The 2015 General Election

[tonyh29]

 

And on the various versions of events, there's lots of agreement of who did what. There's also lots of (partisan) views on why. The Torygraph claims Ed was against because he was scared of Diane abbott. The Open Democracy says Miliband isn't anti war enough for their liking. Clegg says it was because Labour wanted to defeat the Gov't in a vote...take your pick, really.

 

but none saying he did it for the right reasons interestingly

 

 

I think that for whatever mix of motivations, the vote against war was not "playing politics with people's lives" it was the opposite, to me. It was "not committing to military action, which would lead to deaths, without having a much clearer and better and legal set of aims and plans". That was the vote, for me. How they got there was secondary.

 

even though his / Labours own amendment was virtually identical  .... nice try but nobody's buying that one

[tonyh29]

I just threw my hands up in despair. Just when Milliband was starting to look credible he does this. Totally unnecessary, and won't win him any votes. He only needs two topics - the rich/poor divide, and the NHS. That's his ticket to No. 10, not this.

the rich poor divide that grew during the last term of labour government and the NHS that was started down the path of privatisation by the last labour government

 

on reflection ,  I think he's wise to attempt to exploit dead people

[chrisp65]

you never know, on the Syria thing, perhaps the intention was to be a good boy and play the game the right way in backing the PM on a military adventure...

 

...and then somebody noticed, out of the window, public opinion and mood that was shifting to a position of 'oh no, not this clueless blood letting shit again? 

[blandy]

but none saying he did it for the right reasons interestingly

Not in the various analyses in the various press comment pieces, no.

In terms of people in the country, lots of people do think not doing a war in Syria was the right thing to do. There's no sentiment or desire to get involved in these middle east conflicts and civil wars. People will tolerate, just about, a focused campaign over a short period to protect a clear set of victims, but that's about as far as it goes, I think.

[tonyh29]

you never know, on the Syria thing, perhaps the intention was to be a good boy and play the game the right way in backing the PM on a military adventure...

 

...and then somebody noticed, out of the window, public opinion and mood that was shifting to a position of 'oh no, not this clueless blood letting shit again? 

 

he'd tabled his own motion , so not really playing the backing game  ( though for parliament it is sort of the done thing to do)

 

in other words  ,dont worry about the right and wrongs ..just go with whatever is going to buy me some votes ?  that sounds familiar 

[snowychap]

I don't think there is a lot of doubt about what went on to be honest

You appear to be mixing up a lot of things here (and using what may be valid in support of one as proof in support of another), the different areas being:

what went on in public (e.g. fully in public view such as the parliamentary debate);

what went on behind closed doors (i.e. what Miliband may have claimed happened; what Cameron/Oliver/Hammond/Dan Hodges/you claimed may have happened - the shameful stuff, and what Clegg didn't claim as he seemed to try and avoid answering questions on - he may have since answered them, I've ignored much of what he's said in the last year or so),

and why the various parties involved may have acted in the ways that we saw them act (in public) and the ways that we didn't see them act (in private).

I think it's fine to read in to the public record (i.e. the stuff about which you are able to say that things are a matter of record or 'well documented') what you believe may have happened and that public record may even add weight to the claims put forward by people about what may have happened in private but, until we see the minutes of those meetings in 30 years time, we can't say anything other than the claims made by various parties (as apart from the facts about what happened) are well documented.

Edited April 24, 2015 by snowychap

[snowychap]

Provide 500,000 social homes for rent by 2020 and control rent levels I think thats a good policy if its feasible. 

What do you mean by 'feasible'?

Can it be done? Of course.

Is it at all likely? Not on your nelly.

[mjmooney]

I just threw my hands up in despair. Just when Milliband was starting to look credible he does this. Totally unnecessary, and won't win him any votes. He only needs two topics - the rich/poor divide, and the NHS. That's his ticket to No. 10, not this.

the rich poor divide that grew during the last term of labour government and the NHS that was started down the path of privatisation by the last labour government

on reflection , I think he's wise to attempt to exploit dead people

I wouldn't disagree with you Tony, but it's irrelevant. People have short memories, all bets are off with a new campaign. I'm just saying those are the two issues I'd hammer if I were him.

