The 2015 General Election

[smetrov]

 

 

 

 

I think they would still try  ... Cameron will make a Queens Speech and then the SNP will vote with Labour to defeat it  ,,Cameron is out the door but politically the Tories have all  the ammo they need

 

 

 

 

Ammo they need for what? The Tories may well be the biggest party by a few seats but they will be nowhere near an overall majority.

 

In that scenario it won’t just be Labour and the SNP that won’t back them you will also have the Greens and Plaid Cymru and the Lib Dems won’t want to alienate themselves even further by backing the Tories with no chance of them getting a Queens speech passed. The Lib Dems will only be interested in the Tories again if there is a tiny slice of power on offer for them. Unlike last time, this time, there won’t be.

 

The majority of the house will be made up of centre and left leaning parties. Milliband will comfortably get a Queens speech passed. It is anyone’s guess as to what happens and for how long he is Prime minister after that.

 

they've spent months telling everyone how they SNP will prop up Miliband  , they've even convinced Ed to come out and say he wont do it .. the other parties don't have enough seats to really make a difference , the SNP block vote is the deal clincher

 

you don't think that the Tory party wont be raising this every day for the next 5 years and beyond

 

 

I think it really depends on whats happening. Once the hullabalo has died down - i don't think cursing the SNP will be at the forefront of you averages joes mind. And it depends on what happens in the tory party - they might feel they lost the election being not tough enough on europe - and could drift to the right.

 

I don't see anyone in either party - capturing the mood of the country like Blair or Thatcher did - and romping back with a massive majority.

 

Coalitions and minority govts are commonplace outside the UK - One party getting a thumping majority isn't always for the best anyway....

[markavfc40]

 

they've spent months telling everyone how they SNP will prop up Miliband  , they've even convinced Ed to come out and say he wont do it .. the other parties don't have enough seats to really make a difference , the SNP block vote is the deal clincher

 

 

you don't think that the Tory party wont be raising this every day for the next 5 years and beyond

 

 

He doesn't have to go back on that though does he. The SNP will initially back him simply to see the back of the Tories.That won't require a coalition or a deal. After that I guess it will be on a policy by policy basis as to if the SNP back him or not. They certainly won't be voting with the Tories on anything as that would be suicide for them.

There is little doubt the whole thing is a mess though and as far as Labour are concerned the SNP have thrown a massive spanner in the works. Labour will gain seats in England and had their vote got anywhere near close to holding up in Scotland they would have comfortably been the biggest party and close to an overall majority.

[PaulC]

Such a statement will only cost Ed among people who buy the notion that Labour caused the recession, which they didn't. Their borrowing made any recovery harder, but the levels of borrowing under Labour have since been dwarfed by the borrowing by the Tories to fund said recovery. It will probably be dwarfed again in the next parliament, whoever is in charge.

 

Then it will all crash again, and we'll have the same arguments again, and people will keep blaming one another for not working the system right, when it has become pretty damn clear, if it wasn't made clear enough during the previous century, that something drastic needs to change.

Not sure. There's a lot of people who are put off by labour because of their spending polices. By saying that will have fed into their fears and given a proportion of votes to Conservatives. Mainly middle to old age people who don't really like the tories but are scared to vote Labour.

Edited May 1, 2015 by PaulC

[blandy]

 

 

Well, it's still neck and neck with less than a week to go. I wonder what scare tactic the left wing will use in the closing stages.

perhaps they'll get their media barons to write personal attacks lies and distortions in all the pape...

oh no

 

perhaps they will tell lies about privatising the NHS or get the Labour party member and head of Trussell to make false claims about 1m people 

 

 

but that aside , you are sorta missing my point which was to highlight the myopic view of the original post that I copied (and modified)  ... or do we now have to write into VT law that only Tories use scare tactics  ..along with having no moral compass , eating babies , only think about themselves and greed

 

The way I see it is that parties will to an extent raise scare stories about their opponents. That's the nature of them. Both (all) of them do it to one degree or another.

The labour thing about the NHS is clearly OTT. The Tory thing about Labour being in SNP's pocket is equally ludicrous.

Where there's more grounds is because none of them have been fully (or in the tory case even partially) open about spending cuts. It's reprehensible and whilst it's a bit hypocritical of (say) labour to attack the tories validly for hiding what they'll cut, you can see why they do it - because the tories are hiding massive amounts of detail.

