If I had a gun to my head I'd say Green. However, I'd rather be part of a low turn-out. If more than 50% stay at home then it'll be a symbolic middle finger up to all of the major parties. They're all as bad as each other (apart from UKIP, who can most definitely **** off).
Out of interest Bournemouth, how differently do you feel those percentages would have looked over the last five years under a Labour government? Genuine question from a non-party person.
Like you, most public sector workers have been on pay freezes for the majority of this government term, and there has been a huge amount of cuts. Yet those figures have still kept rising (mainly I guess through the interest of the astronomic debt).
So how, even with the benefit of hindsight, would Labour have done things differently over the last five years that would have impacted less on the average joe than what the government have done and made those percentages look better?
None of the parties want to admit this for different reasons. The truth is that the Tories ended up adopting Labour's plans in terms of cutting the deficit. They had intended to cut the deficit to zero by 2015 but have only cut it by half. That's what Labour promised to do in 2010. Osborne realised in 2011/12 that continuing to cutting capital investment (i.e. spending on infrastructure) would stop any recovery from taking place given the continued troubles in the eurozone and quietly u-turned.
No, what would have happened under Labour is impossible to know. They may have cut infrastructure investment to protect welfare. police. local government spending for example which might have had a different effect on the economy.
I think Seth's point about the actual secrecy of the ballot is valid. Can anyone explain why the ballot paper should be traceable to an individual at all ?
I suppose it might well be necessary to get a judge to issue a warrant in order to do so in our perfect world but forgive my cynicism if I think it might just be a lot lot easier than that.
It's not like corruption and cover ups are unknown at this level is it.
Its nothing more cynical than having the potential to identify fraudulent votes (by ruling out genuine ones) in the event of other evidence being available casting doubt on the fairness of the election. From my days as a presiding officer* though no court had EVER granted an order for the votes to be traced back to any individual and the whole process is taken extremely seriously from start to finish. This might have changed due to the shenanigans in LBTH though.
*I did have to threaten a bloke with arrest once who was kicking off and being disruptive about his vote being traceable. Rather than raise his objection with the Returning Officer in the meantime he did the same thing at the next election too, so that was twice his vote didn't get counted.
I think Seth's point about the actual secrecy of the ballot is valid. Can anyone explain why the ballot paper should be traceable to an individual at all ?
I suppose it might well be necessary to get a judge to issue a warrant in order to do so in our perfect world but forgive my cynicism if I think it might just be a lot lot easier than that.
It's not like corruption and cover ups are unknown at this level is it.
Its nothing more cynical than having the potential to identify fraudulent votes (by ruling out genuine ones) in the event of other evidence being available casting doubt on the fairness of the election. From my days as a presiding officer* though no court had EVER granted an order for the votes to be traced back to any individual and the whole process is taken extremely seriously from start to finish. This might have changed due to the shenanigans in LBTH though.
*I did have to threaten a bloke with arrest once who was kicking off and being disruptive about his vote being traceable. Rather than raise his objection with the Returning Officer in the meantime he did the same thing at the next election too, so that was twice his vote didn't get counted.
But it is traceable. Just because you need to have a judge to order that a trace be made does not fill me with complete confidence. Plenty of renegade agencies and individuals out there that could abuse the legitimate reasons. Or are they just all out to get me ?
"....but the very fact that so many of their [Tory] key leaders went to Eton , or other such schools suggest to me that they are a party of privilege who primarily exist to serve the privileged"
Half the Labour shadow cabinet went to private fee paying schools and over a third went to Oxbridge.
Guardian report that 95% of Labour candidates for 2015 election are university educated compared to 90% of Tories.
If socialists want respect for upholding the values which reject bigotry and stereotyping on the basis of race, gender, nationality, age, height, weight, colour of hair etc. they need to explain why stereotyping based on educational background, the sort of company you work for, where you live, how much you earn or how much your house is worth, is fair game.
