brommy

First election not voting Lib Dem. Sad times for me.

I think the only victory would be an outcome matching Nate Silver's prediction that UKIP will not win ONE seat. Here's hoping.

It will be interesting to see many UKIP supporters who had voted against the Alternative Vote system in 2011 (claiming that first past the post is a British tradition), calling for change as their double figure percentage of the vote results in less than 1% of the seats.

Tempted to watch a stream of that game [Newcastle-WBA] instead of Villa!

3 months ago I wouldn't have blamed. Now, you'd be missing plenty.

The local Labour candidate knocked on my door and had a good chat with me. Mid Worcestershire is a safe Tory seat unfortunately, general elections seem almost pointless here, it's been conservative for years.

Edited

Dunno if you're in Bromsgrove but it's massively Tory. I keep telling everyone I know that if you're not voting conservative then it's pointless to tactical vote so may as well vote for whatever you want. It'd be nice to see Sajid Javid get kicked out but it's not happening.

Sajid Javid is my MP. He was 'parachuted in' by Conservative head office to replace the disgraced Tory MP, Julie Kirkbride. There was a significant campaign by the local Conservatives who objected to having a candidate forced upon them when they already had a local candidate. The local tories accused their own party of 'tokenism' and made it clear that the new boy from HQ was unwelcome. Many of their objections seemed to boil down to unashamed racism. Despite all that, Javid was elected as the replacement Conservative MP. I think it says more about the traditional voting of the area than the quality of the candidate.

The Mid-Worcestershire constituency spreads from the north-west (Wyre Forest) to the south-east (Cotswolds) of the Bromsgrove constituency and is even more tory as my area.

Stll no VTers willing to have a guess at the seat numbers gained by the major parties?

 

Go on I'll play along as I can sense that your feeling a bit peeved no one answered your first request

 

Tories 288

Labour 271

SNP 48

Lib Dems 27

UKIP 2

Others 14

Not peeved as such, just surprised in amongst all the action on this thread there were no seat predictions.

Your prediction is very close to mine and is probably what will happen according to the latest opinion polls. I based my guess of a few more seats for the tories and a few less for labour around some of the 'don't knows' voting for the largest incumbent party.

Still no VTers willing to have a guess at the seat numbers gained by the major parties?

The Marginals are going to be key

 

Latest info suggests Labour have clawed back Grimsby from UKIP  ( at least in terms of where previous polling had that seat going)

 

Peterborough seems likely to stay Tory

 

It still suggests a hung parliament either way ... unless the media have something special up their sleeve for Thursday morning  ..

I fully expect the written media will have something up their sleeves for tomorrow and Wednesday. I'm also sure their intended damage won't be balanced across the parties.

We can only hope the UK written media, ruled by a few, near eccentric, often non-UK based billionaires, has no influence on the voters of the UK.

Knowing the way Clattenburg reffed the game even if Given had have pushed Coleman out of the way he'd have probably given a penalty anyway.

I'd put money on it.

As Clattenburg was born, bred and still lives in the Newcastle area, should the FA be more savvy when appointing referees in matches directly affecting relegation rivals?

With just 3 days to go before the voting starts, isn't it time for us to take a guess at the number each party gains of the 650 available?

For your reference, in 2010 the result was:

Con 307

Lab 258

LD 57

Others 28.

My prediction for 2015 is:

Con 292

Lab 263

SNP 50

LD 26

UKIP 4

Others 15.

For this election, I have separated out the SNP and UKIP from 'Others', purely because they have formed a good deal of interest in the campaign to date.

Watched the whole of yesterday's game today. The movement across the whole team is miles (literally!) better than under Lambert. I remember watching us just a few months ago, the player on the ball often had no option other than risking a virtually impossible pass, or knocking it back to Guzan, or giving the ball away. "MOVE FOR 'IM!!!" was often the cry. Not any more!

Thanks Toffeenose.

