - Atos' spineless hiding behind his attack on the vulnerable, the appalling implementation of the UC approach - he's so hopeless its no surprise he had avoided the majority of hustings

And Clegg - I have never considered the LD's to be reliable in any respect except looking after their own interests.

Like I said, a fool, a !!!!!! and a lying bustard

How many levels down the political debate do you want me to go?
* the 500m extra debt that the Tories have added to our pile
* the flawed privatisation of the Royal Mail
* the education and university fees debacle
* the entirely wrong headed approach to immigration and the benefit it is and has always brought to UK
* the reversal in a single parliament of hard won improvements in the NHS
* the almost single handed marginalisation from Westminster of the whole of Scotland who voted to be part of the union and are now Pariah's - how is that going to work out for everyone then

I'm not sure there is any party that looks after the interests of the 99%.

Some of our finest schools, producing some of our best educated young people, are staffed by excellent graduate specialists who are 'unqualified'.

The discouragement of a no work culture is an excellent objective. Your wish to encourage people to do no work, drink lager all day, engage in petty crime, become obese is of no assistance to poor people.

OK you don't like Clegg.

-no idea where 500 million comes from : clearly you don't like numbers
-the Royal Mail seems to be improving all the time
-I'm unaware of any Uni fees 'debacle' : clearly the principle of not subsidising the rich is an excellent one and welcome further fees increase so Uni education isn't subsidised by the poorest people.
-OK you welcome the increasing dependence of imports for our food supply, rejoice in our increasing imports of oil, gas and other essentials, love ever higher house prices and falling standards of housing, welcome the extra pressure on the HNS general, love the extra overcrowding of our transport system, love the low wages due to flood of cheap labour
-I too think that the extra demand on the NHS are unwelcome and a reduction in the 500,000 new people arriving each year would surely help. Modest payments at the point of use would discourage the non essential and wasteful use.
- the Barnett formula has long be a disgrace to UK democracy.
Whether Scotland wishes to remain the the union is up to the people of Scotland : whether they should continue to be unfairly subsidised by the people of England should be up the the people of England.
We need a English referendum asap on the issue.
Parliamentary democracy shouldn't provide the SNP with any privileges different to any other political party nor should it provide the people of Scotland any greater privileges than the people of NI, Wales and England.

kinger101

mark88man wrote: »

How many levels down the political debate do you want me to go?
* the 500m extra debt that the Tories have added to our pile

I think it's more like 500B. It would have been more under Labour. You know that.

* the flawed privatisation of the Royal Mail

Agreed. Can we get Labour to agree to renationalize Royal Mail. And the trains.

* the education and university fees debacle

We'll never have free university education if we insist on sending half the population there. I'm not sure Labour were offering anything more affordable. What's wrong with sending the best say 20% of the population, and paying for out of general taxation. University isn't the best education for everyone, and shouldn't be treated as a right of passage.

* the entirely wrong headed approach to immigration and the benefit it is and has always brought to UK

I think you are confusing them with UKIP. I'm in the position of hiring people at the moment, and I know it's fairly simple for me to select an applicant from anywhere on the planet.

* the reversal in a single parliament of hard won improvements in the NHS

Some of the stuff was okay (more frontline staff, fewer suits), but much of it was pointless. Both parties endlessly mess around with the NHS while making minimal improvements. We've covered Blair's PFI fiasco already.

* the almost single handed marginalisation from Westminster of the whole of Scotland who voted to be part of the union and are now Pariah's - how is that going to work out for everyone then

The Tories have not lost Scotland. They never had it. The SNP have taken Labour votes. And it is Labour leader who has refused to deal with them. To his credit I think; the SNP are batsh.t crazy.

MABLE

Hopefully if the Labour party do gain power they will not do a Viv Nicholson on us and spend, spend, spend.

.string.

Edit I see this crossed over with Generali's post, but never mind. It's worth repeating.

BobQ wrote: »

In discussing the issue of which grouping will have the confidence of Parliament, much has been made of the fact that Sinn Fein never attend the Commons.

Have their been any statements recently to confirm the position as it is not in their manifesto. Could it be that they would attend if it made a difference?

In theory, but have they taken the vote of allegiance, which is

""I...do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors according to law".

Come to that, can all (potential) SNP MPs take that oath and mean it? What would happen were the republican Sturgeon to commands them to vote in a way which undermines the Monarchy?

patman99

My prediction -
On 8th May, we will be governed by a Govt. elected by a minority and rejected by a majority (who could not be bothered to vote).

At the end of the day, none of the Parties standing have a real clue how to solve the issue of just how to balance the books.

When you take a look, Britain only has the income from Taxes to fund it's expenditure. Unfortuanately, it costs more to run the country than the govt. gets in Taxes.
Reducing staffing levels in govt. departments may seem a good idea, but in reality the people they get shot of either claim their civil service pensions, or claim JSA. So end-up still costing the Tax payer.

