The 2015 General Election

[markavfc40]

I wonder whether promising no tax rises for 5 years is like Cameron's immigration promise last time i.e. utter stupidity. How on Earth can you put it in law when you don't know what the economy will do in that time?

 

It is basically putting a Tory ideology into law for five years. It means they can do what they'd have wanted to do all along anyway and cut public spending by slashing even more public services and cutting welfare (but not pensions of course) all behind the excuse of well we can't raise taxes as its been set in stone that we wouldn't. It will have a huge impact on those already with the least but when did that ever stop the evil bastards.

Edited April 29, 2015 by markavfc40

[sharkyvilla]

I wonder whether promising no tax rises for 5 years is like Cameron's immigration promise last time i.e. utter stupidity. How on Earth can you put it in law when you don't know what the economy will do in that time?

 

it's cruel

 

it's another way of saying:

people with money, don't worry you can keep it, if we need to look at finances (which we will), we will be cutting benefits and services from the shit at the bottom of the pile

I'm assuming they know that they won't get a majority so can promise whatever they want, knowing that no coalition partner would ever agree to it, therefore break said promise anyway. Just get a few cheap votes, enough to be biggest party.

[Genie]

I wonder whether promising no tax rises for 5 years is like Cameron's immigration promise last time i.e. utter stupidity. How on Earth can you put it in law when you don't know what the economy will do in that time?

He promises no income tax rises, does that stop him lowering the bands to catch more people at the SAME tax brackets? First thing I wondered when I heard this.

He could also try and force inflation up to push people into higher tax bands.

[VillaChris]

When will Cameron quit/be forced out?

 

Obviously if he loses the election he'll get chopped within weeks but if he's still the PM in whatever form....I'd probably say sometime around 2017 especially if the referendum happens and Britain votes to stay in as I expect. I think he'd see that as a good time to bow out.

 

It's strange with him if you look beyond the policies and ideology...to me he's far more statesmanlike than Milliband when making big statements or representing the country abroad................but he makes so many lazy errors like the infamous West Ham comment that a switched on leader really shouldn't be making. 

[chrisp65]

 

 

I wonder whether promising no tax rises for 5 years is like Cameron's immigration promise last time i.e. utter stupidity. How on Earth can you put it in law when you don't know what the economy will do in that time?

 

it's cruel

 

it's another way of saying:

people with money, don't worry you can keep it, if we need to look at finances (which we will), we will be cutting benefits and services from the shit at the bottom of the pile

I'm assuming they know that they won't get a majority so can promise whatever they want, knowing that no coalition partner would ever agree to it, therefore break said promise anyway. Just get a few cheap votes, enough to be biggest party.

 

 

Yes, that's very true of all of them - it's very likely its a strong reason why none can discuss coalition agreements because that's their get out of jail card. Promise the world, then say they couldn't deliver because they don't have a stand alone majority.

 

Haven't researched it yet, but didn't they promise a similar law last time? I think they said they would enshrine the ring fencing of tax credits 'in law'. Then got in to power and cut them.

 

The elephant in the room, none of them will tell us what it is they are cutting whilst they try to out bid each other with treats for wavering voters.

[jon_c]

I was just looking into all these reports on how the SNP are going to smash Labour in Scotland, then I started looking at the individual seats that the SNP are supposedly going to take. Many of these the SNP were third or even fourth in the last election. If you look at any depth into the figures, it would take some ridiculously large vote swings for this to happen.

YouGov polls for example have Jim Murphy losing East Renfrewshire to the Nationals, last election he had 50.8% of the vote there, Conservatives 30.4%, Lib Dem 9.2%, and Scottish Nationals on 8.9%. I'm not sure there has been a swing of fourty odd percent in a constituency in British electoral history, not that I've been able to find anyway.

[OutByEaster?]

A lovely little manoeuvre today.

 

"We're not sure whether or not you'll vote for us on the basis of spending £100bn on Trident, so we're moving that to 2016 okay? It doesn't count and it can't be part of the election. Cheers."

[tonyh29]

The Sun Scotland and the Sun England .... lets see who can spot the difference  ....

 

[brommy]

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.

