Jump to content
IGNORED

General Election 2015 Match Day Thread (Merged)


Moloch

Recommended Posts

The oil doesn't belong to Scotland. If they want the revenue for that they can pay the capital costs back and repay the bailout of RBS.

If they legally left the union I suspect international law would disagree with you. But certainly the settlement negotiations would be interesting and I don't think the SNP would get anywhere near what they were promising the Scottish people

Anyway, it's an irrelevance because the only way they'll leave the union in the next 5 years is if the UK leaves the EU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where you live bill ,but if you don't know anybody who is screwing the benefit system then you must have your head in the sand,rife where I live,should report I know but not worth the hassle

Well I don't, I'm to busy working every hour I can to get by, I haven't any spare time to go snooping!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realise that the Conservatives will be in hoc to the UUP/DUP of they are to get through this parliament. A six MP surplus is not a working majority.

It'll be how does this benefit/affect Ulster for every policy.

This is the key point. It is clear from news reports that the main reason many people voted Conservative was to keep out the SNP, yet they may not realise the Tories will end up relying on the NI parties to pass votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the key point. It is clear from news reports that the main reason many people voted Conservative was to keep out the SNP, yet they may not realise the Tories will end up relying on the NI parties to pass votes.

Relying on parties dedicated to Great Britain and keeping the Union vs. a known left leaning party dedicated to breaking up the union?

Yep I know which I prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tories moving to straight away change the constituency boundaries to their benefit is disgraceful. They are supposed to work in the public interest and this just yet again proves what a load of self-serving tossers they are. How can they get away with it?

Labour have done the same in the past. The mere fact that ruling parties are allowed to do it is an utter disgrace IMO. The only reason it didn't happen last time was because the Tories tried to screw the Liberals on changes to the Lords so they screwed them on boundary changes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tories moving to straight away change the constituency boundaries to their benefit is disgraceful. They are supposed to work in the public interest and this just yet again proves what a load of self-serving tossers they are. How can they get away with it?

Unfortunately they are going to get away with a lot of things,the Liberals managed to keep some things in check for 5 years.

Now, they are going to make up for lost time,they now feel they have been given a mandate for severe change, be very afraid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it says a lot about our country that out of approx 65 million people who could be leader, the best choice we have is 3 clowns from the circus.

I'm sure you would find 3 better choices in your local supermarket than what we have currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are all complete muppets,it's just the torys don't play the we are for the working people nonsense as much as labour,and the working class have wised up to it,long way back for labour now,but having the torys in is like a team finishing 4th from bottom,not good but better than the rest

Really ;)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32297199

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tories moving to straight away change the constituency boundaries to their benefit is disgraceful. They are supposed to work in the public interest and this just yet again proves what a load of self-serving tossers they are. How can they get away with it?

The whole South Gloucestershire thing was meant to do the same. Parcel some marginal Bristol wards in with Tory suburbia and a bit of country.

Until recently, it hadn't worked out as planned!

They should name that district Gerrymandria. Likewise "North Somerset".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relying on parties dedicated to Great Britain and keeping the Union vs. a known left leaning party dedicated to breaking up the union?

Yep I know which I prefer.

But as a deficit busting Tory, shouldn't you be concerned about the demands that will be made by state-subsidised Norn Iron rather than Scotland - which has actually had its economy grow faster than England, one of the reasons why the SNP did so well?

Forget the Union Jack bollocks, this is actually going to cost us big money.

Look behind the headlines.

Ps: you'll also find that the DUP is one of those dreadful "left-leaning" parties!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But as a deficit busting Tory, shouldn't you be concerned about the demands that will be made by state-subsidised Norn Iron rather than Scotland - which has actually had its economy grow faster than England, one of the reasons why the SNP did so well?

Forget the Union Jack bollocks, this is actually going to cost us big money.

Look behind the headlines.

Ps: you'll also find that the DUP is one of those dreadful "left-leaning" parties!

The DUP are already awaiting "natural wastage" giving them the balance of power: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/election-results-dup-vow-to-help-tories-if-natural-wastage-erodes-the-conservative-majorityduring-the-parliament-10237450.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately they are going to get away with a lot of things,the Liberals managed to keep some things in check for 5 years.

Now, they are going to make up for lost time,they now feel they have been given a mandate for severe change, be very afraid.