Hypocrisy is my pet hate and this, along with their meaningless mantra that they stand for "hard working" families, rather show how they intend to deliver, is why I will not be voting Labour.
Horrible to hear Nicola Sturgeon on the news at lunchtime talking about how she (and her potential large number of MPs) would join up with the Labour Party to stymie the Tories if they have a small majority after the election. I really resent the idea of a party that wants to break up the country having any such opportunity to influence events here.
"....but the very fact that so many of their [Tory] key leaders went to Eton , or other such schools suggest to me that they are a party of privilege who primarily exist to serve the privileged"
Half the Labour shadow cabinet went to private fee paying schools and over a third went to Oxbridge.
Guardian report that 95% of Labour candidates for 2015 election are university educated compared to 90% of Tories.
If socialists want respect for upholding the values which reject bigotry and stereotyping on the basis of race, gender, nationality, age, height, weight, colour of hair etc. they need to explain why stereotyping based on educational background, the sort of company you work for, where you live, how much you earn or how much your house is worth, is fair game.
Hypocrisy is my pet hate and this, along with their meaningless mantra that they stand for "hard working" families, rather show how they intend to deliver, is why I will not be voting Labour.
Nothing boils my blood more than people criticising others because of their background. Whether that's poor, rich, white, black or Asian. None of it is on.
But apparently the size of some ones bank account (that we're told doesn't matter anyway by the same crowd and in the same breath) means they can be freely criticised.
It's almost as if one day we'll vote for the biggest idiot, isn't there a Charlie brooker written tv series about that?
Horrible to hear Nicola Sturgeon on the news at lunchtime talking about how she (and her potential large number of MPs) would join up with the Labour Party to stymie the Tories if they have a small majority after the election. I really resent the idea of a party that wants to break up the country having any such opportunity to influence events here.
If they form a block large enough it's their duty to reflect THEIR voters wishes. It's called democracy. UKIP would do the same over the EU.
The fact that the snp and the Welsh lot will hold the casting votes on who wins and runs the country is terrible, can't believe that there will be any other outcome to the situation,
We will be governed by labour with Wales and Scotland getting many benefits that otherwise they would not have, labour will drag us back to the days of not so long ago, where it pays not to work, it is not good for those hard working do it for yourself folk,
There will be so much waste in local council and government, through extra roles created for no real reason,
The fact that the snp and the Welsh lot will hold the casting votes on who wins and runs the country is terrible, can't believe that there will be any other outcome to the situation,
"....but the very fact that so many of their [Tory] key leaders went to Eton , or other such schools suggest to me that they are a party of privilege who primarily exist to serve the privileged"
Half the Labour shadow cabinet went to private fee paying schools and over a third went to Oxbridge.
Guardian report that 95% of Labour candidates for 2015 election are university educated compared to 90% of Tories.
If socialists want respect for upholding the values which reject bigotry and stereotyping on the basis of race, gender, nationality, age, height, weight, colour of hair etc. they need to explain why stereotyping based on educational background, the sort of company you work for, where you live, how much you earn or how much your house is worth, is fair game.
Hypocrisy is my pet hate and this, along with their meaningless mantra that they stand for "hard working" families, rather show how they intend to deliver, is why I will not be voting Labour.
Of course it is possible to be working class and go to university.
The problem I have is that after decades of breaking down the Oxbridge/Eton domination of senior government positions we seem to be going backwards. I guess I would not want any one group from any sector of society to dominate our political and power bases but giving those that already have too much power even more is just perverse.
Half the Labour shadow cabinet went to private fee paying schools and over a third went to Oxbridge.
Actually a quarter (7 of 28), according to the Mail. Although Hillary Benn left his private school at 10.
Labour MPs are much less likely to have gone to private school (15%) than Tories (54%). Whether this makes them any more in touch with the general public or not is questionable. I do think it can be difficult for someone like Cameron, brought up in a wealthy family who goes to an expensive boarding school, Oxbridge and then straight into politics, to get a sense of what it's like for people worrying about how to pay the next month's rent. Same could be said for Miliband to a certain extent but he at east got some exposure to working class people at school.