I remember visiting anfield in 1989. I got a bit lost on my way back to the city centre and noticeably wearing my Villa colours I was stopped by a group of lads, a couple were wearing Everton shirts. They told me the best way to find Lime Street station and suggested I cover my colours as the many of the 'pool fans were idiotic thugs (or words to that effect). Thanking them for their advice I was soon approaching Lime Street with my jacket almost covering my Villa shirt. Unfortunately, as I walked past three idiotic thugs, they found it hilarious to try to push me over and spit on me. They were wearing Liverpool shirts.

Memories of fans of teams stick for decades.

The main issue for Labour is that their gains in England will be mostly cancelled out by their losses to the SNP in Scotland.

In 2010:

Con 307

Lab 258

LD 57

Others 28.

My current prediction for 2015:

Con 292

Lab 263

SNP 50

LD 25

UKIP 5

Others 15.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if over the next few days Sturgeon hints that a deal with the Tories isn't totally off the agenda.

Did you hear her 30 minutes on the individual Question Time the party leaders had on Thursday night?

Aren't we looking at needing more than two parties for a successful coalition?

 

There's a case for even the Conservatives and UKIP and the Lib Dems together not being enough to secure a majority.

Possibly. It's anyone's guess! Unless something fairly dramatic happens before Thursday, I expect the 'incumbent' factor and relentless media drivel to be enough to steer the Conservatives towards 300 seats. It would then depend on how much damage the LibDem's had suffered for propping up the Conservatives for the past five years. Will the LibDem's manage 25 to 30 seats? If not, will the Conservatives have to bend to a UKIP wish or two? Will Sinn Fein take their seats to force a full requirement of 326 seats?

Party politics is spite.

 

Imagine how much better the country would be if every candidate was an independent; forced to tell us what they believed in so that they can get votes.

 

Miliband never seems to really say anything, and Cameron basically does a thing where he says "Have you got a hole in your face to breathe through? Two legs? So have I! Let's fix this shit!" instead of policy.

 

The papers pick the issues they think are important to them and force them on us, and those issues that might be important to people and that might make a difference to our lives disappear through not being talked about, instead, we get personality, we get people criticising the way the other party leaders look, talk and behave, as if that's what we're really paying them for. 38 of the last 40 American elections have been won by the taller candidate. 

 

It's not about change, in fact, it's the opposite of that, the election is an opportunity to fake choice in order to maintain the status quo, so, in order to foster an environment where it looks like the parties are different, you need antagonism, you need spite. The main parties are like a couple that will be married forever arguing about whether the remote goes on the arm of the sofa or on top of the fire, unimportant differences, amplified through spite.

 

So, in answer to Tony's question, "is Spite enough of a reason to put the other guy in?" 

 

It's the reason both guys exist, it's the reason that either of them gets in in the first place, it's party politics. 

 

I think maybe I should have just typed "yes".

Hear, hear.

Thats actually a good point, but the rest of the country wont forgive labour for lying and allowing the scots to dictate how we do things in this country. The SNP clearly only care about Scotland and no-one else. Sturgeon has not even shyed away from that.

Firstly, the SNP will never be forgiven for allowing the Conservatives to govern in place of labour (I suspect the damage would be even worse than the LibDems have suffered for the same act in 2010).

Secondly and only created because Labour are well aware of the first reason, Labour have committed so heavily to NOT pandering to the SNP that if they did they would lose at least a quarter of their support in England.

Should the election result lead to a minority Labour government (although I think another ConDem coalition is more likely), I fully expect the majority of the English media to crucify Labour's reliance on the SNP, and the Scottish media to claim The new UK government will march to the beat of the SNP. It won't be the first time the media have missed the real truth by a mile but I suspect it will be enough to do the damage they want.

Does that give the lesser parties the right to install the man that came second out spite?

No matter who the largest party is, I wouldn't blame Parliament if they felt the only way forward was to decide on who was liked the least by the country. I remember the alternative vote being described that went something like this. Supposing a group of 10 people want to go for a drink. 4 people want to go to the cafe for a coffee, 3 people want to go to the Red Lion for a beer, 2 people would prefer to go for a beer in the King George and 1 person wants to visit the Crown. The cafe wins the vote but 6 of the 10 are annoyed. Instead the King George and Crown voters agree whilst a beer in the Red Lion isn't quite as nice as their favourite pub, it is better than a coffee in the cafe. I think it finished with all 10 friends going to a pub and getting hammered.

