[Archived] Election

[den]

Can someone tell me what's so bad about the Tories?

Only one rule, no reference to Maggie Thatcher or the last Tory Government (which hasn't been in power for 13 years and had completely different people in it) and no reference to Cameron being 'posh' (which is just pathetic prejudice that would be allowed the other way around IMO).

BTW I'm not a tory boy and not sure who I'll vote for yet...it's just annoys me when people slag off the tories based on nothing more than the fact you're supposed to hate them right?

Better ask someone who votes Tory. Ask them to define "Conservatism" and explain how lower taxation benefits the majority. Conservatism is based on lower taxes -usually meaning less public services and people supporting themselves more - and of course "conserving" what you already have. Ask them to explain what happens to those who don't have much to conserve.

- and that isn't a judgement, just an attempt at an explanation.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

The Lib Dems and Labour should have formed a new party together. "Anybody but the Tories".

I'm pleased that the Lib Dems are getting some good publicity out of the TV debates. I just hope that it has more damaging effects to the Tories than it does Labour.

Silly myopic post , which currently summarises engendered leftist teachings in our college’s and universities which has spread amongst certain sectors of our population. When will the old-guard socialists get it- “New Labour are a centre-right party; Old Labour died with the abolition of clause four.

As pointed out several times; Labour has done nothing for the working classes- it is not interested. It courts the Bourgeoisie, and the work-shy.

Can you please enlighten me of what it is that drives you to make this point ( If you mention Thatcher; I will talk about the Winter of Discontent and the IMF). LABOUR HAS BEEN IN POWER FOR 13 YEARS- you can’t blame the conservatives for the numerous failing of the current administration.

[Ewood and I Would]

den I think you've read way too much into the names of the Parties there mate.

By your logic Labour would make me work harder (or put me in the state of childbirth) and the existence of the Liberal Democrats must mean the Lab/Con parties are right-wing dictators...

[den]

den I think you've read way too much into the names of the Parties there mate.

I don't think so Ewood. That's what the bottom line is.

Anyway, to me, the provision of Cancer drugs is the most important question. Cameron touched on it in the televised debate, but what were his words worth? No detail whatsoever behind that, sounds like opportunism to me.

One things for sure, my MP for wont be getting my vote this time round.

[Ewood and I Would]

Anyway, to me, the provision of Cancer drugs is the most important question. Cameron touched on it in the televised debate, but what were his words worth? No detail whatsoever behind that, sounds like opportunism to me.

Yeah that's a good point and it does worry me that the Conservatives seem to shy away when confronted with the issue. However, it has been under the Labour government that I hear almost monthly about some poor sod that isn't be given their drugs or denied access to them.

They did say they would protect 'frontline services' which is close as you're gonna get for any detail to be honest.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

If you knew anything about a Software Engineering degree then you'd know that, in no way, shape, or form, do they teach old-guard socialism, nor any other form of politics. Nor do the lecturers slip in any influential comments regarding where you should be standing in the political spectrum. Unbelievably, it's just plain old computer science - software languages, databases, data structures, algorithms, and so on. Political brain-washing at university is a complete myth. It genuinely has no bearing on which way you vote or where you stand on the political spectrum.

Labour, no wait, "New" Labour, are a centre-left party. That is a fact, bazza. You can't seriously say they have done nothing for the working class. Remind me when the national minimum wage was brought in. Remind me which party has pumped the most money, proportional to inflation, into the NHS. Remind me who created all these "p*ss-take public sector jobs" that people talk about. As far as my instincts tell me, although they're far from a socialist party, they still see to the working class. Think of all the rights that employees have these days. I don't think this is down to natural causes.

In all honesty bazza, Thatcher is before my time so I can't really pass judgement. You have the group who resent her and will be dancing on her grave when she goes for ruining working-class jobs, and then you have the group that admire her for standing by what she believes in under massive scrutiny (quite possibly the majority of the country - though only in hindsight). I can only go-off my own experiences so far and weigh up if the grass is greener on the other side. Although I'm worried about pensions, I've been relatively happy with my life in this country thus far - job security, education, health services - for me (and for pretty much everyone), all life necesseties... and all have been top notch by my own experiences. It's not all down to the Government but they have made the provisions and facilities available to me and, by my own choice, I've made full use of them.

Throughout the whole of your current post there is nothing to substantiate your bias against the conservatives. As for your theoretical argument “New Labour” initially marketed itself as a centre-left party; whilst in reality it is further right than the conservatives on several issues , most notably on its policy of detaining terror suspects.

