Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: UK General Election 2010
iGrandTheftAuto.com Forums > General > Political & World News
Pages: 1, 2
demon
If this is the true Gordon Brown then I'm happy he forgot to switch off the mic. Good to really know the candidates before the election.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Apr 30 2010, 07:15 AM) *
Yeah ok I don't get it. It seems like all the candidates are attempting to look as 'moderate' as possible, to the point where they all start sounding the same. Why have the Lib Dems distinguished themselves especially? I watched the debates and he sounds exactly like the other two, except possibly more confident.
The real issue to the small minority of informed Lib Dem supporters (for few voters choose for actual good reasons) isn't that Clegg has acquitted himself fantastically well in the debates. The reason he's polling so well is that there was an unspoken attitude regarding third parties, that they must be third parties because they're abject idiots, and all good people would join the hegemony if they were capable. It has ever been thus, and by being shown on TV not to be an idiot, Clegg showed himself to be at least the intellectual equal of the other two. In answer to the accusation that he is unremarkable or that it is unfair that he was there: it is remarkable that he is there and it is only to redress the 60 years of unfairness that he was allowed to be there. The illusion of the well-meaning failure was utterly destroyed when the lay-voter was allowed to see the third party on a level footing with its otherwise inexplicably more popular rivals.

The real reason for the Lib Dems' success is that they are, in at least one way, genuinely out of the establishment. Rupert Murdoch hates that a party over whom he cannot exert influence may have some share of power. His vehicles' vicious personal attacks on the man (some completely irrelevant, out of context and wrong -- CLEGG IN NAZI SLUR ON BRITAIN* most famously) and desperately unsubtle propaganda dressed as objective journalism (the Times first edition called the second debate a draw -- the copy that went out in the morning called a Cameron victory). This is a man who has very specific vested corporate interests and who has had the ear of every government for the last 20 years. His papers have never even acknowledged the Lib Dems And he hate that someone who he (an unelected and unpopular force) doesn't control might have a shot at power.

There are other reasons: Vince Cable is an excellent treasury spokesman amidst a global recession and the party's views on major issues such as Trident and tuition fees are fit well with those of many informed voters. But the main reason for their popularity is that the public have seen three men: a public relations manager, a former Prime Minister and some other guy. The fact that there isn't much difference should not be shocking, but given the way the public has been conditioned, it is. And that shock is enough to put a party in contention.

* Nick Clegg wrote an article about German workers being harassed and called Nazis to the point where they quit their jobs in 2002. He mentioned that this was in part due to an unhealthy obsession Britain has with the war. Fair enough, it does. We have a false sense of grandeur (in thinking Britain is or was the economic, military and political equal of the US/USSR) and a false sense of superiority over Germany and German people unrelated to the war that continues to this day. The right-wing press took it out of context and printed that headline on national front pages.

[Edit] That Disgusting Nazi Slur In Full.
QUOTE (Pieface @ Apr 30 2010, 11:07 AM) *
Lib Dems look like they're doing well, and distinguishing themselves because the other two won't dare dig into him. Clegg has got them both at his feet, because if it goes to a hung parliament, he's the one to decide who he goes and supports.
Statistically, Cameron attacked Clegg most in the second and third debates, whereas Brown attacked Cameron most. Just sayin'.

QUOTE (demon @ May 1 2010, 07:28 AM) *
If this is the true Gordon Brown then I'm happy he forgot to switch off the mic. Good to really know the candidates before the election.
They all have contempt for the electorate. Of course, that Brown should lose out from it is only typical of Labour's situation. I just think it's unfair to assume the best of Cameron, just because his mic has never been on at an inopportune time. After all, old Gideon Osborne is famously no fan of the working man.
0bs3n3
Lib Dems actually losing seats? I lol'd.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
:shrug:

People.
Pieface
Our constituency still hasn't been announced lol. Out of 650 seats, we're one of the last 30 at the moment. Should be 20 minutes apparently though.

Labour held their seat at us, damn. I blame Ellesemere Port, it's a shit hole as it is. Perfect Labour candiancy witht he amount of benefits and crime that goes on their.
0bs3n3
So what's the bet of another election before the year is out?
demon
I lol'd a bit when the Libs got about 20% of the votes and only about 5% of the seats. I understand the demands for a system reform. That would make the system more fair to all parties but it would also make it less likely that you would get a stable government.