If the Conservatives can't muster a straight Parliament majority or a coalition with the help of another party or parties (most likely in my opinion), I think it will lead to another election where they either get a small majority or just about manage a coalition with the LibDems (further alienating more of their supporters).

On a not unrelated note; whilst I am aware that UKIP have ruled out a coalition with any party, have they confirmed what UKIP's stance is on a confidence and supply arrangement? Would UKIP prop up a minority Conservative government if Cameron agreed to remain neutral in an EU referendum (instead of supporting an IN vote as is currently proposed/expected)?

So, so happy with Tom Fox's comments about Benteke getting a new contract

Doesn't mean he'll accept of course.

Agreed, i think it's a stupid move making it public knowledge in my opinion

why?

It alerts other clubs, i prefer it when we do that kind of business behind closed doors like we did with delph and then announce it when the contract is signed, also like we did with delph

Delph's contract situation was well known as it ran down in to the final few months. Several statements and comments were made along the way and despite most people's expectations, Delph still signed. Whether our club makes the occasional statement or not, it will not change whether Benteke signs a third contact with us. In any case, a player and his agent typically have more say as to how much publicity is given to contract negotiations, or the lack of.

On the general subject of voting, and why/for whom: do people tend to vote for 'what is best for me (and my family)' or 'I'm voting for what I believe in ideologically, and morally'. I've always been firmly in column B.

 

For me, it's about how I'd like the country to be run, morally, socially, politically, and not really a consideration of 'economically, it's in my best interests to vote Tory cuz I'm rich' etc

I'd like to think I would run the country with the same ethics I have used bringing my two kids up. I have always guarded them against greed, urged them to work hard but play fair and try to see the best in people; one of the reasons I have never voted Conservative to be honest. My household income is probably more typical of someone who might vote Conservative so I guess that makes me more likely to vote based on the good of the country than for selfish reasons.

no offence , but that really is a load of bollocks

No offence taken, it is merely your opinion, whilst it really is the way I have guided my children and it really is one of the reasons I have never voted Conservative.

Wasn't CB in good form the last time he signed a contract renewal?

On the general subject of voting, and why/for whom: do people tend to vote for 'what is best for me (and my family)' or 'I'm voting for what I believe in ideologically, and morally'. I've always been firmly in column B.

 

For me, it's about how I'd like the country to be run, morally, socially, politically, and not really a consideration of 'economically, it's in my best interests to vote Tory cuz I'm rich' etc

I'd like to think I would run the country with the same ethics I have used bringing my two kids up. I have always guarded them against greed, urged them to work hard but play fair and try to see the best in people; one of the reasons I have never voted Conservative to be honest. My household income is probably more typical of someone who might vote Conservative so I guess that makes me more likely to vote based on the good of the country than for selfish reasons.

Unless he had that written in as release clause when he signed his new contract

I remember reading that we don't do release clauses at Villa. I think it was from someone at the club, possibly Faulkner. Whilst PF had many critics, his name would have been on Benteke's current contract so I'm not convinced there is a release fee clause or that a minimum transfer fee has been set by the club.

Renewing 3 season tickets for the 28th, 23rd and 11th consecutive seasons. Without them I'd probably be wandering around Merry Hell buying crap I don't really need so I'm convinced the £1500 expenditure is actually saving me money.

Backing the SNP in Scotland and yet warning against the 'SNP running the country' in the rest of the UK is exactly the sense I expect from them.

I always wonder if its worth a bet. I mean at 6-1, if we get relegated I certainly wouldn't be happy, but betting 100 quid an being 600 quid up would ease the pain. An if we don't get relegated, it might be worth the loss.

Or you are pissed off either way, for relegation or for stupidly losing money.

Or... you are paying £100 to guarantee our survival or watch every home game next season.