 

 There you go, the labour party members and the unions are too blame nobody else, the dream of a return to the old style socialism died even before Thatcher was elected in 1979, people had had enough of it. 

 

But of course the labour party took another 16 years and 4 defeats to actually fathom it out with Foot and Kinnock (twice).

 

Cue 13 years of new labour and the labour party members and especially the unions, misguidedly thought, perhaps with the hatred of Blair and Brown, we can take the party back to it's socialist roots with Ed.

 

That worked out well, so what next?.

 

PS:- The untimely death of John Smith was probably the biggest tragedy not only for labour but maybe British politics as a whole as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tories moving to straight away change the constituency boundaries to their benefit is disgraceful. They are supposed to work in the public interest and this just yet again proves what a load of self-serving tossers they are. How can they get away with it?

To be fair, I believe these changes have been proposed by the electoral commission and will actually make a fairer distribution of seats. The reason being some areas such cities in the north of England, Scotland and the Welsh valleys have had slower population growth than other areas such as the south east of England, London etc. As an extreme example, the Isle of Wight elects a single MP with an electorate of 110,000+, yet other constituencies have an electorate half the size, or smaller. I can see some arguments though as there are several contentious changes with constituency straddling historical boundaries eg there will be a constituency running across the Cornwall-Devon border and also across the Lancashire-Yorkshire border.

Ultimately, the changes will not have a massive effect. If the changes had taken place before the 2015 election, the Conservatives would have gained 52.3% of seats rather than the 50.9% they achieved and Labour would have gained 35.1% rather than their actual 35.7%. The SNP would have gained 8.2% of the seats rather than their 2015 8.6%. The changes would only be significant if there was an extremely close election (as was predicted for 2015), however, it wouldn't have changed the ultimate make up of any government for 30+ years. Furthermore, it will increase the number of seats in England which are straddling rural and urban areas and thus "marginal".

In my opinion talk of "locking out" Labour for evermore is therefore wide of the mark.

It would be interesting to see how easy it is for the Conservatives to get it through parliament, as it will result in the number or MPs dropping from 650 to 600 it will mean several MPs from all parties are likely to lose their job at the next election. With Cameron only having a slim majority those in his party who are in seats which would cease to exist (or would change sufficiently that they'd naturally be won by a different party) could rebel and stop the plans, just like the Lib Dems did in the last government.

Note, all of the above is based on the changes proposed in 2013, the Conservatives could look for further changes, however, they are unlikely to be much more beneficial to the Tories as since 2013 the largest population increases have been in inner city areas (such as East London) which are naturally labour leaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, I believe these changes have been proposed by the electoral commission and will actually make a fairer distribution of seats. The reason being some areas such cities in the north of England, Scotland and the Welsh valleys have had slower population growth than other areas such as the south east of England, London etc. As an extreme example, the Isle of Wight elects a single MP with an electorate of 110,000+, yet other constituencies have an electorate half the size, or smaller. I can see some arguments though as there are several contentious changes with constituency straddling historical boundaries eg there will be a constituency running across the Cornwall-Devon border and also across the Lancashire-Yorkshire border.

Ultimately, the changes will not have a massive effect. If the changes had taken place before the 2015 election, the Conservatives would have gained 52.3% of seats rather than the 50.9% they achieved and Labour would have gained 35.1% rather than their actual 35.7%. The SNP would have gained 8.2% of the seats rather than their 2015 8.6%. The changes would only be significant if there was an extremely close election (as was predicted for 2015), however, it wouldn't have changed the ultimate make up of any government for 30+ years. Furthermore, it will increase the number of seats in England which are straddling rural and urban areas and thus "marginal".

In my opinion talk of "locking out" Labour for evermore is therefore wide of the mark.

It would be interesting to see how easy it is for the Conservatives to get it through parliament, as it will result in the number or MPs dropping from 650 to 600 it will mean several MPs from all parties are likely to lose their job at the next election. With Cameron only having a slim majority those in his party who are in seats which would cease to exist (or would change sufficiently that they'd naturally be won by a different party) could rebel and stop the plans, just like the Lib Dems did in the last government.

Note, all of the above is based on the changes proposed in 2013, the Conservatives could look for further changes, however, they are unlikely to be much more beneficial to the Tories as since 2013 the largest population increases have been in inner city areas (such as East London) which are naturally labour leaning.

 

Spot on but of course not as sensational of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...