 

But what's been really really poor is the co-ordinated personal attacks on Miliband in the Torygraph, Mail and Sun, the double standards around the letters from whoever in the Press. And while it's kind of unsurprising that Murdoch told the Sun editor and staff to attack Miliband, it's massively unedifying for an Aussie /US media mogul with no vote and no residency in the UK to try and do everything he can to stop Labour.

And the same with the tax exiles at the Torygraph, and just the odious twunt at the Mail. Political comment and opinion articles is one thing, but the deranged howling attacks instigated in the right wing press (which is most of it) by the paper owners and the tories is just anti democratic. A concerted attempt by night wing establishment, with all the sense of entitlement they have to manipulate the results is just poisoning the election.

[smetrov]

 

 

 

Well, it's still neck and neck with less than a week to go. I wonder what scare tactic the left wing will use in the closing stages.

perhaps they'll get their media barons to write personal attacks lies and distortions in all the pape...

oh no

 

perhaps they will tell lies about privatising the NHS or get the Labour party member and head of Trussell to make false claims about 1m people 

 

 

but that aside , you are sorta missing my point which was to highlight the myopic view of the original post that I copied (and modified)  ... or do we now have to write into VT law that only Tories use scare tactics  ..along with having no moral compass , eating babies , only think about themselves and greed

 

The way I see it is that parties will to an extent raise scare stories about their opponents. That's the nature of them. Both (all) of them do it to one degree or another.

The labour thing about the NHS is clearly OTT. The Tory thing about Labour being in SNP's pocket is equally ludicrous.

Where there's more grounds is because none of them have been fully (or in the tory case even partially) open about spending cuts. It's reprehensible and whilst it's a bit hypocritical of (say) labour to attack the tories validly for hiding what they'll cut, you can see why they do it - because the tories are hiding massive amounts of detail.

 

But what's been really really poor is the co-ordinated personal attacks on Miliband in the Torygraph, Mail and Sun, the double standards around the letters from whoever in the Press. And while it's kind of unsurprising that Murdoch told the Sun editor and staff to attack Miliband, it's massively unedifying for an Aussie /US media mogul with no vote and no residency in the UK to try and do everything he can to stop Labour.

And the same with the tax exiles at the Torygraph, and just the odious taunt at the Mail. Political comment and opinion articles is one thing, but the deranged howling attacks instigated in the right wing press (which is most of it) by the paper owners and the tories is just anti democratic. A concerted attempt by night wing establishment, with all the sense of entitlement they have to manipulate the results is just poisoning the election.

 

 

I think for 4.5 years the Tories thought Milliband was an easy target - IMO they even gave him an easy ride at times - then when they turned there big guns on him - Hes actually done ok - he hasn't been the massive voter turn off many expected.

 

I don't actually think the privatisation of the NHS is OTT - There will always be something called the NHS - and it will always be free at point of delivery. For example NHS trusts ...are they really public sector ? - they get govt contracts and are paid as such - but that aside they stand alone - some have massive budget surplus  (profits !)

[blandy]

 

I think for 4.5 years the Tories thought Milliband was an easy target - IMO they even gave him an easy ride at times - then when they turned there big guns on him - He's actually done ok - he hasn't been the massive voter turn off many expected.

 

I don't actually think the privatisation of the NHS is OTT - There will always be something called the NHS - and it will always be free at point of delivery. For example NHS trusts ...are they really public sector ? - they get govt contracts and are paid as such - but that aside they stand alone - some have massive budget surplus  (profits !)

Sorry, I meant the labour claims on the tories privatising the NHS are over the top - i.e. the claims are a massive exaggeration, and kind of gloss over the fact that they introduced the private companies into the NHS - albeit the tories have expanded that.

 

I think you're right about Milliband. And the attacks on him have been ridiculous - first his Father was a "traitor" (Mail) then he's a wimp and a geek, then he's a cold hearted assassin of his brother, then he's in Salmond's pocket. He's also been "Red Ed" as if he were some kind of marxist instead of someone leading a pretty centre-ground party, that's slightly averse to perks for the very rich and beating up on the very poor. In most European countries he's be bang in the middle, politically. It's only really that compared to the US/Aus that he seems at all left wing, or what they'd call "Red".  But then you've got Murdoch and Lynton Crosby (two aussies) kind of running the attacks on him.

