Bollitics: VT General Election Poll #3 - GE Week One

[kidlewis]

they don't give a shit about people. Which is fine if you've got money and have no concept of empathy.

because for all their faults I think they best represent the best interests of the many rather than the few

sorry but what a load of Bollocks (no malice intended guys )

Fine if you throw that accusations at all parties but to single it out on the Tory party is so outdated as to make me wonder if you aren't both living in 1927 or something

Labour represent the interests of many ..don't make me laugh .. it's conveniently forgotten that labour courted business , bankers the media and sold their souls to the highest bidder to gain power .. but suddenly now that they've lost all that backing they are trying to make out that these people are bad and cronies of the Tories ...

Was chatting to a mate of mine on Sat , he's actually one of the few people I've met who is what you would call a floating voter ..he was a Tory but switched to voting Labour and Lib dem the past couple of elections ..He doesn't know how he will vote in May but he was saying in any real sense the public should be doing what they can to get rid of Labour .. and yet here we are where have the possibility , sown by Labour in to the public's mind , to vote tactically to stop the Tories from winning :shock: ..

seriously at the election they should have a stock pile of straight jackets and the second you put an X in the Labour box you should be put in one and be taken away ..

but anyway for Trent and Chindie :winkold: ,in today's other news .... Charles Lindbergh has just made the first solo non-stop trans-Atlantic flight from New York to Paris.....Babe Ruth has become the first baseball player to hit 60 home-runs in a season and Mae West has been sentenced to 10 days in prison for obscenity

Sorry to quote you again,

People seem to think that because Labour somehow managed to shed it's old skin and become NuLabour, it means they are the only party who can change, apparently for the better.

[drat01]

What a ludicrous post KL - to use a local biased report as some sort of indication for national Labour policy is clutching at the straws in a similar way to Cameron does all of the time.

The Tory party are showing time after time after time in this election to have got rid of none of the Thatcherite policies - I am surprised Cameron has not taken to wearing a dress and fluffing up his hair. The Tory party has NOT changed and a vote for them is a vote to return to the days of the "**** you I am alright" days of Thatcher.

They WILL cut NHS budgets, they WILL raise VAT etc etc - they have done it before and nothing they have said shows that they will not try and do it again. The people who will prosper under any sort of Tory regime are those who already have not the have nots.

[mjmooney]

Any party who's defining character uttered the infamous words 'theres no such thing as society' can go swing.

Thats to me what underpins why they're the nasty party - they don't give a shit about people. Which is fine if you've got money and have no concept of empathy.

I agree Chindie.

I personally would probably be better off as an individual under a Tory government but I want to see society (which I do believe still exists or should) better off even if it comes at some personal cost. That is why I will vote for Labour because for all their faults I think they best represent the best interests of the many rather than the few.

This USED to be true. Sadly, the Labour Party of Blair/Brown is not the Labour Party of Keir Hardie, Nye Bevin or Neil Kinnock. I actually quite like Gordo as an individual, but the party is now far too infested with slimy rocket polishers like Mandelson to be saved. They need a purge, and a few years in the wilderness to remember what they're supposed to stand for.

The question is, are the Cameron Tories equally changed from the Thatcher Tories? In my opinion, no, they are still reptiles (not as nice as wolves) in sheeps' clothing.

Which leaves me with a "conscience" vote for the hapless LibDems, simply because they are the only party who have even a shred of that social conscience that Trent, Chindie and I value.

[Chindie]

they don't give a shit about people. Which is fine if you've got money and have no concept of empathy.

because for all their faults I think they best represent the best interests of the many rather than the few

sorry but what a load of Bollocks (no malice intended guys )

Fine if you throw that accusations at all parties but to single it out on the Tory party is so outdated as to make me wonder if you aren't both living in 1927 or something

Labour represent the interests of many ..don't make me laugh .. it's conveniently forgotten that labour courted business , bankers the media and sold their souls to the highest bidder to gain power .. but suddenly now that they've lost all that backing they are trying to make out that these people are bad and cronies of the Tories ...