For those complaining about how Labour opened the borders answer me this. What changes have the conservatives done in the past 5 years to immigration policy?
SNP in Westminster - now THAT"S a Trojan Horse. I wish the Scots had voted Yes and were busy implementing their own policies for their own folk up there rather than having influence down here in a country they do not wish to belong to.
Some terrific posts on here .. if the 'layman's knowledge and opinions' are anything to judge by, the future of political debate is in good hands, at least so far as CL is concerned. There has been a dearth of pamphlets and propaganda put through my letterbox so far. What has arrived is rather disquieting. Both the Labour and Conservative bulletins concentrate almost exclusively on demigods Miliband and/or Cameron, with little enlightenment as to policy or local candidates .. 'we will balance the books and make you all much happier and wealthier, trust us' is the message from both parties .. Labour has gone out of its way to portray Farage as the devil's right hand man .. every election lead up nowadays seems to take on more and more the aspect of a presidential/dictatorial campaign with little or no mention of individual candidates, no specific policies, just bland promises which will probably not be kept and there will be no comeback on the parties for lies told until the next election in five years time ... I guess that the same 'newssheets' are put through letterboxes from John O'Groats to Lands End (well almost) .. whatever happened to local issue and politics ? .. that seemed to go out with the demise of Robin Hood and the Sheriff of Wherever .. reminds me of the Thatcher joke about 'the vegetables' .. are contemporary MPs little more than voting fodder, the parliamentary equivalent of the sheep in Orwell's Animal Farm ?
For those complaining about how Labour opened the borders answer me this. What changes have the conservatives done in the past 5 years to immigration policy?
But the fact that we have a Tory led government when they only have one MP in Scotland is OK ?
Is it okay to have a labour government when the shires vote tory? The arguement about lack of Tories in Scotland is made by little scotlanders who are too busy blowing bagpipes up each other's kilts to realise Scotland is actually quite small and only a small percentage of the uk.
SNP in Westminster - now THAT"S a Trojan Horse. I wish the Scots had voted Yes and were busy implementing their own policies for their own folk up there rather than having influence down here in a country they do not wish to belong to.
Part of me does too, since salmond said he would be able to maintain his spending pledges if oil stayed over $100 a barrel. It's currently around $50. The scots would be utterly fucked right now if they voted yes.
People should not be criticised for not voting, the right to abstain is a fundamental component of a democratic society.
Well, I agree with that if you and the others who say that could at least be bothered to go down to the polling station and write "none of the above" or even something stronger, on your ballot slip. That way it gets counted, and an actual message can be clearly inferred from it. By the way I imagine that Australia and Belgium consider themselves democratic societies, voting there is compulsory. Meanwhile I have to fight like hell to make sure I retain my right to vote - and indeed that the buggers send the postal voting form out in sufficient time.
Anyway, Surbiton remains my constituency and I'll be voting for Ed Davey, an outstandingly hard working constituency MP. As will several of my friends who are naturally either Tory or Labour voters. As an example I've got my personal email from Davey assuring me that he's kicked the electoral office's asses to get the papers out earlier than the 10 days in advance they were planning on. Some of you voting from abroad for the first time may want to look sharp about returning your papers.
All I will say is, please take another look at the "looking for work thread", which AFKA started in 2009.
It's amazing how quickly we forget, how desperate things were only 6/7 years ago.
Granted things aren't exactly great now, but they are a damned sight better than 2009, when many many people were either losing their job or worried about losing their job.
Do we want to continue on the road of improvement or do we want to go back to them days again ?
I just don't see why the Labour party are to blame for all of the troubles 7-8 years ago. Sure, they were in power at the time but many, many countries were affected. It was a worldwide situation.