The way forward is for the Govt. to start investing in companies that make nice profits.

purch

I'm still going for a Grand Coalition with Dave as PM, and Caroline Lucas asking the questions at PMQ's

antrobus

kinger101 wrote: »

The Tories have not lost Scotland. They never had it. ....

Yes they did. The Conservatives won just over 50% of the vote in Scotland in 1955 and won 36 out of the 71 seats available. Things went a bit downhill afterwards, especially after 1983, and they eventually got a big fat zero in 1997.

kinger101 wrote: »

...The SNP have taken Labour votes. And it is Labour leader who has refused to deal with them. To his credit I think; the SNP are batsh.t crazy.

Maybe so, but that won't get him his votes back.:)

padington

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Financial illiteracy is thinking the country can afford to pay benefits to anyone on 70K a year.

Or anyone on 45K for that matter, but I guess the line had to be drawn somewhere.

I've always thought it was financial illiteracy subsidising children through child benefits and then having to endure the expense of educating them when we can have as many new well educated people through immigration as we want.

Shakethedisease

BobQ wrote: »

I think the Fixed Term Parliament Act will prevent that. Under what circumstances can you see no grouping being able to survive a vote of confidence?

Miliband saying he won't walk through the doors of No 10 if it means support from the SNP/Plaid. Very loudly and on national tv. And if Cameron gets more seats/bigger share of the vote. Whether Miliband meant it 'quite that way' is a different matter. He's now reiterated it several times, and Jim Murphy with his months of 'biggest party gets to from the government' to Scots voters. Both will be played on loop to the UK public for the next few weeks if Miliband gets less in the way of seats than Cameron.

Miliband has completely delegitimised any government that relies on SNP votes to gain power, especially if it has less in the way of seats. So if Tories get more seats. They'll remain in power until a Queens speech 27th May. The SNP will vote against a Tory one as stated. Labour may prefer to ditch Miliband and risk another election in October rather than pass their own Queens Speech with SNP/Plaid/Greens support...( the media will be going into overdrive about how Labour shouldn't take power as they 'didn't win' and the SNP shouldn't be allowed blah blah ).. So if Labour and Tories both vote and pass a specific 'no confidence vote in the house' there will be another election.

A second election has already been planned for by the Tories. They've been keeping donations back in preparation, it was reported in the press a month or so ago. And Nick Clegg was talking this morning about 'more radical devolution' to Scotland, Wales and NI and 'grown up coversations'. He's backing the Tories 100% with the 'who gets most seats' line and has been for weeks also. It's all been planned, hence all the 'SNP not legitimate' stuff being hammered so hard recently. Though am not sure how the 6 SNP's who've been at Westminster for the last five years representing their constituents feel about suddenly becoming illegitimate MP's.

Miliband, in effect, in being so emphatic over no deals with the SNP ( without stating he meant coalition or confidence and supply ) may have just gifted the Tories No 10 through another election in October with Boris in charge. Stitched up good and proper. That's why the Tories are planning a 'George Bush' on Friday if they get more seats ( claiming victory while things are uncertain in order to make things even more difficult for Labour ).

SENIOR Labour figures are privately discussing a strategy for a second general election later this year.


Scotland on Sunday has learned that party officials are looking at a second vote, which one MP described as a “very likely scenario”, in the wake of Ed Miliband’s confirmation last week that he would not form a Labour government if it required a deal with SNP MPs. They believe the only way to avoid a second election is if Labour can somehow emerge as the largest party and form a minority government.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/labour-gets-ready-for-second-2015-general-election-1-3761692

And this article is a good read also.

In a move slammed in an email to openDemocracy from Graham Allen, chair of the Constitutional Reform Select Committee, as 'an affront to the electors', David Cameron has postponed the return of Parliament until the 18th of May. This leaves even more time for a right royal stitch up, with grappling between leaders over a request from the Queen to form a government. Without a proper constitution, and without Westminster meeting for 11 days, it’s not just the parliamentary maths that matters, though it does. There will also be, in the immediate hours after the election, an important question around the ‘mood of the nation’. And that will be defined, at least to some extent, by the front pages of the newspapers.
It seems they are going to do this in two ways. The first is that they get to set the goalposts and define what it means to ‘win’. The second is what’s on display at the moment across the press — an attempt to delegitimise any partnership between Labour and the SNP...


....However, this is not how the Tory press will interpret the election. If they can possibly get away with it, they will find any way they can to declare Cameron the winner, even if it’s going to be almost impossible for him to command a parliamentary majority. In doing so, they will seek to make it impossible for Miliband to govern.

https://opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/adam-ramsay/newspapers-are-preparing-for-coup-and-labour-is-doing-nothing-to-stop-them

* this is only my own opinion. And yes, it does depend how Miliband handles the inevitable bad press if Tories get more seats. Confidence of the house is how things work, not more seats. But, well, we all know how the press will play it.. There's always the fact that Labour could get more seats anyway, polls are so close. Interesting times. But when I saw Tim Shipman's tweet last night the above article immediately came to mind.