[Archived] Election

[thenodrog]

While I see where you are coming from with this post Bryan I feel you ignore too many other aspects of the recent financial crisis. If you can point to a major government which has not been effected by the banking crisis the point would have some validity. The world wanted cheap money and we got it, then spent it by the billion on life-styles many could not afford. Today the chickens are coming home to roost. However while times are tough they have for the public been tougher, despite this being the "worst recession" since the 30s. For example under the Conservative administration and recession house repoessessions where:

1990 - 145,350

1991 - 186,649

1992 - 142,162

Under Labour in the worst recession of modern times the figures are:

2007 - 137,656

2008 - 142,626

2009 - 93,463

So even at the peak of the current recession (2009) 50% fewer people lost their homes. The source is county courts, England and Wales, via the Ministry of Justice.

Maybe this is a big factor in your figures.....

http://www.walletpop.co.uk/2010/04/16/bank-of-grandma-and-grandpa-replacing-bank-of-mum-and-dad/?icid=main|uk-ws-bb|dl4|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.walletpop.co.uk%2F2010%2F04%2F16%2Fbank-of-grandma-and-grandpa-replacing-bank-of-mum-and-dad%2F

[tony gale's mic]

Thats the way the politico's wanted. They wanted it down to a choice between 3 men on a podium and not 3 parties. A political showpiece a political 'X Factor'. Well they got bit and yesterday the curtains came down on one of em.

One bit of hope for all you socialists and even your own champagne variety TGM..... The huge spin is that Brown is not like that at all in private but I believe it's more likely they will all be the bloody same.

Considering we're still looking most likely to elect as the largest party someone who used to openly vandalise eating establishments (and it doesn't matter if he was a student - he was still well into his adulthood), what politicians are like behind closed doors is of little concern, unless they're Nazi sympathisers or wife beaters or such like. If they're prone to making ill thought out private comments to their aides - which is what this basically amounts to, nothing more, nothing less - then that matters far, far less than policies.

The politicians have resisted this live debate thing for years actually, I don't think they were that keen on it at all. The public and Sky News (who initially tabled this idea for this election) wanted it. I think Cameron and Clegg were probably more open (and agreed first as I recall) to it than Brown as it's quite obvious that Brown is starting all these debates with a handicap.

I think televised debates are not a bad idea but suddenly having three in 3 weeks leading upto an election is bad. I think every year there should be one big political debate between the major parties where they can talk about the major political issues of the year gone by and the upcoming year. It's rare enough to still make it a big event, but frequent enough so more people will actually engage with politics at least once a year and when the election comes they'll have a better base knowledge about what each party stands for, than watching a debate and having their opinion immediately formed by what newspaper they read or what the snap polls are doing.

[JAL]

Actually you can borrow more and the restrictions are for second homes only

In France you can only borrow 70% and you cannot borrow against the equity in a house that you own, even if you do not have a motgage

The French would appear to have a more balanced approach to housing yoda, as opposed to our lunatic ex public schoolboy driven brigade.

The stystem we have is only fuelling wages and debt upwards. When we have a budget deficit heading past the ONE TRILLION POUNDS, this aint the direction in which we should be heading, and ALL Three main parties seem to support this continueing trend.

HELP! This country needs to be run by a more fit and proper bunch than the current ones that are on show and the ones that lurk in the background advising these posh monkeys.

[broadsword]

Polls were conducted yesterday, but before Gordon Brown opened his mouth and leapt in with both feet.

I agree with Tombro, we won't see any more polls until after the debate. I'm intrigued to see what the changes will be.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Polls were conducted yesterday, but before Gordon Brown opened his mouth and leapt in with both feet.

I agree with Tombro, we won't see any more polls until after the debate. I'm intrigued to see what the changes will be.

Sometimes it can take a few days for the polls to register any major changes from a debate. I am expecting the Conservatives to show a small dip over the weekend and the bank holiday (historically they tend to poll badly on holidays). Wednesday's polls will be the key ones.

On a different subject, some interesting comments from Mervyn King according to a US Economist in the Grauniad:

Mervyn King warned that election victor will be out of power for a generation, claims economist

"I saw the governor of the Bank of England [Mervyn King] last week when I was in London and he told me whoever wins this election will be out of power for a whole generation because of how tough the fiscal austerity will have to be," Hale said in an interview on Australian TV reported by Reuters."

=====

I can't trust Labour to get us out of this economic mess, they were the ones that inherited a booming economy from which they used the profits to spend heavily and borrowed even more at the same time.

The origins of the economic crisis might have been out of our control, but our ability to react to it was hampered by Brown's economic mismanagement.

If we had saved money for a rainy day when the economy was booming then we wouldn't have had to borrow as much money as we had to go on this Keynesian spending spree in order to try and stimulate growth.