[Jon]

That rag is trying to compete with The Heil for the most godawful piece of shite ever to be published. It's still got a long way to go though. Thankfully, the power of the papers, and thus rocket polishers like Murdoch and the Nazi loving owners of the Heil, is on the wane.

[Jon]

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

[villaglint]

Great question Jon which also plays a big part in the reasons behind the political divides between various parties.

 

For me I go B also as I think the stuff "for me" is generally the give away vote winning tactics that try to mask the bits in column B you dont agree with.

 

Tories been a great example of this in what has been a pretty terrible election so far for them. Loads of give away yet their ideology and main message has and will be cuts! Mixed messages at its finest.

[brommy]

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.

[tonyh29]

I know someone posted A as the answer to that question once , I wont name him , but he's from the Left side of VT

 

I don't get this "morally " thing , its banded around VT as a badge of honour and always  suggested you can only have morals if you vote Labour  , having morals is nothing to do with how you vote ... my morals come from my upbringing and I have parents that have taught me very well in that regard ... if people want to from an opinion of me (or anyone else for that matter) based around how I vote then that says more about them than it does me  ..

 

It can be in someone's best interest to vote for a party not just because they are Rich , we've all done those vote compass things , we've on the whole (those that answered them truthfully )  found out that in some instances we tick boxes with more than one party ..in my case Lib Dem in one survey , Tory in another  , but in all of them I've discovered that there is also a little bit of lefty in me (for shame )  ....

[tonyh29]

 

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

[brommy]

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.

[chrisp65]

No, I think I can see where Brommy is coming from.

When I was starting out in life there were any number of occasions where it became clear you needed to be in a particular set or club to get nice things.

I've had a job where it was made clear that to progress I had to join the golf club and play by the clubhouse rules. I tried it, it was so up itself and so obviously just a conservative meeting place that I dropped it quite quickly.

Another time, I needed a written quote for building work to qualify for a grant that was only available for a very brief window. Couldn't persuade a builder to give a quote. A friend who it later transpired was in the masons got me that quote. The masons was very much a tory thing around here.

I could go on (don't worry I won't), but I found this time and time again, you had to be 'in' to get a share of the nice things. It was unfair.

[El Zen]

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

Mostly B. My family is resonably well off and generally benefit financially from traditional conservative policies but we're still a bunch of lefties.

However, my own situation does influence my political leanings. Two years of working in the private sector, seeing exploitive contracts and union crushing, made me more radical than I was previously. I voted liberal last time, will vote socialist (and I don't mean Labour!) next. I'm now a teacher, so obviously I'd be more likely to vote for a party that looks after teachers' interests. So it's a bit of A, too, to be completely honest.

[Jon]

I know someone posted A as the answer to that question once , I wont name him , but he's from the Left side of VT

 

I don't get this "morally " thing , its banded around VT as a badge of honour and always  suggested you can only have morals if you vote Labour  , having morals is nothing to do with how you vote ... my morals come from my upbringing and I have parents that have taught me very well in that regard ... if people want to from an opinion of me (or anyone else for that matter) based around how I vote then that says more about them than it does me  ..

 

It can be in someone's best interest to vote for a party not just because they are Rich , we've all done those vote compass things , we've on the whole (those that answered them truthfully )  found out that in some instances we tick boxes with more than one party ..in my case Lib Dem in one survey , Tory in another  , but in all of them I've discovered that there is also a little bit of lefty in me (for shame )  ....

No longer on here AFAIK?

 

[Jon]

 having morals is nothing to do with how you vote ...

I honestly, hand on heart, don't think I could ever vote Tory, not matter how much or what they promised to give me. I couldn't live with my conscience, and for me that makes it a moral judgement. I just could not bring myself to vote for a party whose primary aim seems to be to keep the wealthy, wealthy, and shat on the weak, the poor, and the needy.

 

It's very much a moral judgement I am making when I walk into that voting booth.

 

I'm not equating being moral with voting Labour by the way. They seemed to lose their moral compass some time ago. Possibly in 1997. But maybe before. I think Thatch found their compass, and crushed it. Labour has yet to fully recover from Thatch. Hence the popularity of the Greens, who have gone from being a fringe 'single interest' party to a genuine UK-wide force and home for left wing, socialist and environmental thought.