Was chatting to a mate of mine on Sat , he's actually one of the few people I've met who is what you would call a floating voter ..he was a Tory but switched to voting Labour and Lib dem the past couple of elections ..He doesn't know how he will vote in May but he was saying in any real sense the public should be doing what they can to get rid of Labour .. and yet here we are where have the possibility , sown by Labour in to the public's mind , to vote tactically to stop the Tories from winning :shock: ..

seriously at the election they should have a stock pile of straight jackets and the second you put an X in the Labour box you should be put in one and be taken away ..

but anyway for Trent and Chindie :winkold: ,in today's other news .... Charles Lindbergh has just made the first solo non-stop trans-Atlantic flight from New York to Paris.....Babe Ruth has become the first baseball player to hit 60 home-runs in a season and Mae West has been sentenced to 10 days in prison for obscenity

You seem to have forgotten that I don't like any of the parties. I won't vote for any of them.

But at the bottom of the pile are the Tories. I don't care that Labour did shed what they once stood for and followed the well trodden path of Conservatism to court the middle class. I do care that the Tories had a woman in charge, before I was born admittedly, that said there is no such thing as society, and all that entails. Me me me, I'm alright jack. I don't like that. I believe it's something the Tories still rather like but they know they can't win an election by pissing on the poor.

The tenets of conservatism do no favours for the majority. They value money more than people. And they value those who make a lot of it more than those who would need it to be spent. The underlying basis of conservatism is based on lowering costs, small government, etc etc, are they not? While that's not necessarily a bad thing, it is when it comes at the cost of the people the government, the state, owes help to. Which it almost inevitably will do to my mind.

While Labour these days, as Mike says, are no better, having gotten power through slick ability and carefully orchestrated courting of the money, they still have made improvements to this country, I don't buy this idea that they did no good and screwed us all for all it's worth. The NHS is the easiest example - it's better now than before to my mind. It's gained new flaws, like the waste of money on bureaucracy and far too much cash on admin, but at the frontline, straight up healthcare, it's better than it's been.

Would the Tories have done that? Well, it'd mean paying for it and that means money and that means, god forbid, taxes.

The lack of a social conscience in what conservatism is disgusts me. And I'm glad people like Trent, who probably would have benefitted from the Tories taking less of his wage packet, are willing to take a sacrifice personally to ensure the good of the people as far as possible.

[bickster]

The Tory party are showing time after time after time in this election to have got rid of none of the Thatcherite policies - I am surprised Cameron has not taken to wearing a dress and fluffing up his hair. The Tory party has NOT changed and a vote for them is a vote to return to the days of the "**** you I am alright" days of Thatcher.

Agreed but if you'd said.......

The Labour party has changed and a vote for them is a vote to return to the days of the "**** you I am alright" days of Thatcher.

I'd have agreed with that too

They WILL cut NHS budgets, they WILL raise VAT etc etc

Raising tax is traditionally a Labour thing, and I suspect Labour will do just the same as the Tories this time around, cut budgets and raise taxes, I'd say it was almost inevitable no matter who gets in, so using it as some sort of justification of voting for one side of corrupt bastards versus another team of corrupt bastards seems to me a little futile.

The differences between the two main parties are in the minutiae not the top line, the top line is almost the same. The Tories will slash defence budgets by buying off the shelf and not investing in R&D, Labour MAY choose to keep R&D going but that will necessitate a cut somewhere else, it could well be in the NHS, no-one knows, neither side is going to tell us the bad news before the election, they'll break it gently (or not) after it. Labour will increase the tax burden on tramps by keeping the extra tax on cider, the Tories will do the same but they'll hint otherwise and then forget all about it (its called taking a leaf from Bliars book). The Tories will increase the threshold on inheritance tax because it looks good to their market, Labour will not for exactly the same reason, in truth it wont matter because the exchequer doesn't earn that much from the ranges being talked about anyway. But either way and whatever way they do it, they have to raise taxes and make budget cuts

The country needs change, a change away from the two party state, we won't get it but the best hope for a small change is a hung parliament with the Lib Dems getting a foot on Gordo's windpipe, but that won't be enough for me either but hey ho

[drat01]

a change away from the two party state,

The Lab and Lib Dems are proposing this - the Tory party are not. A start being the HOL

[thetrees]

Which leaves me with a "conscience" vote for the hapless LibDems, simply because they are the only party who have even a shred of that social conscience that Trent, Chindie and I value.

But then you don't have to be a socialist to have a social conscience, so many of your VT correspondents who err on the "reptile" side of politics may well value the same, but with a different perspective.

Personally I see no difference between snouts in the trough Tories, or snouts in the trough Labour, except that the latter allude to a 'working class' (sic) moral high ground.

The Lib Dems, hapless though they be, have one agenda, and that is to be the power brokers through to the end of time. Let's hope that we are saved from that fate once again.