[Amo]

Yeah, he's shown that he's not really a man you can warm to. Of course, that shouldn't matter, only his competence as Prime Minister should matter. However, we must live in the real world and admit that personalities can hugely influence election outcomes.

There's a lot of voters out there who believe the parties are barely distinguishable besides the image projected by their leaders. Gordon Brown's latest blooper will have seriously damaged his chances with this demographic.

[thenodrog]

HELP! This country needs to be run by a more fit and proper bunch than the current ones that are on show and the ones that lurk in the background advising these posh monkeys.

Lets all spoil our papers and write Gillian Duffy.... X then. She's the one who has talked most sense without platitudes, lies or deception in the last 3 weeks.

[JAL]

Sometimes it can take a few days for the polls to register any major changes from a debate. I am expecting the Conservatives to show a small dip over the weekend and the bank holiday (historically they tend to poll badly on holidays). Wednesday's polls will be the key ones.

On a different subject, some interesting comments from Mervyn King according to a US Economist in the Grauniad:

Mervyn King warned that election victor will be out of power for a generation, claims economist

"I saw the governor of the Bank of England [Mervyn King] last week when I was in London and he told me whoever wins this election will be out of power for a whole generation because of how tough the fiscal austerity will have to be," Hale said in an interview on Australian TV reported by Reuters."

=====

I can't trust Labour to get us out of this economic mess, they were the ones that inherited a booming economy from which they used the profits to spend heavily and borrowed even more at the same time.

The origins of the economic crisis might have been out of our control, but our ability to react to it was hampered by Brown's economic mismanagement.

If we had saved money for a rainy day when the economy was booming then we wouldn't have had to borrow as much money as we had to go on this Keynesian spending spree in order to try and stimulate growth.

What can we predict that the immediate future could have in store then ?

All final salary pensions - Gone !

Retirement age - Increased again !

Taxes across the board increased !

All health care to be either part or fully paid for from now on !

Taxation on savings and investments increased !

The unemployed to lose a large part of their current benefits !

Politicians pay and benefits to increase !

any more ?

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

THE COUNTRY'S FCUKED I TELL THEE!

[broadsword]

Gordon Brown's tendency to shake his head and smile when david Cameron is speaking is not particularly endearing.

[Paul]

There was absolutely no way for me to know that.

I'm sure you can appreciate the general point that one person's experience need not be representative of how patients are treated by the NHS as a whole (just ask patients in Basildon and Staffs), without resorting to catty remarks.

You obviously have a great deal more first-hand knowledge than me, I wasn't to know that at the time.

I apologise I didn't mean to be catty or rude.

Personally I feel the NHS is simply too simple a target. It's very easy to find "granny left in corridor on trolley" stories when the changes in the NHS are an enormous success and credit to the country, not the government.

[Paul]

Of course not Paul. However, the Gordon Brown Machine spent the first days of this week telling us how his campaign had now changed - he was going out there to meet and speak to real people rather than planted Labour supporters in stage managed photo calls.

Two days into this new tactic and it speaks volumes when Brown follows up his pally chat with Mrs Duffy with this completely unexpected observation - "That was a disaster - they should never have put me with that woman. Whose idea was that? It's just ridiculous..."

The damaging irony being of course, that Mrs Duffy IS (or was) a die hard life long Labour voter. You can have it either way - it's either stage management done dreadfully badly, or it's Gordon Brown just being his unpleasant self.

Two previous moments in this campaign grated even more than today. 1 - The earliest moves in Brown's election campaign after returning from Buckingham Palace .. that awful trip to a supermarket in Kent via St Pancras International, when there was a line of student-aged Labour wannabees as he got out of the Jaguar, and then grinned his way to the train stopping only to talk to kids in pushchairs. Absolutely cringeworthy.

And then 2 - the almost criminal ruse of pulling HMS Ark Royal off a military exercise north of Scotland to toddle off in the direction of Calais - costing one million pounds per day - in the pretence that an aircraft carrier could become a passenger ferry.

As he made that fake statesman-like broadcast from the cabinet office, Brown must have already known 3 things - 1) There was already more than enough capacity on the channel to deal with demand ... - 2) Ark Royal wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference due to being totally unsuitable for the role ... - 3) Less than 48 hours later the skies were open again anyway, so Ark Royal never even made the channel. He must have known that would be the likely outcome when he made the order on Ark Royal, because talks must have been very well advanced.

Now THAT is stage managing your PR. Playing politics with the Flagship of the UK Naval Fleet to score a political point in a time of crisis. I refrained from posting my thoughts at the time, but today Brown got his karma - and it's fully deserved.