The hallmarks of a centre-left party is not to cosy up to Neo-cons in America and Zionists in Israel.

Additionally, there is very little to corroborate your other point, that Labour is the champion of the working classes. Most research would indeed indicate that the gap between the Rich and Poor has widened since Labour came into power; and to take the words out of the well known Bolshevik Jim Mrk II “ The Rich have done well out of Labour”

[broadsword]

How can you say that a party's position is a fact, it's not something that's specifically measurable.

Whether they've done anything for the working man or not, their support for the City, PFI, going to war suggests to me that they're right, and not left.

[Ewood and I Would]

It's funny that people say Labour help 'the working man'. As far as I can see it's the non-working (but could) man that gets the benefits (literally)....

I'm in the position where I work full time for a reletavively low wage and have no kids. I can honestly say Labour have done nothing for me.

Please don't mention the minimum wage, it's so low (that's if you even qualify) that any business hwo offered less wouldn't get any applicants anyway. I am currently temping for £8 an hour which in Oxford is pretty much the lowest you can earn so the mimimum wage does nothing for me. Here's the detail of mimimum wage....

* £5.80 per hour for workers aged 22 years and older

* a development rate of £4.83 per hour for workers aged 18-21 inclusive

* £3.57 per hour for all workers under the age of 18, who are no longer of compulsory school age

So basically Labour don't help at all if you're under 22 pretty much and even if you do qualify for the massive £5.80 an hour, the kind of jobs that offer that rate are the ones that foreigners mostly do anyway (i.e strawberry picking etc) because Labour keep talling us 'British workers don't want these kinds of jobs'.

Now if the mimimum wage was a system whereby you couldn't earn less than X percent of the MD's salary then I'd see how Labour are for the working man but to me the mimimum wage is nothing more than tokenism to show they're 'for the people'.

[philipl]

The Big Society idea is straight out of the California handbook of how to completely screw up the governance and public finances of the wealthiest state in he world.

Cameron has made this up on the hoof to try to appeal to the centre and simply has insufficient credibility to put policies like this over. The fact no opponents have deigned to take him on over the Big Society is an indicator that private polling is showing that Big Society is passing the public by and the best way to react is to treat it as an irrelevance.

Yes there is a role for far me citizen empowerment and local democracy but not in the half-baked semi-tea party way Cameron is wittering about.

Incidentally, seems that only Cameron is talking about Big Society- none of the other Tories are as far as I can follow these things.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Perhaps this exclusive interview in the Independant tomorrow might make people think about where to put their cross on May the 6th. Brown is deeply unpopular all the leadership polling shows that, knowing that he will get in if the core voters stay with their parties and the swing voters stick with the Lib Dem’s might make people step back and think.

Source: http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/8133/front_pages_21st_april_2010.html

[thenodrog]

Why? It is a free country and people vote for the party that offers them the best future. For me Labour offers a lot more job security than Tory.

Me to. A drastically weak £ means lots of bunce for some manufacturing / production industries. Sh!t for the rest of the country though but so what? It's surely been strong long enough for people to have squirreled some bundle away for a rainy day.... or is that not how it works nowadays?

The Lib Dems and Labour should have formed a new party together. "Anybody but the Tories".

I'm pleased that the Lib Dems are getting some good publicity out of the TV debates. I just hope that it has more damaging effects to the Tories than it does Labour.

Very illogical..... unless you will benefit from a screwed up economy too.

Can someone tell me what's so bad about the Tories?

Only one rule, no reference to Maggie Thatcher or the last Tory Government (which hasn't been in power for 13 years and had completely different people in it) and no reference to Cameron being 'posh' (which is just pathetic prejudice that would be allowed the other way around IMO).

BTW I'm not a tory boy and not sure who I'll vote for yet...it's just annoys me when people slag off the tories based on nothing more than the fact you're supposed to hate them right?

No it's simply cos their Dad did. Simple.

[Ewood and I Would]

No it's simply cos their Dad did. Simple.

Exactly, that's why I appreciate posts like philipl's last post as he is at least attacking a current Torry policy he doesn't like. All this 'remember the Thatcher government' and 'Ohhh Cameron went to Eaton therefore he must hate working class people' stuff is just pathetic IMO.

[colin]

I must admit, I have no idea what you're on about there.