 

He's a bit geeky at time, but nothing sinister, or damaging.

[blandy]

they've spent months telling everyone how they SNP will prop up Miliband  , they've even convinced Ed to come out and say he wont do it .. the other parties don't have enough seats to really make a difference , the SNP block vote is the deal clincher

 

you don't think that the Tory party wont be raising this every day for the next 5 years and beyond

Spot on. They will. Whether it's a valid "complaint" is another matter. It isn't. If the people vote for a parliament made up of however many Labours, SNPs, Tories and the rest, and it turns out that Labour +SNP (or Tory + UKIP, or whatever else) have enough MPs, as voted for by the people, to be the Gov't, or to Govern - that's what the system produced. Live with it.

 

The system is completely unsuitable for the 21st century, but there's no way the tories will consider changes to it for as long as they hold the delusion that they can get power through the current system (and that applies almost as much to Labour). Obviously all the other parties accept they can't win outright, so want a system that gives a representative parliament according to the way people vote.

 

We look at opinion polls and it's all 34% these, 35% those, 10%...etc.. - that's the way people divide amongst what's on offer from the parties. That's the way the parliament should be made up.

 

It's mad that the SNP might get 55% of the Scotch (sorry) votes and 100% of the MPs, or the UKIPs or Greens, say, 15% or 8% of the votes and 1% or 0.03% of the MPs. The system is utterly bonkers.

 

It's not so tribal anymore - people are generally not "I'm 100% tory" (or Labour) they'll like some tory and some UKIP and some LD policies, or whatever. The parliament needs to reflect how people see the world and the country.

[smetrov]

 

they've spent months telling everyone how they SNP will prop up Miliband  , they've even convinced Ed to come out and say he wont do it .. the other parties don't have enough seats to really make a difference , the SNP block vote is the deal clincher

 

you don't think that the Tory party wont be raising this every day for the next 5 years and beyond

Spot on. They will. Whether it's a valid "complaint" is another matter. It isn't. If the people vote for a parliament made up of however many Labours, SNPs, Tories and the rest, and it turns out that Labour +SNP (or Tory + UKIP, or whatever else) have enough MPs, as voted for by the people, to be the Gov't, or to Govern - that's what the system produced. Live with it.

 

The system is completely unsuitable for the 21st century, but there's no way the tories will consider changes to it for as long as they hold the delusion that they can get power through the current system (and that applies almost as much to Labour). Obviously all the other parties accept they can't win outright, so want a system that gives a representative parliament according to the way people vote.

 

We look at opinion polls and it's all 34% these, 35% those, 10%...etc.. - that's the way people divide amongst what's on offer from the parties. That's the way the parliament should be made up.

 

It's mad that the SNP might get 55% of the Scotch (sorry) votes and 100% of the MPs, or the UKIPs or Greens, say, 15% or 8% of the votes and 1% or 0.03% of the MPs. The system is utterly bonkers.

 

It's not so tribal anymore - people are generally not "I'm 100% tory" (or Labour) they'll like some tory and some UKIP and some LD policies, or whatever. The parliament needs to reflect how people see the world and the country.

 

 

But realistically it makes no difference - sure the smaller parties may get a few more seats in the house of commons, but so what ? - they still don't influence much (ie say we got 10 Green MP'S - what could they do ?) 

[tonyh29]

 

they've spent months telling everyone how they SNP will prop up Miliband  , they've even convinced Ed to come out and say he wont do it .. the other parties don't have enough seats to really make a difference , the SNP block vote is the deal clincher

 

you don't think that the Tory party wont be raising this every day for the next 5 years and beyond

Spot on. They will. Whether it's a valid "complaint" is another matter. It isn't. If the people vote for a parliament made up of however many Labours, SNPs, Tories and the rest, and it turns out that Labour +SNP (or Tory + UKIP, or whatever else) have enough MPs, as voted for by the people, to be the Gov't, or to Govern - that's what the system produced. Live with it.

 

The system is completely unsuitable for the 21st century, but there's no way the tories will consider changes to it for as long as they hold the delusion that they can get power through the current system (and that applies almost as much to Labour). Obviously all the other parties accept they can't win outright, so want a system that gives a representative parliament according to the way people vote.

 

We look at opinion polls and it's all 34% these, 35% those, 10%...etc.. - that's the way people divide amongst what's on offer from the parties. That's the way the parliament should be made up.