A more unfair system could be better; let each vote for the biggest party count as four votes. With a system like this the biggest party would get more than 50% of the seats. Jumpy.gif

Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
That is literally the Conservative talking point: tip things in our favour, because that is possibly good for the country!

It's 1750s high Toryism all over again.
0bs3n3
Fuck proportional representation. I don't know how anyone could delight in an unstable coalition government. It gives me a headache just to think about it.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
France, Germany, Finland, Spain, France, Sweden, Italy, Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands all have PR. These countries all have AAA credit ratings, something the Tories threaten the nation with losing if they don't gain a majority. The word for "hung parliament" in Germany, our current economic superiors (yes they are, suck on it) is the same as the word for "parliament".

But Greece has a strong majority government, so all is not lost!

I've never seen a solid claim for the merits of FPTP, and the fact that it gives one a headache hasn't changed that. In fact, if you'll excuse my saying, it's the level of discourse the electorate has come to expect of Murdoch's rags.
Pieface
The only thing I don't understand with PR is how do you decide who looks after a constituency.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSUKMa1cYHk

That's one way of doing it, the way the proto-Lib Dems wanted.

"ECONOMIC STEPS TO CHAOS" - The Mail. We as a nation must be doing something right.
Pieface
Coalition Government, good news imo. Suprised to not see Cable as Chancellor though.
DuPz0r
Fuck the coalition. Torries and Liberals... I don't think so. Our country is just going to get worse imo.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
The way I see it, it's one step to a revival of the left. Sadly, given the choice between the most popular maybe-chancellor in my lifetime vs probably the least popular Labservative chancellor, they went with the latter. Oh well.
Pieface
DupZor, why would it be bad in your opinion, instead of finding a reason to moan?
0bs3n3
Dunno if it's good for the Cons atm...who will get blame for shit going wrong, which it inevitably will?
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
Is the implication here that the Lib Dem presence will be the only thing wrong with the government, but the Tories will get the blame? Certainly a novel way to think about it.
DuPz0r
QUOTE (Pieface @ May 11 2010, 10:24 PM) *
DupZor, why would it be bad in your opinion, instead of finding a reason to moan?


Because the Lib-Dems and the Tories will not see eye to eye. I give them half a term before they collapse because of disagreements.
Pieface
Yet the last Coalition Government was one of the strongest governments we had.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
A point that most Conservatives forget. WE ARE THE WINNERS, WE ARE THE PARTY OF WINSTON CHURCHILL!!!1

Winston Churchill, leader of Britain's most diverse coalition government :/
trathen93
QUOTE (Pieface @ May 13 2010, 01:25 AM) *
Yet the last Coalition Government was one of the strongest governments we had.


yet david cameron is a twat. I think that sways it a bit doesnt it?

I personally dont see it lasting long anyway, because there will come a day where the tories or lib dems will want to pass something and the other party disagrees major style.

next election : 6 - 18 months time
Pieface
^Typical uneducated view tbfh.
trathen93
QUOTE (Pieface @ May 18 2010, 09:52 PM) *
^Typical uneducated view tbfh.


well if im honest, from my side of the fence hes going to financially screw with the majority of my family. were not exactly rich. he wants to scrap some of the benefits, which is understandable, but not all the people who receive them sponge off them. my auntie for example, she spends all of the child tax credits on the nursery for my cousins and it takes a very big chunk out of the costs in the long run which helps her. its not just him, its the whole conservative party.
DuPz0r
QUOTE (El-Nino @ May 19 2010, 03:29 PM) *
QUOTE (Pieface @ May 18 2010, 09:52 PM) *
^Typical uneducated view tbfh.


well if im honest, from my side of the fence hes going to financially screw with the majority of my family. were not exactly rich. he wants to scrap some of the benefits, which is understandable, but not all the people who receive them sponge off them. my auntie for example, she spends all of the child tax credits on the nursery for my cousins and it takes a very big chunk out of the costs in the long run which helps her. its not just him, its the whole conservative party.