UKIP want to introduce bicycle parking charges

The "wibble wibble" etc you can look on a search engine thing

[Ewood and I Would]

El Tombo why do I feel your one of the people with a pointless middle management jobs getting overpaid for doing very little at some local council?

I work in the Public Sector, but recently came from the Private Sector, so I'm at threat too but I'm also intelligent enough to admit that there are massive cuts you can make in the public sector without affecting service one iota.

Where I work, you have temps like me doing all the actual work whilst there are various managers on huge salaries, most of whom I couldn't tell you what exactly they are responsible for. I have two friends that work at the local hospital and talk to them about whether efficiency savings (you use the work 'cuts' which is innaccurate IMO) could be made in the NHS. The answer would be yes, and then you get a rant about how many consultants (non-medical that is) there are on massive wages are hired by the NHS and how much they pay to agencies for outsourcing Nurses and Doctors.

The most ridiculous thing I ever heard though was when a hard drive went down on a hospital PC and instead of just being able to phone OcUK and get a replcement for £60, they were contractually obliged to get in from Germany for something £800.

El Tombo your fears would hold water if I believed the NHS was an efficient organisation where every pound is spent well. I am 99% sure that millions could be saved by simply cutting the BS and employing more doctors and less 'consultants'.

[Ewood and I Would]

I've never worked in the public sector and believe it or not I'm relatively underpaid for what I do.

You should then you'd see all the wastage I do every day.

I just have a different view to the responsibility of Government. While a lot of people, if not most, believe that their tax money should be spent wisely and shrewdly, I place a higher value on people's livelihoods - in other words, jobs, having something rather than nothing, being able to live a little...

So you support people giving pointless jobs at the tax payers expense because you feel sorry for these people if they lose their jobs? What about council tax payers? Do you think it is right that they are paying for these people?

Local government jobs aren't creche's for the unemployed where you give them magic money that you can just pluck out of the air. This is people's taxes you're playing with.

I agree that there are most likely public sector jobs out there that you and others think are pointless and should be cut, but if you look at what the Conservatives want to do to cut the budget deficit I find it a little frightening for people, particularly those in the public sector and the hundreds if not thousands of companies who rely on Government contracts.

Again, I can't speak for the Torries but if I were in power then some of these people should appreciate that they've been overpaid for a long time for doing an unnessesary job. As for government contracts, as I said before you can cut a lot of waste in the public sector without affecting service...

On another note, be careful with your assertion about IT equipment as all is not always as it seems! It may cost £60 for a hard disk drive off the net but I'd be interested to know exactly what the supposed £800 figure you mentioned included - probably system compatibility, type of hard drive, keeping insurance validated, configuration, etc? I'm a techie BTW You'll find most IT systems are built to only take certain components and configurations, most likely based on the manufacturer or software company - they all do it.

I'm a techie too (my job at the council is IT related) and I build PCs in my spare time and I can say you are talking rubbish. It is not true that "most" systems are built to take certain components (unless by certain components you mean suitable for the PC's hardware but that's as obvious as not trying to put a CD in a tape player). Most systems will take any compoment as long as it slots into your Mobo.

I underestimated the £800 figure, it was actually over £3,000! Here is the anecdote I paraphrased from... He could be lying of course but in the context of the debate he had no reason too.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=36020540&postcount=8 (5th paragraph down)

[philipl]

Simon Heffer in the Telegraph writes as though the Tories have already lost the election and fires the starting gun for sacking Cameron.

[Ewood and I Would]

On a lighter note did anybody see Alaxander Armstrong's gamshow, Pointless, the other day? If you haven't seen it, the idea is that they ask the general public a question with several possible answers and then contestants on the show get the same question have to try and give the least popular (but correct) answer the public gave, if no one said it then the answer is "pointless" and you get a big whoop from Mr Armstrong. Basically it's like Family Fortunes but with reversed scoring rules..

Anyhoo, the question to one couple was "Name a Liberal Democrat leader since the party formed in 1988". They said...

"On the basis that we don't think people will know who the current leader is, we're going to say 'Simon Clegg'"

(the other team then rubbed it in by giving Nick Clegg as their answer instead of being kind and just saying Paddy Ashdown or something)

[tony gale's mic]

Simon Heffer in the Telegraph writes as though the Tories have already lost the election and fires the starting gun for sacking Cameron.

The comments section is funnier. Calling Cameron a "Marxist" and for the likes of Daniel Hannan and Nigel Farage to lead the new Conservative party had me in stitches. Christ say what you like about Balls, Milliband but at least they're better politicians and finer minds than the brains that the Tories have behind the scenes or ready in waiting.