 

It's mad that the SNP might get 55% of the Scotch (sorry) votes and 100% of the MPs, or the UKIPs or Greens, say, 15% or 8% of the votes and 1% or 0.03% of the MPs. The system is utterly bonkers.

 

It's not so tribal anymore - people are generally not "I'm 100% tory" (or Labour) they'll like some tory and some UKIP and some LD policies, or whatever. The parliament needs to reflect how people see the world and the country.

 

I'm puzzled how Mark can disagree with me when i say it and then like your post when you say I'm Spot on

[markavfc40]

Tony I didn't disagree that the SNP would back Labour. I just stated that Miliband doesn't have to go back on what he said about not doing a deal/going into coalition with them. None of us are daft though and the SNP will clearly back Labour simply to see the back of the Tories just as the rest of the left wing mobs will. Milliband knows this which is why he doesn't need to strike any deals to get his Queens speech backed. As I said after that it will be on a policy by policy basis and I'd imagine the SNP will back him, especially initially. I'd imagine there will be some shit storm further down the line though.

 

 

As my brother Pete said though    it is what the people will have voted for given the constraints of the current system and therefore the Tories, who defended it vigorously, can have no complaints if it produces a result they don't like.

Edited May 2, 2015 by markavfc40

[VillaChris]

 

Who do you think they would go for then Tony?

May and Osbourne have been mentioned, but I think both could be easily ripped apart by a credible opposition (if the others can muster such a thing)

Neither have much of a personality and both come across as more arrogant/aloof than Dave?

Boris is a loose cannon, but still their best bet for a majority imo?

 

I'm not sure tbh  , I don't' see May or Osborne as good candidates , at least in the publics eye's  ( see Ed for the effect that can have)  so I suspect the party would still got for Boris regardless

 

I'm in a minority as I like Gove and think he would be the best candidate , if you watch him on QT he's always very fair to his opponents ( maybe we'd final get a PMQ with some respect and dignity ?) and puts his point across well   ... He is another one though that is prone to strutting around like Napoleon and his wife would probably also alienate large amounts of the public  

 

 

Sorry but Gove is Toxic....you immediately lose votes from the whole education profession if he somehow becomes Tory leader.

 

I don't hate all the Tories but him and Grant Shapps I think sum up all that is worst about the party, sneering, think they know better than anyone, Shapps has been an embarrassment last 6 months with all these revelations about him.

 

I think the next Tory leader will be Osbourne.

 

As amusing as Boris is, I just can't picture him as Prime Minister at all.

[VillaChris]

 

Being as the only chance Labour have of forming a govt is to form a coalition with the snp, I can't understand why the Labour party would want to rule this out.

 

Easy

 

Because the SNP have ruled out any deal with the tories. They have no where else to go but Labour - so Ed doesn't need an agreement\Coalition - its already there   (Called showing your hand to early !)

 

 

Trouble is, he's stated live on TV he doesn't want to deal with them at all so surely if he backtracks after the election results, that's this campaign's Tuition fees moment so people wouldn't take him serious in government when he promises stuff like we've seen with Clegg?

[tonyh29]

Looking at the spread betting odds comes up with some interesting options based on what some bookies are offering / predicting

Tory (289) + LibDem (24) = 313 + DUP (9) + Ukip (5) = 327.

Labour (270) + SNP (48) = 318 + 9 (fringe left parties) = 327.

Though tbh I don't see UKIP getting 5 seats

Edited May 1, 2015 by tonyh29

[VillaChris]

Farage will probably lose his seat, don't see them winning any new, just retaining the ones Reckless and Carswell got from being Torys anyway.

[smetrov]

 

 

Being as the only chance Labour have of forming a govt is to form a coalition with the snp, I can't understand why the Labour party would want to rule this out.

 

Easy

 

Because the SNP have ruled out any deal with the tories. They have no where else to go but Labour - so Ed doesn't need an agreement\Coalition - its already there   (Called showing your hand to early !)

 

 

Trouble is, he's stated live on TV he doesn't want to deal with them at all so surely if he backtracks after the election results, that's this campaign's Tuition fees moment so people wouldn't take him serious in government when he promises stuff like we've seen with Clegg?