[kidlewis]

What a ludicrous post KL - to use a local biased report as some sort of indication for national Labour policy

No what I actually said was

The latest spin headlines is that Labour are targeting cancer patients in order to get votes.

Not sure where in that sentence you think I say that it's an indication of a national policy for Labour, but appears they are using tactics you often say only used for by the Blue party.

I am sure that Labour WILL spend all our money and then some, and we will not see a great return on the amount we pay in tax. They WILL continue to seemingly ignore various military chiefs points of view and continue to put soldiers lives at risk. and they WILL continue to implement half arsed things like the FSA, this ridiculous high speed rail proposal and various other projects which are at best "alright".

Labour in the past 13 years have seemingly charged us for fillet and given us a MacDonalds quarter pounder with cheese. But justified because they have improved things which were a Rustlers microwave burger when they inherited the restaurant.

[bickster]

a change away from the two party state,

The Lab and Lib Dems are proposing this - the Tory party are not. A start being the HOL

No point in reforming the HOL until it gets some teeth back and the idea of the political party being abandoned in there. (big round of applause there for Labour making the HOL a complete and utter irrelevance What is happening there is an attempt to subvert the idea of democracy, giving us a second chamber devoid of any ability. No thanks, I'd rather have the hereditaries back than that, at least there was some form of independent thought going on. Now its just crony time, but the cronies are worse than ever before.

Neither Lib or Lab will propose anything good enough for me, and Labour are only using it as a way of courting the Libdems in the eventual hung parliament

[tonyh29]

like but they know they can't win an election by pissing on the poor.

but everything (or pretty much everything) that they have said so far doesn't point to that though ..it's as though People just hear what they want to hear

Cameron has promised not to cut NHS spending

The NI rise by labour will still apply to those earning over £35k

the 50p tax rate still stays

etc etc

and yet all i'm seeing on VT is meh they will rape the poor and give to the rich ...

So I suppose it becomes an issue of do you trust him , which clearly a lot of people don't .. but why doesn't he have that trust ..it's all on the back of something that a previous leader did over 25 years ago ... it's like saying well Fred West was a serial killer therefore all his children will be as well so we'd best lock them up

I think Cameron does actually care , I've seen him talk , heck i sat next to him on a flight to Turkey and spoke to him ... He may be a bit wishy washy in a lot of areas but in wanting to do whats right for the country I see him as being genuine .. TBF I would also say the same thing about Brown , I think he genuinely believes in what he is trying to do , but Brown like Major is just out of his depth .. as for Cameron well why not give him a term and find out .. we can always take to the streets and riot if we don't like him

[kidlewis]

a change away from the two party state,

The Lab and Lib Dems are proposing this - the Tory party are not. A start being the HOL

hang on in PMQs last week Nick Clegg say that both Labour and Tories opposed proposals on reforming the HOL.

I don't think Herr dictator Mandelweasel wants reformation either.

[tonyh29]

who have even a shred of that social conscience that Trent, Chindie and I value.

Sorry Mike i'm sure it's not intentional but that is a tad harsh ..

I have a social conscience , since the down turn my firm has laid off exactly zero people ... myself and the other directors have taken cuts in pay to ensure that everyone has kept their job as reward for their loyalty to us over the years ... the easiest thing would have been to cut people loose but we are hoping to come through it with everyone intact ..

to sort of have Social conscience used as a badge of honour that can't be worn by tories sort of bites a bit

Would the Tories have done that? Well, it'd mean paying for it and that means money and that means, god forbid, taxes.

what exactly do you think a 1% rise in NI is ?

[drat01]

KL - the proposed changes were stopped by the Tory party and in the typical trading that goes on at the end of any parliament, Lab had to drop the proposal due to the Tory party objections. Clegg wanted them to go through - so simply it was the Tory party who want it to remain the others not

[drat01]

Tony you keep - like the Tory party mentioning this 1% NI raise. Lets get a few things out in the open here, the Tory party are still putting forward a rise in NI, they have not said how they will pay for their plans - they have a past record of raising VAT and will do so again. How much a year to the average wage earner is 1% NI out of their pockets?

Please don't say but business say it will cost jobs, we had exactly the same with minimum wage (and the Tory party were very vocal against that - and have still not said what they would do to it if they got into power)

[Chindie]

Would the Tories have done that? Well, it'd mean paying for it and that means money and that means, god forbid, taxes.

what exactly do you think a 1% rise in NI is ?

...something proposed by Labour, and not the Tories, who hate taxes?

