Why the Tories Won

Generali

antrobus wrote: »

There is the Salisbury Convention, - the Lords will not block any legislation that is based on a manifesto commitment. But that is an 'understanding' rather than satute.

The Parliament Acts only allow the Lords to delay legislation for a year. After which the Commons can just cite the Parliament Acts and pass the bill into law anyway.

OT I know but to what level did you study history or are you self taught?

Enterprise_1701C

Facts, Conservatives won, Labour lost, LibDem were squashed and SNP won Scotland.

My Opinions?

Conservatives won because people actually trust them with the Economy and believe they will not kowtow to Europe.

Labour lost because people DO NOT trust them with the economy, because Blair opened the floodgates of immigration "to rub the middle classes noses in it" and hence ruined the economy, most of these immigrants have greater need of the NHS and hence ruined the NHS, and SNP thought they could be the tail that wagged the dog.

SNP got in on a wave of nationalism, once the people that voted for them actually realise the reason behind her not answering questions properly is because she had no answer they will go back to their roots. Of course if they are handed FFA and suddenly realise they have no money, no free prescriptions paid for by the rest of us, no free uni paid for by the rest of us (and the fees for England were voted for by Scottish MPs in Westminster), this will make them realise they need real representation in Westminster.

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

you mean like the phase 'reducing austerity' should be banned and replaced with more open and honest 'increasing borrowing without limits'

Change the wording by all means, however I do not think that it translates as 'increasing borrowing without limits'

I understand the SNP was very clear about setting out the £140 Billion programme for delivery on a UK-wide basis over the course of the parliament.

So stop spinning bullsh!t and truly be open and honest

IveSeenTheLight

antrobus wrote: »

All you are doing is quoting from the Labour Party Activist Bumper Book of Excuses for Losing an Election.

Is it, I didn't realise that.

I'm just voicing how I as an individual think all of politics would be better going forward.

P.S. I have repeatedly said that Labour lost the election

IveSeenTheLight

nic_c wrote: »

It was an effective strategy though, and probably pushed Cameron into a majority. Nicola pushing Ed on the post-election relationship and Alex joking, did help the SNP, but it also helped the tories south of the border


Its not the reality, but the perception that matters. Analysing the last coalition the Lib Dems will point to issues they put in, but in reality its more which of their policies Cameron was fine with adopting. Even though we had just had 5 years of coalition the perception of a post 2015 coalition would be that the minority parties would wield the power, labour would be held to ransom by the SNP and the tories would be held to ransom by UKIP. There wasn't rational talk of what actual power they would wield, so the fear drove people to vote tory

Totally agree with your post, however I'm pressing that perception should not be acceptable and clarification and details should prevail

antrobus

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Is it, I didn't realise that.

I'm just voicing how I as an individual think all of politics would be better going forward.

P.S. I have repeatedly said that Labour lost the election

Yup.:)

Of course, the Labour Party Activist Bumper Book of Excuses for Losing an Election has been rather neglected of late, largely due to that fellow Blair's ability not to lose elections. But, as you can see, it still has its uses.

The usual thing is to blame a combination of a biased media and evil Tory Jedi mind tricks for distracting the electorate from the 'real issues'.:)

Rinoa

Interesting insight into the last hours at Labour HQ on election night.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9528312/inside-the-milibunker-the-last-days-of-ed-did-ed-miliband-sacrifice-ed-balls/

Apparently Ed was writing his victory speech when the exit poll was released. :rotfl:

Moby

Are voters in London less aspirational than the UK average? London voted heavily for Labour. Are young voters (aged 18-44) less aspirational than the UK average? Young people voted heavily for Labour, and middle-aged people tended to favour Labour. Only the over-65s voted heavily for the Tories. Based on the evidence from the Ashcroft poll, Labour polled well among “aspirational” age groups and hard-working families. The easiest way for Labour to win is to gain votes in the south of England (outside London) and among pensioners. The policy most likely to achieve this is probably a promise to increase NHS funding, so that no local hospitals will have to close in southern towns, and GP surgeries will be able to provide appointments on the day. Renationalising the railways might also gain votes for Labour in the south-west and among commuters in the south-east.
Labour doesn’t need to move to the right. As the Lib Dems have just found out, being Tory-ish or Tory-lite is not a route to electoral success.
Things will change and people like me will make sure the tories don't achieve what they want to achieve. It's a war of attrition that will go on and on. At least Miliband achieved one thing in the campaign.... he forced Cameron to make pledges he didn't want to make and the point of a Labour/SNP/UKIP/LIBDEM opposition is to hold them to the letter of their promises and expose the credibility gap between what they promised and what they'll deliver! For instance it's going to be very interesting to see what concessions Cameron brings back from Europe for the referendum and how this plays out....I mean is he going to recommend staying in or not and how will he keep his headbangers onside? The opposition are united on this issue within their own parties.

chewmylegoff

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

All I'm asking for is to campaign based on facts.

Let's pass legislation that "accounts" for exactly what is manifestoed.

That way a true debate can be held with a deeper understanding.

It's far too much soundbite and negative campaining without any measure in my opinion.

Which parties campaigned in such a way? Are you suggesting that the SNP did not engage in any negative campaigning and that everything they said or did was entirely based on independently verified facts?

Moby

Rinoa wrote: »

Interesting insight into the last hours at Labour HQ on election night.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9528312/inside-the-milibunker-the-last-days-of-ed-did-ed-miliband-sacrifice-ed-balls/

Apparently Ed was writing his victory speech when the exit poll was released. :rotfl:

Thanks for that and then I saw who wrote it....... son of Glenda......Dan Hodges!:rotfl:
You do know of course that this guy loathes Ed Miliband. He left the Labour Party and GMB Union in the wake of Ed stabbing David in the back. He was invited to join the Torygraph and has been writing numerous character assassination hack jobs in that rag ever since to work out his vitriol.