 

 

It depends what you define as doing a deal -

 

- He (EM) could and probably will stick closely to his manifesto - and the SNP will support him through his 'Queens Speech'  (which would be the same content as if Labour had a majority) 

- What he won't do (IMO) -is negotiate with the SNP and put some sweetners in  - so they back him  (At first this sounds mad - but as Sturgeon as said she won't deal with Tories and will block them)  ED knows Sturgeon will (at least initially) back labour

 

So Sturgeon either agrees to Labours terms - or puts the Tories back in power. From a SNP point of view Sturgeon shouldn't have ruled out a deal with the Tories - Then she could have played Labour off v the Tories - But I guess standing on a 100% anti tory ticket has got her a lot votes. 

[markavfc40]

 

 

Being as the only chance Labour have of forming a govt is to form a coalition with the snp, I can't understand why the Labour party would want to rule this out.

 

Easy

 

Because the SNP have ruled out any deal with the tories. They have no where else to go but Labour - so Ed doesn't need an agreement\Coalition - its already there   (Called showing your hand to early !)

 

 

Trouble is, he's stated live on TV he doesn't want to deal with them at all so surely if he backtracks after the election results, that's this campaign's Tuition fees moment so people wouldn't take him serious in government when he promises stuff like we've seen with Clegg?

 

 

He doesn't have to deal with them though does he. He presents his Queens speech and they and the rest of the left wing parties will back it simply to see the back of the Tories. He then presents his policies and I'd imagine initially at least they will back them as otherwise they will be siding with the Tories in blocking them. I am sure somewhere down the line the SNP will try their hand though.

Edited May 1, 2015 by markavfc40

[Brumstopdogs]

[PaulC]

Being as the only chance Labour have of forming a govt is to form a coalition with the snp, I can't understand why the Labour party would want to rule this out.

 

Easy

 

Because the SNP have ruled out any deal with the tories. They have no where else to go but Labour - so Ed doesn't need an agreement\Coalition - its already there   (Called showing your hand to early !)

 

Trouble is, he's stated live on TV he doesn't want to deal with them at all so surely if he backtracks after the election results, that's this campaign's Tuition fees moment so people wouldn't take him serious in government when he promises stuff like we've seen with Clegg?

 

He doesn't have to deal with them though does he. He presents his Queens speech and they and the rest of the left wing parties will back it simply to see the back of the Tories. He then presents his policies and I'd imagine initially at least they will back them as otherwise they will be siding with the Tories in blocking them. I am sure somewhere down the line the SNP will try their hand though.

Sorry but how does that work if Labour don't get the largest number of seats? He can't take govt without a coalition with the SNP first.

[smetrov]

 

 

 

 

Being as the only chance Labour have of forming a govt is to form a coalition with the snp, I can't understand why the Labour party would want to rule this out.

 

Easy

 

Because the SNP have ruled out any deal with the tories. They have no where else to go but Labour - so Ed doesn't need an agreement\Coalition - its already there   (Called showing your hand to early !)

 

 

Trouble is, he's stated live on TV he doesn't want to deal with them at all so surely if he backtracks after the election results, that's this campaign's Tuition fees moment so people wouldn't take him serious in government when he promises stuff like we've seen with Clegg?

 

 

He doesn't have to deal with them though does he. He presents his Queens speech and they and the rest of the left wing parties will back it simply to see the back of the Tories. He then presents his policies and I'd imagine initially at least they will back them as otherwise they will be siding with the Tories in blocking them. I am sure somewhere down the line the SNP will try their hand though.

 

Sorry but how does that work if Labour don't get the largest number of seats? He can't take govt without a coalition with the SNP first.

 

 

Of course he can. If the Tories know that whatever they put the other parties will vote down - then typically they wouldn't go to queens speech (although in theory they could) - Labour could then present a queens speech - and the SNP have to choose whether to vote it down.

 

As EM has just said on the news - how the SNP vote in parliament is a matter for them.

[markavfc40]

Chris as Smetrov has said above Miliband doesn't need to form a coalition. If the Tories get the most seats, and as the incumbents, it is usual protocol that they get the first crack at forming a Government. If as seems likely even with the support of the Libs, DUP and UKIP they still wouldn't have a majority they can still present a Queens speech but it is almost certain it would be voted down. Labour then have the opportunity to present theirs and the SNP will back it along with the other left wing parties as it means the back of the Tories. It doesn't need a coalition, or deal, with any other party for that to happen.

Edited May 1, 2015 by markavfc40