The Conservatives have done well to turn things around in the South and South East but the situation in more northern areas is still desperate.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the Tories (together with Lib Dems) have done anything different to what measures Labour would've had to have taken had they been re-elected.
The changing of policy was needed whoever was in charge. It just appears convenient for the Conservatives that the necessary changes came around shortly after they were elected.
As things stand I will be going down to the polling station and writing "none of the above" at the bottom of my paper.
All I will say is, please take another look at the "looking for work thread", which AFKA started in 2009.
It's amazing how quickly we forget, how desperate things were only 6/7 years ago.
Granted things aren't exactly great now, but they are a damned sight better than 2009, when many many people were either losing their job or worried about losing their job.
Do we want to continue on the road of improvement or do we want to go back to them days again ?
Winds me up big time that people think you can criticise someone for going to private school. Have you ever considered why they were in a position to go there? Money doesn't just land out of nowhere into a families lap. Once, at least via a certain past generation, someone in that family would have worked hard and delivered in some way to bring success to that family to benefit their future generations.
I work hard and will be sending both my children to private school. I am certainly not 'rich'. What if, in generations to come, my children or grandchildren ran for govt? Are they 'out of touch' because they went to private school? Not if I can help it. Even now, my oldest has learnt he won't get anything on a plate. If he wants pocket money then he has to do chores or help his mummy when I am at work. If he works hard and does his spellings and reading after school (how well he does is irrelevant) then he will get rewarded.
I hate the sense that the world owes you a living in any walk of life. And I hate the way that some people think it's ok to talk people down for being successful.
It's a combination of the above that means I am conservative through and through.
You don't have to have a government that is 'in touch' with the working class. You just need a country of people that will work to be the best they can. And just accept that, as in any society, some will be more successful than others. It's life. As long as we have a benefits system that helps those really in need (and not those who think they are) then that's ok.
All I will say is, please take another look at the "looking for work thread", which AFKA started in 2009.
It's amazing how quickly we forget, how desperate things were only 6/7 years ago.
Granted things aren't exactly great now, but they are a damned sight better than 2009, when many many people were either losing their job or worried about losing their job.
Do we want to continue on the road of improvement or do we want to go back to them days again ?
Comments
No, what would have happened under Labour is impossible to know. They may have cut infrastructure investment to protect welfare. police. local government spending for example which might have had a different effect on the economy.
*I did have to threaten a bloke with arrest once who was kicking off and being disruptive about his vote being traceable. Rather than raise his objection with the Returning Officer in the meantime he did the same thing at the next election too, so that was twice his vote didn't get counted.
Half the Labour shadow cabinet went to private fee paying schools and over a third went to Oxbridge.
Guardian report that 95% of Labour candidates for 2015 election are university educated compared to 90% of Tories.
If socialists want respect for upholding the values which reject bigotry and stereotyping on the basis of race, gender, nationality, age, height, weight, colour of hair etc. they need to explain why stereotyping based on educational background, the sort of company you work for, where you live, how much you earn or how much your house is worth, is fair game.
Hypocrisy is my pet hate and this, along with their meaningless mantra that they stand for "hard working" families, rather show how they intend to deliver, is why I will not be voting Labour.
But apparently the size of some ones bank account (that we're told doesn't matter anyway by the same crowd and in the same breath) means they can be freely criticised.
It's almost as if one day we'll vote for the biggest idiot, isn't there a Charlie brooker written tv series about that?
UKIP would do the same over the EU.
We will be governed by labour with Wales and Scotland getting many benefits that otherwise they would not have, labour will drag us back to the days of not so long ago, where it pays not to work, it is not good for those hard working do it for yourself folk,
There will be so much waste in local council and government, through extra roles created for no real reason,
Ain't a place to look forward to
The problem I have is that after decades of breaking down the Oxbridge/Eton domination of senior government positions we seem to be going backwards. I guess I would not want any one group from any sector of society to dominate our political and power bases but giving those that already have too much power even more is just perverse.
