[Archived] The General Election 2015

[Amo]

If Cameron is really that vile, then what does that say about the quality of his opposition?

You people voted Dubya into office... TWICE. Don't lecture us on politics.

[yoda]

You people voted Dubya into office... TWICE. Don't lecture us on politics.

Yes but that is show bis for you

[Paul]

How many times has he stood for election and how many years has he been a top Conservative, and only now do the allegations surface?

That tells me:

1. His opponents were incompetent;

2. Or the opposition knew about them but believed they were largely untrue or exaggerated and didn't want their credibility undermined raising them; or,

3. If they went into college days they had their only dirty laundry/behavior problems that would be aired; or,

4. Some combination of 1, 2 and 3.

Steve if you're commenting on the Lord Ashcroft "revelations" with this post it's probably best to note it's nothing more than an embittered billionaire selling a story to right wing press in an effort to gain revenge for what he perceives as Cameron's failure to give him a "significant position" in government.

We've got much more to worry about than what Call me Dave did with a pig's head or if he was present at a party where drugs were taken - you only have to visit a toilet in a football ground to qualify for that one!!

It's got bugger all to do with the opposition and everything to do with a man who donated £8m to the Conservative party.

[Baz]

If anything it definitely proves Cameron was right not to choose him in his cabinet.

The problem it shows is that because he was a wealthy donor he came close.

[Paul]

Spot on Baz

[Steve Moss]

You people voted Dubya into office... TWICE. Don't lecture us on politics.

He was better than the alternatives.

[adopted scouser]

Cameron was a student, people need to grow up.

[joey_big_nose]

How many times has he stood for election and how many years has he been a top Conservative, and only now do the allegations surface?

That tells me:

1. His opponents were incompetent;

2. Or the opposition knew about them but believed they were largely untrue or exaggerated and didn't want their credibility undermined raising them; or,

3. If they went into college days they had their only dirty laundry/behavior problems that would be aired; or,

4. Some combination of 1, 2 and 3.

A totally fair analysis. My guess is number 3 - a gentleman's agreement not to get stuck into personal mud slinging. If you got the political parties into raking over students days it would be brutal, infantile, and only serve to lowering the already appalling low opinion that the public have of politicians.

What Cameron is accused of is hideous, and reinforces all the tory stereotypes. But you can't beat a man of 45 for what he did when he was 20. And to be honest, while I'm a centre left person, Cameron has always behaved with dignity and an open inclusive voice (as opposed to someone like Thatcher).

This story coming out doesn't really help anyone except the newspapers sell copy. Even Ashcroft I'm sure will sorely regret it.

[Baz]

1700 jobs gone in Redcar steelworks.

Surely the government can do something here?

Do we not need a stockpile of steel for the HS2 project? The works are closing because the price is low, so a great time to buy, and you can offset some of the likely benefits bill for unemployment against that cost.

[T J Hooker]

No doubt we will carry on shipping in Chinese steel from the other side of the world though

[Biddy]

But the cheap price is the problem. Ordering more at a cheap price doesn't really help as the owners are already saying the plant is running at a loss.

[RibbleValleyRover]

But the cheap price is the problem. Ordering more at a cheap price doesn't really help as the owners are already saying the plant is running at a loss.

I think I read somewhere it's gone from something like $480 per tonne at the beginning of the year to $130 per tonne. Ian King the Sky News business presenter said that SSI were only making a profit at Redcar when the price was around $400 per tonne. No wonder they are in trouble.

[Baz]

I think I read somewhere it's gone from something like $480 per tonne at the beginning of the year to $130 per tonne. Ian King the Sky News business presenter said that SSI were only making a profit at Redcar when the price was around $400 per tonne. No wonder they are in trouble.

So make the order at break even point, keep the plant running (we all know "mothballing" can quickly turn into full closure), protecting jobs both short and medium term. Once the price becomes profitable then let the owners go back to running the business for profit, keeping the jobs in the uk long-term. 1,400 people on benefits is a massive monthly cost. The price drop is down to overproduction in China, so its very likely that the price will regain its price again once China sorts out the problem.

You can set this to a term of 6/12 months at a time, so if the price doesn't recover you aren't tied longer term to your decision.

[Biddy]

What a knob head Eamonn Holmes is

[Amo]

Drunken Paddy.

[Mike E]

What a bloody embarrassment he is to TV. He's out of his depth on This Morning, never mind the political stuff!

[T J Hooker]

never mind this morning, the eejit's out of his depth when he appears on celebrity juice

[yoda]

Just the warm up act for the establishment, who are circling above, they have already started to re write last year's financial figures to counter the austerity angle

There will be a gradual increase in pressure and heavy weights brought into play to pull the rug from under him.

Sky will be up there pulling strings

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

So Corbyn would spend on Polaris Nuclear Missiles but would not have the balls to use it in our defence?.....NOT the man to lead this Country.

Appears a bit of a crank to me this fella.

[T J Hooker]

yea, not personally wanting to set of a nuclear bomb makes you a crank!

(what a @#/? weird civilisation we have become)

[Mike E]

We do not need a nuclear defence imo. We need democratic talks with other countries involved in nuclear arms.

Last time countries had deterrents for the sake of deterrence, it contributed to the First World War.

[yoda]

We do not need a nuclear defence imo. We need democratic talks with other countries involved in nuclear arms.

Last time countries had deterrents for the sake of deterrence, it contributed to the First World War.

Which where ?

[Mike E]

The series of pacts between nations. Most prominently us with France and Russia vs Germany and Austro-Hungary.

Each developed essentially as a deterrent to prevent the other from declaring war. Then came the catalyst that led to a sickeningly bloody conflict.

Edit - to clarify the point.

If we have nuclear weapons and use them first, we are the bad guys. Simple as that, no argument.

If we have nuclear weapons and are struck first by Putin (or whoever) what's the point in having them when we're dead?

[yoda]

The series of pacts between nations. Most prominently us with France and Russia vs Germany and Austro-Hungary.

Each developed essentially as a deterrent to prevent the other from declaring war. Then came the catalyst that led to a sickeningly bloody conflict.

I see, like sitting down for a cup of tea

[Baz]

Sky should be embarrassed by that interview.