Jump to content

Recommended Posts

keekybreeks Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> you reckon there will even be enough non disgraced

> kippers left to even stand for 5 seats by May ?

>

> What does concern me is the libdem scum - they

> have killed themselves for a generation- their

> fault, they should pay, no sympathy- but the

> diretion of previous libdem voters ( long terms or

> swingers) is pivotal

>

> of course they could go for a non event like the

> greens- the last time a slab of voters went green,

> we found ourselves invading most of the middle

> east as a result.

>

> hmmmmm


Lib Dems are finished


I'm 90% sure the SNP are going to hold the balance of power


And would they even abstain if it allows the Tories in ??

I don't think the Lib Dems will lose anywhere near the number of seats that is being predicted based on their expected share of the vote. There are plenty of seats that have been Lib Dem now for 15+ years with big majorities, and they are notoriously good at playing local politics. The key issue seems to me to be how many seats will the Tories lose because UKIP split their vote. If they can keep it to no more than a dozen, I'd expect Tories + Lib Dems to have a narrow majority, and if they can form a government, they will.

The numbers are worrying. Current predictions have Lab at about 270, Tory at about 275 and LD at about 25. So, both Lab+LibDem and Tory+LibDem about 10-15 seats short of a majority.


I don't really mind who gets in so long as it is stable and the nationalists/UKIP/Greens aren't involved. Let's face it - whichever combination of Lab/Tory/LD gets in, it will be much the same as before - there's sweet FA in policy difference between them in the major areas.


Though ejecting Scotland from the union would rather neatly solve things!

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think the Lib Dems will lose anywhere near

> the number of seats that is being predicted based

> on their expected share of the vote. There are

> plenty of seats that have been Lib Dem now for 15+

> years with big majorities, and they are

> notoriously good at playing local politics. The

> key issue seems to me to be how many seats will

> the Tories lose because UKIP split their vote. If

> they can keep it to no more than a dozen, I'd

> expect Tories + Lib Dems to have a narrow

> majority, and if they can form a government, they

> will.



Thats what Clegg seems to think


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/14/lib-dems-lose-half-seats-still-hold-power-tory-coalition


I think he's damaged them more than he realises - Are LibDem supporters really Tories ??

Or does Clegg realise he'll have to go if they swap sides.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The numbers are worrying. Current predictions

> have Lab at about 270, Tory at about 275 and LD at

> about 25. So, both Lab+LibDem and Tory+LibDem

> about 10-15 seats short of a majority.

>

> I don't really mind who gets in so long as it is

> stable and the nationalists/UKIP/Greens aren't

> involved. Let's face it - whichever combination

> of Lab/Tory/LD gets in, it will be much the same

> as before - there's sweet FA in policy difference

> between them in the major areas.

>

> Though ejecting Scotland from the union would

> rather neatly solve things!


The SNP will vcte against the Tories whatever.


They won't abstain because that may let the Conservatives in.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DaveR Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I don't think the Lib Dems will lose anywhere near

> > the number of seats that is being predicted based

> > on their expected share of the vote. There are

> > plenty of seats that have been Lib Dem now for 15+

> > years with big majorities, and they are

> > notoriously good at playing local politics. The

> > key issue seems to me to be how many seats will

> > the Tories lose because UKIP split their vote. If

> > they can keep it to no more than a dozen, I'd

> > expect Tories + Lib Dems to have a narrow

> > majority, and if they can form a government, they

> > will.

>

>

> Thats what Clegg seems to think

>

> http://www.theguardian.com

>

> I think he's damaged them more than he realises - Are LibDem supporters really Tories ??

> Or does Clegg realise he'll have to go if they swap sides.


That article says "most probably in coalition with the Conservatives". The LibDems can form a coalition with either Lab or Tory. As a LibDem voter, I really don't mind which - as I said, the major policies for both Lab and Tories are pretty much the same. The LibDems are a good moderating influence for both the big two, rather than the blackmailing influence UKIP or the SNP will be.


> The SNP will vcte against the Tories whatever. They won't abstain because that may let the Conservatives in.


Don't underestimate the SNP - they will sell their souls to the Tories if it gets them what they want. You forget, the SNP had an informal coalition with the Tories in Scotland for a number of years.

So the predictions are for a lor of SNP seats at the GE - despite a majority in Scotland recently voting against the SNP's raison d'etre.


So either this same majority are voting for a party whose fundamental aim they oppose - or the electoral system is a little bit jiggered?


If the Libs hold the balance again - and I suspect they will - surely they will demand a PROPER referendum on electoral reform (not the farce of last time) as part of any deal.


And this time around perhaps Labour will not have the arrogance (or make the mistake) of assuming the Libs could be tweaked by the ear because they couldn't possibly work with the Tories.

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So the predictions are for a lor of SNP seats at the GE - despite a majority in Scotland recently

> voting against the SNP's raison d'etre.

>

> So either this same majority are voting for a party whose fundamental aim they oppose - or the

> electoral system is a little bit jiggered?

>

> If the Libs hold the balance again - and I suspect they will - surely they will demand a PROPER

> referendum on electoral reform (not the farce of last time) as part of any deal.


I think if this election turns out as badly and as fragmented as it is looking, it will set the PR/electoral reform debate back 20 years.

Anyone else finding the current onslaught of "here's me in my kitchen" posturing from each party leader slightly nauseating?