Did anyone see the last Have I Got News For You? It was being broadcast at the same time as the TV leaders' debates but obviously was recorded before and so had repeated jokes at Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems (the usual jokes about them not being any kind of a threat, noone noticing them etc) so it'll be very interesting to see it this Thursday, especially along with their take on the volcano travel alerts lately.

[SouthAussieRover]

No I'm talking about the Normans who were decended from Scandanavian vikings. The Normans were not "French", they were Normans (or Norse Men, meaning from scandanavia) who had conquered an area of France before moving on to us!

You are indeed correct although there were Viking invasions as early as the 8th Century.

[Ewood and I Would]

Did anyone see the last Have I Got News For You? It was being broadcast at the same time as the TV leaders' debates but obviously was recorded before and so had repeated jokes at Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems (the usual jokes about them not being any kind of a threat, noone noticing them etc) so it'll be very interesting to see it this Thursday, especially along with their take on the volcano travel alerts lately.

Yeah I saw that. At risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse I never liked the "Lib Dems will never get in anyway" joke that HIGNFY peddles out every election. Not because I like the Lib Dems but because the BBC is supposed to be impartial. Yes they take the mick out of Labour and the Conservatives but the basis of the Lib Dem joke actually encourages the psychology that they aren't worth voting for which IMO is unfair and not 'impartial' broadcasting.

Having said that, I still laugh.

[tony gale's mic]

Yeah I saw that. At risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse I never liked the "Lib Dems will never get in anyway" joke that HIGNFY peddles out every election. Not because I like the Lib Dems but because the BBC is supposed to be impartial. Yes they take the mick out of Labour and the Conservatives but the basis of the Lib Dem joke actually encourages the psychology that they aren't worth voting for which IMO is unfair and not 'impartial' broadcasting.

Having said that, I still laugh.

I think they just go with what the public opinion is - that until a week ago has been the public opinion for decades. If you look this campaign they've aimed more at Labour and Brown etc than the Tories, but equally if you look at the episodes from 1997 you'll probably find more jokes at the Tories and in 2001 plenty of jokes about how William Hague didn't stand a chance.

[jim mk2]

. Christ say what you like about Balls, Milliband but at least they're better politicians and finer minds than the brains that the Tories have behind the scenes or ready in waiting.

From Cameron down there is no one in the shadow cabinet who impresses. The City does not rate Osborne, and the rest are political pygmies who I would struggle to recognise or name. The Labour party even after 13 years in government and after the loss of many senior politicians through retirement still have in Darling, Straw, the two Milibands, Balls, Adonis and others men of stature and talent. I fear for the future of Britain if the Tories are elected.

[tony gale's mic]

I'd say I'm quite strongly anti-Thatcher but leaving aside her policies and just merely judging her as a politician rather than her views (ie her abilities to convince, to argue, to speak, as a presence etc) she was an excellent politician. I think there's a reason why the only two successful Tory leaders (Thatcher and Heath) since MacMillan in the late 50s were from humble backgrounds - they had a common touch due to their background and their politics combined with this made the everyday person on the street feel that under the Tories their children or even themselves stood a similar chance of making it just like they did. It meant they were far more adept at convincing the less well off about the merits of a party which traditionally sought to benefit the wealthy.

If you look at today's shadow cabinet they are almost all in the classical mould of upper/upper-middle class ex-public schoolboys and I think one of the key reasons why they haven't been able to strike such a chord with the electorate. This country faces a period of austerity and having an old Etonian like Cameron or his chums trying to preach this to us doesn't strike any kind of a chord with the electorate.

Yes the Lib Dems and Labour have their fair share of people from well off backgrounds, but they also have people from very humble beginnings; Lord Adonis may have been to Oxford but grew up in a state children's home and whilst Brown was comfortably middle class he was hardly from a rich background. It's not just a class thing but the fact is that these two parties have selected their frontline politicians from a wide range of different backgrounds. The Conservatives just come across as different shades of one colour (and I don't mean this in an ethnic sense...).

[thenodrog]

I'm not sure what you're getting at there - a hung parliament?

No. The tories traditionally strengthen the economy, labour traditionally wrecks it. Happens time and again.

......... No one can rem what the Liberals do.

[den]

I am 99% sure that millions could be saved by simply cutting the BS and employing more doctors and less 'consultants'.

I take it you mean managers, rather than consultants? If so, how do you know that?