Labour MPs are much less likely to have gone to private school (15%) than Tories (54%). Whether this makes them any more in touch with the general public or not is questionable. I do think it can be difficult for someone like Cameron, brought up in a wealthy family who goes to an expensive boarding school, Oxbridge and then straight into politics, to get a sense of what it's like for people worrying about how to pay the next month's rent. Same could be said for Miliband to a certain extent but he at east got some exposure to working class people at school.
There has been a dearth of pamphlets and propaganda put through my letterbox so far. What has arrived is rather disquieting. Both the Labour and Conservative bulletins concentrate almost exclusively on demigods Miliband and/or Cameron, with little enlightenment as to policy or local candidates .. 'we will balance the books and make you all much happier and wealthier, trust us' is the message from both parties .. Labour has gone out of its way to portray Farage as the devil's right hand man .. every election lead up nowadays seems to take on more and more the aspect of a presidential/dictatorial campaign with little or no mention of individual candidates, no specific policies, just bland promises which will probably not be kept and there will be no comeback on the parties for lies told until the next election in five years time ... I guess that the same 'newssheets' are put through letterboxes from John O'Groats to Lands End (well almost) .. whatever happened to local issue and politics ? .. that seemed to go out with the demise of Robin Hood and the Sheriff of Wherever .. reminds me of the Thatcher joke about 'the vegetables' .. are contemporary MPs little more than voting fodder, the parliamentary equivalent of the sheep in Orwell's Animal Farm ?
Part of me does too, since salmond said he would be able to maintain his spending pledges if oil stayed over $100 a barrel. It's currently around $50. The scots would be utterly fucked right now if they voted yes.
; )
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/2432632/UK-General-Election-2010-political-map.html
Anyway, Surbiton remains my constituency and I'll be voting for Ed Davey, an outstandingly hard working constituency MP. As will several of my friends who are naturally either Tory or Labour voters. As an example I've got my personal email from Davey assuring me that he's kicked the electoral office's asses to get the papers out earlier than the 10 days in advance they were planning on. Some of you voting from abroad for the first time may want to look sharp about returning your papers.
It's amazing how quickly we forget, how desperate things were only 6/7 years ago.
Granted things aren't exactly great now, but they are a damned sight better than 2009, when many many people were either losing their job or worried about losing their job.
Do we want to continue on the road of improvement or do we want to go back to them days again ?
http://www.charltonlife.com/discussion/26133/the-looking-for-work-looking-for-staff-thread/p1
The Conservatives have done well to turn things around in the South and South East but the situation in more northern areas is still desperate.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the Tories (together with Lib Dems) have done anything different to what measures Labour would've had to have taken had they been re-elected.
The changing of policy was needed whoever was in charge. It just appears convenient for the Conservatives that the necessary changes came around shortly after they were elected.
As things stand I will be going down to the polling station and writing "none of the above" at the bottom of my paper.
https://www.conference-board.org/data/globaloutlook/map.cfm?width=900&height=600
I work hard and will be sending both my children to private school. I am certainly not 'rich'. What if, in generations to come, my children or grandchildren ran for govt? Are they 'out of touch' because they went to private school? Not if I can help it. Even now, my oldest has learnt he won't get anything on a plate. If he wants pocket money then he has to do chores or help his mummy when I am at work. If he works hard and does his spellings and reading after school (how well he does is irrelevant) then he will get rewarded.
I hate the sense that the world owes you a living in any walk of life. And I hate the way that some people think it's ok to talk people down for being successful.
It's a combination of the above that means I am conservative through and through.
You don't have to have a government that is 'in touch' with the working class. You just need a country of people that will work to be the best they can. And just accept that, as in any society, some will be more successful than others. It's life. As long as we have a benefits system that helps those really in need (and not those who think they are) then that's ok.
bbc.co.uk/news/10604117
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/01/19/james-blunt-chris-bryant-classist-gimp-open-letter_n_6500554.html