That is one of the main points I disagree with the conservatives. They are basically shitting on the women and children in this country. In my books, women with children are a priority... Tax credits make that extra difference for some of the working class and the less fortunate. Without them it good be the difference between a nutritious meal or a value can of beans and bread for their dinner.
I know that there are a lot of can't-give-a-shit, benefit grabbing mothers out there, but there are some damn honest, good families that will suffer.
Pieface
We're in a large amount of debt due to the benefits system, some you may not agree with. But cuts have to come from somewhere. Who do you think would of been better in government at this time? Labour who come with Keynesian economics so in the end we'll just end up in larger and larger amouns of debt, or someone who has to change. One thing that Labour did that was just a stupid idea, and was a reason we led to such a huge loss of money. EMA. As with benefits there are a few people who use it properly but due to it being such a loose means tested system, and without actually looking at people's location of living etc there are a huge amount of people taking benefit of it when they don't need it.

Also, Conservatives are cutting Child Tax credits for those with a minimum of 31k a year. The working class, and less fortunate that you mention Dup, I'm betting come under that income. Hardly shitting on them.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
Are you seriously, suggesting that there's a vast and fundamental economic difference between Labour and the Conservatives? You can talk EMA and tax credits, child benefits and NHS funding, but this Keynesian economics discourse is just bizarre. All the mainstream parties essentially believe in free-market capitalism, and in the long run, reducing the deficit.
Pieface
Of course they believe in reducing deficit, but when has spending more ever got us out of a mess? I know Cameron uses the analogy of running the country as a business, but name me a mainstream shop, or business that spent more and more money to try and get them into the black? You know what all the BA strikes are about? Cutting money by having a pay freeze, and reducing long haul cabin crew from 15 to 14 due to the amount of money they lost. Even where I work we are making cuts to save money, we're not spending ourselves out of the problems we're currently facing.
Edgecrusher
The way I see it, the coalition gives the possibilty of five years of reduced unilateral decision making. This could be a good thing, only time will really tell. In anycase it seems we are finally slowly moving away from a two party system, which, in My opinion, can only be a good thing. I have lived for twenty eight years now and have seen two parties split that time almost 50/50 and continually blame their successors/predecessors for their own shortcomings. The time to give someone else a chance is long past due.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE (Pieface @ May 21 2010, 11:54 PM) *
Of course they believe in reducing deficit, but when has spending more ever got us out of a mess? I know Cameron uses the analogy of running the country as a business, but name me a mainstream shop, or business that spent more and more money to try and get them into the black? You know what all the BA strikes are about? Cutting money by having a pay freeze, and reducing long haul cabin crew from 15 to 14 due to the amount of money they lost. Even where I work we are making cuts to save money, we're not spending ourselves out of the problems we're currently facing.
You've got to speculate to accumulate, as the old capitalist saying goes. Have 2, buy a newspaper and invest the difference in the stocks you read about, make 3 and repeat...

It's not a perfect analogy, but I hope it serves to illustrate that CUTSCUTSCUTS are not the only way to make money. I also hope you realise Cameron's business analogy is not entirely in good faith either.


The two main parties (in fact every national party apart from the BNP and the Greens) are essentially tied to the same system of free market capitalism. The differences are in the size of the state (best illustrated by the Lib Dems wanting to lower taxes on the poor, whereas Labour want to take taxes from everyone and give them back to the poor). The Conservatives have traditionally been bent on reducing taxes full stop, but the discourse leading up to the election has shown that they are at least pandering to the idea of a more prevalent welfare system.

Labour have lost their contact with their creditors and their roots -- you will have seen that the BA strike was deemed illegal, due to NuLab "balancing" legislation meaning any effective strike is illegal. The airlines and the airline lobbies are as bad as the banks, making massive profits and taking subsidies in good times and asking to be bailed out after the ash (see: black elephant collapsonomics; Private Eye) so I'm not sure why we should listen to a word they say when it comes to the deficit.
Pieface
Cuts may not work, but in this country it's never really been used to try and get us out of a recession. Keynesian economics has been used a few times and it's never really worked.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
To use a very Tory party line of thinking: just because it's new doesn't mean it's better. I agree with the bald facts of what you said, but given what we know (or more importantly what we don't know), what you've said is correct but in the end meaningless.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.