[tonyh29]

I just threw my hands up in despair. Just when Milliband was starting to look credible he does this. Totally unnecessary, and won't win him any votes. He only needs two topics - the rich/poor divide, and the NHS. That's his ticket to No. 10, not this.

the rich poor divide that grew during the last term of labour government and the NHS that was started down the path of privatisation by the last labour government

on reflection , I think he's wise to attempt to exploit dead people

I wouldn't disagree with you Tony, but it's irrelevant. People have short memories, all bets are off with a new campaign. I'm just saying those are the two issues I'd hammer if I were him.

Yeah that's true enough , a part of me thinks the election could swing by what happens the night before \ morning of the election ... wonder if Cameron is looking at the map of the South Atlantic about now

[OutByEaster?]

I'm not sure there's a big swing in this election, I think the main parties are both pretty sure where they'll lie. They're no longer campaigning at us, they're campaigning at each other - persuading the British electorate to vote for you is going to be very difficult, making friends with the SNP is probably simpler.

[chrisp65]

 

Provide 500,000 social homes for rent by 2020 and control rent levels I think thats a good policy if its feasible. 

What do you mean by 'feasible'?

Can it be done? Of course.

Is it at all likely? Not on your nelly.

 

 

is it possible?

 

100,000 homes per year?

 

of course it is, ONS  stats show that for decades we used to build over 300,000 per year, all through the terrible bankrupt 1970's when we were 'broken'

 

where the Green Party would allow 100,000 homes per year to be built would be interesting, you will struggle to find 100 towns a year for 5 years to accept a 1,000 house developments in the existing confines of the town and I'm not sure the Greens will allow new towns to be built on newt occupied grasslands

 

so history says yes, easy, but practicality suggests it won't happen (imagine the amount of road it would commit the greens to building!)

[smetrov]

I just threw my hands up in despair. Just when Milliband was starting to look credible he does this. Totally unnecessary, and won't win him any votes. He only needs two topics - the rich/poor divide, and the NHS. That's his ticket to No. 10, not this.

 

Did a similar thing when elected Labour leader - started going on about Israel.

 

I quite like a lot of what he says - but the average bloke in the street isn't really interested in Israel ....or Syria....unless we get onto the subject of taking refugees ....which we now might over the next 48 hours.....concentrate on public spending cuts and the NHS... 

[tonyh29]

I just threw my hands up in despair. Just when Milliband was starting to look credible he does this. Totally unnecessary, and won't win him any votes. He only needs two topics - the rich/poor divide, and the NHS. That's his ticket to No. 10, not this.

Did a similar thing when elected Labour leader - started going on about Israel.

I quite like a lot of what he says - but the average bloke in the street isn't really interested in Israel ....or Syria....unless we get onto the subject of taking refugees ....which we now might over the next 48 hours.....concentrate on public spending cuts and the NHS...

I'd imagine the average bloke in the street is exactly who they try and get to with these daft statements

Labour / Tory already have their core voters who will vote for them no matter what ... What they need to do is strike a cord with the undecided , ukip are showing around 18% in the polls ... That's 18 % of realitively new voters to a party that have switched alliegience or are possibly first time voters ... Cameron needs that 18% and as ukip are single issue party knows that he can possible dip into that 18% if he says the right things on Europe ... Then he ( the party pollsters more accurately ) has to decide how much the pink vote may be worth to his party and in going after them how much of the UKIP vote he's just attracted back will be homophobic and thus vote elsewhere ...

Libya will be forgotten in a few days , the calculation for labour will be did they manage to turn any undecided would be Tory voter away ... And having turned them away can they say anything that might resonate with them ...

marginal seats only need to sway a smallish number of people and what might not be a deal clincher for one voter might be for another

Edited April 24, 2015 by tonyh29

[Demitri_C]

The snp and labour are already fighting and they are not even in power yet. Can't see how they will survive 5 years together if as expected they scrap a win in the election?

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

https://twitter.com/cooledmiliband

 

 

 

 

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

 

well, well!

[Condimentalist]

Yeah I saw that. I think he does actually support Villa, he's related to Dugdale. Strange mistake to make though. I suppose he must have been thinking about West Ham when we was talking. 

[chrisp65]

out of curiosity, where was he when he said it

 

That sounds quite a big echo filled venue you'd rattle around in, so he could have just been being nice to the venue, Karen Brady.

[markavfc40]

out of curiosity, where was he when he said it

 

That sounds quite a big echo filled venue you'd rattle around in, so he could have just been being nice to the venue, Karen Brady.

 

 

He was at Turf Moor.

[coda]

He said he had a 'brain fade'. Strange.