We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Why the Tories Won
Comments
-
Sturgeon said she would "force Labour's hand". Have you got that yet?
I do not disagree with that and I'm sure at some votes the SNP would have been able to force some amendments in policies.
Not all though, not the controlling part of the minority government
The SNP had experience of a minority government and knew what it would take to succeed.
The SNP had to work with the other parties between 2007 and 2011 as a minority government to get legislation through so knew that with a large contingent SNP and a minority Labour government, she would have a certain amount of influence.
She could not force things like Trident, as a minority Labour government would have gained support from the Conservatives to get that through, but it didn;t stop the Conservatives blatently scaremongering to the opposite effect though.
The SNP would have had a certain amount of persuasion in a minority government. SNP probably over played it, but the Conservatives definately overplayed it and was bolstered by the magnitude of the English population as compared to the Scottish populationActually it was more like 37%. I am sure that there are people prepared to argue that it would have been 'better' if the result had been different. But that doesn't change the result.
I agree, it does not change the result, however we were discussing the merits of the political posturing prior to knowing the result and going by the polls as the best indicator.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »The SNP would NEVER had called the shots. That is clear exaggeration and scaremongering.
Again, political posturing, classic scaremongering and downright lies.
Yes you are correct.
Nicola was very very stupid to say those things, and by doing so she won the election for David Cameron.
The English will never take kindly to someone who isn't even standing for election to Parliament telling them that she will be calling the shots.'In nature, there are neither rewards nor punishments - there are Consequences.'0 -
Yes you are correct.
Nicola was very very stupid to say those things, and by doing so she won the election for David Cameron.
The English will never take kindly to someone who isn't even standing for election to Parliament telling them that she will be calling the shots.
Please show a link where Nicola said she would be "Calling the shots". That was the conservatives I believe.
Forcing a hand is a figure of speech with regards to persuading, just as her hand was was forced in the Scottish minority government by the other parties.
Same as Clegg was not calling the Shots in the coalition, but we was able to make some minor adjustments to policy:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »
Sorry, I watched the clip and didn't see here say anything of the sorts:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »
Be wary of journalism.
"Changing the direction" is not "calling the shots"
"I can help Labour be bolder" is not "calling the shots"
"The reality is this, If on May the 8th, there are more anti Tory MP's in the House of Commons than Tory MP's, then if we work together, we can lock David Cameron out of Downing Street." Is not "Calling the Shots" or indeed only the "SNP will lock the Tories out of government":wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
OK, I'll keep hunting for the relevant video or transcript.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Please show a link where Nicola said she would be "Calling the shots". That was the conservatives I believe.
You seem incredibly desperate to deny that Sturgeon did or said anything that might have altered voting patterns.
Unfortunately you are wrong.
Certainly the Conservatives used her words against her, but it was what she said, and the way that she said it that caused the most offense to English voters.
I have spoken to many people in England who are of that opinion, and I know a good many who voted Conservative because of what she said.'In nature, there are neither rewards nor punishments - there are Consequences.'0 -
You seem incredibly desperate to deny that Sturgeon did or said anything that might have altered voting patterns.
Unfortunately you are wrong.
Certainly the Conservatives used her words against her, but it was what she said, and the way that she said it that caused the most offense to English voters.
I have spoken to many people in England who are of that opinion, and I know a good many who voted Conservative because of what she said.
Asking people to verify their statements is not desperation.
If she said she would be "calling the shots", then I would condemn it as well.
As it stands, it looks like careful manipulation and political posturing to emphasize the scaremongering
The videos in a few posts above were very telling
You believe it was her words, so please show them"Changing the direction" is not "calling the shots"
"I can help Labour be bolder" is not "calling the shots"
"The reality is this, If on May the 8th, there are more anti Tory MP's in the House of Commons than Tory MP's, then if we work together, we can lock David Cameron out of Downing Street." Is not "Calling the Shots" or indeed only the "SNP will lock the Tories out of government"
It only strengthens my point that Labour (moreso Ed) were extremely weak this campaign.
I'd also add maybe a good example of not taking the media at face value, always dig behind what was said as to what was truly said.
It reminds me of Drop The Dead Donkey program which was a satirical comedy and emphasized how the media manipulated events to sensationalise the story to the point it was beyond what was actually said and meant:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards