Jump to content

If there was a general election tomorrow...


paddy

If there was a general election tomorrow who would you vote for?  

177 members have voted

  1. 1. If there was a general election tomorrow who would you vote for?

    • Labour
      36
    • Conservative
      44
    • Liberal Democrats
      36
    • Green Party
      14
    • SNP
      0
    • Plaid Cymru
      4
    • BNP
      18
    • Other (please state)
      9
    • Spoilt Ballot
      3
    • Abstain / Won't Bother
      14


Recommended Posts

Same as the idol bastards who dont vote, your spoilt paper changes nothing

*idle*

fucking_grammar_nazi3d1.jpg

You watch too much reality TV mate! :lol::lol::lol:

Clucking bell 1 incorrect letter and 1 in the wrong place.

Well done Rob - I will enable my fcuking sepll chcekre nxet tmie

Spell checker wouldn't have helped - "idol" is a valid word. But the wrong one. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, it's sometimes an easy get-out to crap on about 'Eton', 'the buller' or, what is more invidious, generally, 'private schools'.

I thought Eton and the like were public schools :?

All (UK) Public schools are private schools. :winkold:

I assumed it was a joky rhetorical question, and that most Americans had fathomed the paradox by now, but just in case....

I do so enjoy playing the ignorant colonial...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoilt ballot here.

Just out of interest why?

Same as the idol bastards who dont vote, your spoilt paper changes nothing in the great scheme. (You may feel you have made a protest vote)

Just seems a bit meaningless really

Sorry

It is far better to exercise your democratic right than not, if you can't see that then............you're thinking is a tad limited imo

Spoilt papers are recorded and until we get "None of the Above" on the ballot paper it is the only legitimate means of recording your displeasure at all the candidates on offer

Who would really care?

The MP who wins in that ward - no they will be busy celebrating

The losers - maybe but what can they do about it.

There are always going to be more of the populous who dont bother to vote than those who can be bothered but dont feel able to vote for a political party.

To think it will make any difference in the slightest is " a tad limited"

Caring?

Making a difference?

Cost of kippers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caring?

Making a difference?

Cost of kippers?

I sure this post means something, I would ask but then there is little point.

Really interesting to see the 3 major parties so close together. Now if that happened at the polls it would be very interesting wouldnt it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really interesting to see the 3 major parties so close together. Now if that happened at the polls it would be very interesting wouldnt it

the fact that the Libs cant even win a poll on a VT web site full of woolly's proves that don't have a prayer in the real world :lol:

but seriously , with the mess the country has been left in I think a hung parliament would be the last thing we need right now ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BNP with a nice 7%.

Everyone of you who picked that option, you're scum :).

If I was to take the wooly liberal view I would say they obviously have their reason for voting this way.......

But you could well be justified. I wonder if anyone who voted that way would have the decency to explain their choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peripherally related, but...

How about Efficiencyarchy in the UK?

The Conservative Party is expected to take power in the United Queen^H^H^H^H^HKingdom this May, and we're starting to get glimpses of Tory leader David Cameron's plan to reinvent government.

The Guardian explains how the British red team [in the American sense, of course, this being from a US publication --LR] plans to restore fiscal discipline and "protect frontline public services" by reducing waste:

Teh Grauniad"]

Philip Hammond, the shadow chief secretary, said "high-performing public sector businesses" such as the Passport Agency would be allowed to bid for work from other government departments where its proven IT skills were essential.

But there will be carrots as well as sticks for public sector managers. Whereas past governments have often confiscated gains made by efficient public bodies, a David Cameron government would provide incentives for innovation by allowing them to keep the bulk of what they saved, Hammond said.

Central to the Tory strategy is the calculation that Labour has wasted £60bn during two successive public spending sprees – neither connected with the global recession – by failing to achieve the same productivity gains as the private sector managed in the decade after 1997.

Reuters notes that Hammond uses phrases that roughly translates into American as best practices and good to great:

Reuters"]

On Friday, Hammond will say that if productivity growth in the public sector had kept pace with the private sector over a decade of Labour rule between 1997 and 2007, the state could have saved some 60 billion pounds.

"If efficiency gain is going to yield year-on-year savings and become a central part of what public sector bodies do, it has to become embedded within them, not imposed upon them." according to extracts of his speech.

The efficiency comparison is apt given Cameron's professed identification with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger also came into office promising greater effiency, waste reduction, and so on. He went on to grow Golden State spending by 40 percent over five years.

Cameron's preference for compromise with big government did not originate with Cameron. The Thatcher and the Reagan revolutions were both founded on such a compromise, and this is one of the main reasons that the U.K. now faces a staggering deficit and the United States a paralyzing one. However you define the common nature of British and American governance (i.e., representative government in the English common law tradition), in both countries there is a self-described small-government party that is clearly in favor of big government (and I believe Cameron's definition of "frontline public services" includes National Health).

This creates a utilitarian problem. California's example argues that if you come into office promising more efficient government that will deliver the same level of service, you will leave office with a much larger government. Even a government purged of waste fraud and abuse will continue to grow itself.

It also creates a problem of principle. The Guardian says, "Tories want prisons, schools, civil servants and hospitals to raise their game or risk losing results-based funding." Who wants the government to raise its game? To the extent that living under the U.S. government is still preferable to living under any other government, it's preferable for all those areas where the government is least efficient: that it is hard to make new laws, that the IRS does not make every possible effort to seize your money (unless you're the star of a classic libertarian film and they decide to make an example of you), that the courts have enough belief in the superstition of individual rights to tie up the will of the majority for years. These are conservative ideas, rooted in the fallen nature of the world, the non-perfectibility of human beings and the need to preserve free will as the precursor to true salvation.

So what does the conservative compromise with big government get you, except a promise of public savings that has never been fulfilled in history?

Also, is "raise your game" a British or American idiom? With even decent Americans talking about the "run-up" to this and the "spot on" nature of that, I can't tell anymore. Cheerio!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, avoiding the obvious red herring of the US libertariarian angle, there is a point for old blighty, which is the following:

All promises of 'efficiency savings' are bogus. They either materialise in cuts or they fail to materialise at all because of circumstance. Well, blow me over with a feather:

The state grows. [tick]

Efficiency savings are found by cutting services. [tick]

Please do carry on, chaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why you should vote Labour

This may come as some surprise to many here, but I really think that the next government we elect in UKia should be Gordon Brown's Labour.

We have had delivery on crime, we have had 2.5 million now unemployed.

We've sacrificed 52 pubs a year to enact the smoking ban, and sold our sovereignty to the EU for them to crush our Anglo Saxon capitalism. Meantime the former PM is off doing some capitalism himself.

We've had the judiciary setting out there is one law for them and another for us. We have police harassing photographers, and our Royal Navy allowing pirates to kidnap British citizens.

The intrusion into our lives is not limited to stealing our children; stop smoking, stop eating salt, don't drink more than a beer a day. State operatives are there to fine you at every possible opportunity. We have 1% of the population of the world but 20% of CCTV cameras - 1 for every 14 people. Despite this the police can shoot an innocent man and there be no resignations or sackings as a result, the CCTV evidence having gone walkies.

Our state education system has been shattered.. If you try and opt out of state education the government brands you a paedophile. In the meantime the difference between the rich and poor grows. Our hospitals are killing people.

By propping up our ruined economy by spending one borrowed pound for every four pounds HMG spends- we are now facing a Sovereign debt crises next year.

So, yes, in 2010 I shall put the nosepeg on and vote Labour.

Because in light of all the above, 29% of my fellow citizens will still vote Labour in 2010.

Until the evil that is Socialism in the UK has been shown to have comprehensively failed, we will continue electing the left. It will run close to destroying the country, but we have a brighter future once the blight of Marxism is forever expunged from this green and pleasant land.

To do that, UKian living conditions must deteriorate under a Labour government until that 29% have abandoned them totally, completely and forever.

(the UKia, UKian, etc. thing is a meme on the sites descended from Kuro5hin... basically the Canadian posters made a stink about the use of "American" to mean people from the USA and proposed USian... from there we got USia and then the British and Northern Irish posters appropriated UKian and UKia... I've never been clear on whether is "You-kay-ee-ah"/"You-kay-ee-an" or "You-ke-yah"/"You-key-an")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labour.

Conservatives are too close to the BNP for me, seem to recall a local Tory MP giving it all the "Britain for the British" speech, sounded a lot like Griffin tbh.

Even though I am starting to lean slightly towards the Lim Dems, I would move out if the BNP ever got voted in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labour.

Conservatives are too close to the BNP for me, seem to recall a local Tory MP giving it all the "Britain for the British" speech, sounded a lot like Griffin tbh.