TBH Tris other than the Gillian Duffy story I'm completely unaware of any of this. I don't see any of it as relevant to how one might vote. I've said before I don't like, or especially trust, Gordon Brown so I'm not a great supporter of his. I'm sure one could find equally cringeworthy actions from David Cameron. I take no notice of politicians making popularist statements preferring to try and decide which party is really offering us a future................and I am undecided, as a Labour supporter, on how I shall vote.

[broadsword]

Well, that's the problem, the man in the street who hasn't needed to use the NHS only sees stories in the 'papers. That sort of sensationalised reporting is not the way to get an overview of how the NHS really is performing.

Quite what percentage of grannies shut in store cupboards, immigrant workers not understanding what nil by mouth mean s, MRSA, unnecessary layers of bureaucracy, unsanitary conditions there are compared to the NHS as a whole i really wouldn't have a clue on.

Bad news sells 'papers!

[RibbleValleyRover]

Third debate:

YouGov poll: David Cameron 41%; Nick Clegg 32%; Gordon Brown 25%

Comres/ITV

Cameron 35%

Clegg 33%

Brown 26%

Angus Reid:

Cameron 36%

Clegg 30%

Brown 23%

GUARDIAN ICM POLL Cameron 35% Brown 29% Clegg 27%

[Paul]

It's more than a simple comment Hughesy. It's an insight to the man behind the public facade..................

For a man who appears to take pride in not takng part in the democratic process you do seem to get rather worked up about our Prime Minisetr

Maybe this is a big factor in your figures.....

http://www.walletpop...-mum-and-dad%2F

This is very old news and a report from "Key Retirement Solutions" ? are you sure it doesn't say advertising feature somewhere on the page?

[thenodrog]

For a man who appears to take pride in not takng part in the democratic process you do seem to get rather worked up about our Prime Minisetr

Thats cos unlike your decleration in your last post I have enough intellect not to 'support' any of them no matter what they do and at whatever cost to the country!

Paul how you or indeed anybody else can be so blinkered to continually and unequivacably 'support' a single political party for approaching 50 years leaves me incredulous.

[Paul]

........and I am undecided, as a Labour supporter, on how I shall vote.

Thats cos unlike your decleration in your last post I have enough intellect not to 'support' any of them no matter what they do and at whatever cost to the country!

Paul how you or indeed anybody else can be so blinkered to continually and unequivacably 'support' a single political party for approaching 50 years leaves me incredulous.

In referring to my last post I think it's possible you may be the blinkered one, let me write it again for you, "and I am undecided, as a Labour supporter, on how I shall vote." Now in my understanding of the English language, and I do realise you have a particularly perverse comprehension, this says while I support the Labour party I may not vote for them in the election. I'd be grateful if you could explain to me how effectively voting against a party I support can be defined as blinkered, continual and unequivacal support. This definition would surely apply to someone who simply votes for a party regardless of anything.

You may also recall I have said I have voted Liberal Democrat on two occassions.

[thenodrog]

In referring to my last post I think it's possible you may be the blinkered one, let me write it again for you, "and I am undecided, as a Labour supporter, on how I shall vote." Now in my understanding of the English language, and I do realise you have a particularly perverse comprehension, this says while I support the Labour party I may not vote for them in the election. I'd be grateful if you could explain to me how effectively voting against a party I support can be defined as blinkered, continual and unequivacal support. This definition would surely apply to someone who simply votes for a party regardless of anything.

You may also recall I have said I have voted Liberal Democrat on two occassions.

I do apologise Paul. You are obviously only a 'part time supporter'. Or would 'glory hunter' be appropriate too?

[only2garners]

Or would 'glory hunter' be appropriate too?

Not if, like me, he has voted Liberal Democrat in the past.

[Amo]

I think Labour (or should I say Brown) lost this election well before the campaign began.

People have become so disillusioned with Labour, that all Brown can do is try to disparage the opposition and convince people Britain will become even more unstable under Conservative or Lib Dem governments.

[den]

Well after the three debates, I'm far from convinced that they actually achieve anything. They come across as a BGT kind of show.

Paxman, given one and a half hours grilling each leader on their manifestos would give us all a far greater insight into what they are trying to achieve.

.......and, for the first time im my memory, the NHS hasn't been included in any meaningful way whatsoever. I suppose that's what you get when the TV companies set their own agendas.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Paxman is doing an interview with Brown tonight.

[ultrablue]

Last nights debate was excellent - good questions and some clear objectives laid out by both Conservatives and Labour. Its now a well defined choice between big or small government. Saying it was like an X factor contest, yet complaining the leaders needed to be more lucid and honest is a bit contradictory and to my mind says more about the intelligence of those that whinge rather than politicians themselves.

[LeChuck]

Last nights debate was excellent - good questions and some clear objectives laid out by both Conservatives and Labour.

You missed someone...

[broadsword]

Apparently the Guardian's now saying that the Tories have won it?