I don't want to see your f?$%ing Aga, or your wife in a tracksuit.... sort out the economy, NHS and foreign policy for this election with business-like purposeful schtick instead?

MrBen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyone else finding the current onslaught of

> "here's me in my kitchen" posturing from each

> party leader slightly nauseating?

>

> I don't want to see your f?$%ing Aga, or your wife

> in a tracksuit.... sort out the economy, NHS and

> foreign policy for this election with

> business-like purposeful schtick instead?



Boris was in a team GB tracksuit - and his hair was all over the place.


He seemed happy.

Where to start Henry old chap.......underpopulated, beautiful , the last true wilderness on the planet, mineral rich, an attractive exchange rate and one of the highest standards of living outside of Sweden. Excellent fly fishing, positive attitude to entrepreneurs, Albertan steak. Albertan women. Bears. Quiet roads. Uncrowded ski slopes. An incredible social health care system and solid and underlying constitutional principles born of Scottish sensibilities and fairness.


And best of all.....they're not American.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Doesn’t seem that simple   according to fullfact that’s a net figure   ” The £21.9 billion was a net figure. Gross additional pressures totalling £35.3 billion were identified by the Treasury, and approximately £13.4 billion of these pressures were then offset by a combination of reserve funds and other allowances. The additional pressures identified were as follows: 2024-25 public sector pay awards (£9.4bn) ”   I don’t think Labour have set expectation that changing government cures all the ills. In fact some people on here criticise them for saying exactly opposite “vote for us we’re not them but nothing will change because global issues”   I think they are too cautious across many areas. They could have been more explicit before election but such is the countries media and electorate that if they were we would now be stuck with sunak/badenoch/someone else with the 14 years of baggage of their government and infighting  the broad strokes of this government are essentially along right lines  also loving ckarkson today “ Clarkson: Your claim that I bought a farm to avoid taxes is false and irresponsible.  BBC: It’s your own claim.  Clarkson: What’s that got to do with anything?” and by loving I mean “loathing as much as I ever have”    
    • BBC and the IFS https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e12j4gz0o From BBC Verify:   Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank said Reeves "may be overegging the £22bn black hole". What about the rest of the £22bn? The government published a breakdown, external of how it had got from the Treasury's £9.5bn shortfall in February to the £22bn "black hole". It said that there was another £7bn between February and the actual Budget in March, as departments found out about new spending pressures and the government spent more on the NHS and the Household Support Fund There was a final £5.6bn between then and late July, which includes almost a month when Labour was in power. That was largely caused by increases in public sector pay. It was the Labour government that accepted the recommendations of the Pay Review Bodies (PRBs), but they said that the previous government should have budgeted for more than a 2% increase in public sector pay. Prof Stephen Millard from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research think tank told BBC Verify: "The 'political' question is whether you would count this as part of the fiscal black hole or not. If you do, then you get to the £22bn figure; if not, then you’re left with around £12.5bn to £13.5bn." It isn't this at all. When you run on an agenda of change and cleaning up politics and you put all of the eggs of despair in a basket at the door of the previous government you better hope you have a long honeymoon period to give you time to deliver the change you have promised. Look at the NHS, before the election it was all...it's broken because of 14 years of Tory incompetence and the implication was that Labour could fix is quickly. Then Wes Streeting (who is one of the smarter political cabinet members and is clearly able to play the long game) started talking about the need to change the NHS before the election - he talked about privatising parts of it (much to the annoyance of the left). He was being pragmatic because the only magic wand that is going to fix the NHS is massive reform - it's broken and has been for decades and throwing money at it has just papered over the cracks. Now Labour talk about the NHS needing 10 years of healing for there to be real difference and people are saying....what..... Words in opposition are easy; actions in government are a lot harder and I fear that given the structural issues caused by Covid, the energy crisis, the war in Ukraine (and now maybe a massive US/China trade war if Trump isn't bluffing) that we are heading to constant one-term governments. I don't think there was a government (and correct me if I am wrong) that survived Covid and in a lot of countries since Covid they have had regular government change (I think what is playing out in the US with them voting Trump in is reflective of the challenges all countries face). Labour massively over-egged the 14 years of hurt (who could blame them) but it is going to make things a lot tougher for them as they have set the expectation that changing government cures all the ills and as we have seen in the first 90 days of their tenure that is very much not the case. Completely agree but the big risk if Farage. If Labour don't deliver what they promised or hit "working people" then the populists win - it's happening everywhere. Dangerous, dangerous times ahead and Labour have to get it right - for all our sakes - no matter what party we support. P.S. Lammy is also one of the better Labour front-bench folks - he just is suffering from Labour's inability to think far enough ahead to realise that some posts might come back to haunt you...but in his defence did anyone really think Americans would be daft enough to vote him in again....;-)
    • My cat has been missing since Sunday evening 17th November he is British short hair male cat colour black with grey stripes. medium to large in size. He is easily identified by a large tooth missing on the top left of his mouth.  He lives in Upland Road just near the roundabout at Underhill Road. His name is Jack but he  only answers to Puss Puss please call me on 0208 299 2275 if you see him.   thank you Linda  
    • I think this could go on endlessly, so I suggest we finish it here!  But why don't you  track down the makers of the sign? Which hopefully has amused a lot of people, as well as brightening my bus journey. Tell  them that their directions to Dulwich are not only wrong, but they do not seem to know where the "real" Dulwich is 🤣 I'm sure they will be delighted 🤣  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...