Just for the record, Wedge:

PM stands by 'British jobs' vow

Gordon Brown does not regret promising "British jobs for British workers", a No 10 spokesman has said, amid rising unrest about the use of foreign labour.

The PM's pledge, at the 2007 Labour conference, was attacked by critics as unwise and even illegal as European law opens UK jobs to all EU nationals.

The slogan is now being used by protesters at refineries across the UK, angry at a plant using Italian workers.

No 10 said it was working hard to help British people fill job vacancies.

Does that mean Labour are nearly the BNP too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoilt Ballot, just so no one can claim that i'm a lazy and apathetic citizen.

In the past i've begrudgingly voted Lib Dems but i've come to the conclusion that voting is utterly pointless unless you're only doing it to prevent a greater evil. I think that who is in power doens't really dictate the quality of our lives but rather what we do at a grass roots level. Labour and the Tories are both backed by the same interests, that is by the wealthy and both parties act in the interests of thse backers and the media moguls, i'm sure the Lib Dems would be no different.

Like the saying goes if voting could change anything it would be illegal, all it is is a facade of democracy that essentially tries to hide the fact that the government is primarily an administrative institution for keeping capitalism ticking over.

I don't see a single party that could effectively represent the interests of the working class in this country. Labour have abandonned even a pretence of doing so, the Socialist Workers Party are utterly out of tocuh and have no support on the ground and the BNP are run by a middle class, cambridge educated landowner whose dad was a senior tory!

I think if we want to make out lives better then we should put the work in at a grass roots level, agitating in our workplaces and communities for better homes, less working hours, more control over society etc. If we do this then the government has to listen regardless of who is in power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has to be Lib Dem for me

labour are a busted flush and going nowhere with no ideas, Cameron's tories are trying desperately to copy them (with strangely even fewer ideas than none) and even if back home I couldn't vote SNP as Salmond is a complete plank who bottled his mandate and raison d'etre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why you should vote Labour

This may come as some surprise to many here, but I really think that the next government we elect in UKia should be Gordon Brown's Labour.

We have had delivery on crime, we have had 2.5 million now unemployed.

We've sacrificed 52 pubs a year to enact the smoking ban, and sold our sovereignty to the EU for them to crush our Anglo Saxon capitalism. Meantime the former PM is off doing some capitalism himself.

We've had the judiciary setting out there is one law for them and another for us. We have police harassing photographers, and our Royal Navy allowing pirates to kidnap British citizens.

The intrusion into our lives is not limited to stealing our children; stop smoking, stop eating salt, don't drink more than a beer a day. State operatives are there to fine you at every possible opportunity. We have 1% of the population of the world but 20% of CCTV cameras - 1 for every 14 people. Despite this the police can shoot an innocent man and there be no resignations or sackings as a result, the CCTV evidence having gone walkies.

Our state education system has been shattered.. If you try and opt out of state education the government brands you a paedophile. In the meantime the difference between the rich and poor grows. Our hospitals are killing people.

By propping up our ruined economy by spending one borrowed pound for every four pounds HMG spends- we are now facing a Sovereign debt crises next year.

So, yes, in 2010 I shall put the nosepeg on and vote Labour.

Because in light of all the above, 29% of my fellow citizens will still vote Labour in 2010.

Until the evil that is Socialism in the UK has been shown to have comprehensively failed, we will continue electing the left. It will run close to destroying the country, but we have a brighter future once the blight of Marxism is forever expunged from this green and pleasant land.

To do that, UKian living conditions must deteriorate under a Labour government until that 29% have abandoned them totally, completely and forever.

(the UKia, UKian, etc. thing is a meme on the sites descended from Kuro5hin... basically the Canadian posters made a stink about the use of "American" to mean people from the USA and proposed USian... from there we got USia and then the British and Northern Irish posters appropriated UKian and UKia... I've never been clear on whether is "You-kay-ee-ah"/"You-kay-ee-an" or "You-ke-yah"/"You-key-an")

...I really dunno why, but I suspect that that article may be a bit biased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shall vote UKIP

Not that it will may a jot of difference in this area as I am in one of the safest Tory seats in the UK, hence the reason Douglas Hurd was my MP for years and now a certain David Cameron is my MP. He only lives three miles down the road from me and I have met him a number of times. He is actually a suprisingly pleasent guy, though comes across as a bit a wishy washy dandy to be honest.

I fully expect the tories to get in to power this time, which I am fine with as I feel we need a change.. plus I am looking forward to seeing what new and exciting ways they can screw me over!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â