(apologies if they've u-turned and decided a NI rise is a good thing in the lasty couple of days, I've been too busy to watch people lie to me).

[kidlewis]

KL - the proposed changes were stopped by the Tory party and in the typical trading that goes on at the end of any parliament, Lab had to drop the proposal due to the Tory party objections. Clegg wanted them to go through - so simply it was the Tory party who want it to remain the others not

did the 1997 manifesto not promise us a reformation on the HOL?

again another half arsed effort it seems by Labour

13 years and very little changed considering what they said they would do in 1997.

[tonyh29]

Would the Tories have done that? Well, it'd mean paying for it and that means money and that means, god forbid, taxes.

what exactly do you think a 1% rise in NI is ?

...something proposed by Labour, and not the Tories, who hate taxes?

(apologies if they've u-turned and decided a NI rise is a good thing in the last couple of days, I've been too busy to watch people lie to me).

:confused:

Sorry it's just i thought you were saying that the tories would make people pay more for health care.. I was just pointing out that NI in theory goes towards paying for the NHS ( and policing as well as a few other areas) and thus people are in fact paying more anyway

I've not U-Turned or lied on NI as I've never commented on it's merits or lack of them either way ...

Lets get a few things out in the open here, the Tory party are still putting forward a rise in NI,

They have said (and I've mentioned it here countless times as well) that they will keep the rise for those on incomes over over £35k ... (how very looking after the rich of them :shock:)

raising VAT and will do so again

can you point me to anywhere on the interweb where the tories have said they will put up VAT , as i haven't seen this.. I've seen plenty of Labour MP's and supporters say it will happen but i don't think I've actually seen Cameron or any Tory come out and say it .. If I start saying Labour will shoot every third child in a family does that make it labour policy ??

talking of VAT though it's seem to be used to Tory bash and yet

The Labour Government is not ruling out a VAT rise

On Thursday, Nick Clegg said this:

“We will not have to raise VAT to deliver our promises. Let me repeat that: Our plans do not require a rise in VAT.

days later , Vince Cable was on the BBC’s Politics Show, interviewed by Jon Sopel. Here’s an extract:

Sopel: “Would you rule out raising VAT?”

Cable: “No, I don’t.”

how weird ....

[leviramsey]

No point in reforming the HOL until it gets some teeth back and the idea of the political party being abandoned in there. (big round of applause there for Labour making the HOL a complete and utter irrelevance What is happening there is an attempt to subvert the idea of democracy, giving us a second chamber devoid of any ability. No thanks, I'd rather have the hereditaries back than that, at least there was some form of independent thought going on. Now its just crony time, but the cronies are worse than ever before.

The Road to Serfdom)"]

It is a despotism exercised by a thoroughly conscientious and honest bureaucracy for what they sincerely believe is the good of the country. But it is nevertheless an arbitrary government in practice, free from parliamentary control; and it's machinery would be as effective for any other than the beneficient purposes for which it is now used. I doubt whether it was much exaggerated when recently an eminent British jurist, in a careful analysis of these trends, came to the conclusions that "in Britain today, we live on the edge of dictatorship. Transition would be easy, swift, and accomplished with complete legality [ironically, for all the moaning about the EU from the likes of UKIP, who pretend to be a party that believes in liberty, various bits of the EU are the only things that would hamper the transition to a dictatorship... unless a party advocates substantial constitutional change (e.g. moving to a written constitution) as a precondition for leaving the EU, you cannot be anti-dictatorship and anti-EU --LR]. Already so many steps have been taken in this direction, due to the completeness of power possessed by the Government of the day, and the absence of any real check such as the terms of a written constitution or the existence of an effective second chamber, that those that still need to be taken are small in comparison."

Not that Hayek had much love for the Tories:

It is true, of course, that in the struggle against believers in the all-powerful state the true liberal must sometimes make common cause with the conservative, and in some circumstances, as in contemporary Britain, he was hardly any actively working for his ideals. But true liberalism is distinct from conservatism, and there is danger in the two being confused. Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic, and power-adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than to true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if the world is to become a better place. A conservative movement, by its very nature, is bound to be a defender of established privilege and to lean on government for the protection of privilege. The essence of the liberal position, however, is the denial of all privilege, if privilege is understood in its proper and original meaning of the state granting and protecting rights to some which are not available on equal terms to others.

[mjmooney]

in 1956 ! -"]"in Britain today, we live on the edge of dictatorship"

Still hasn't happened though.

[Mantis]

The question is, are the Cameron Tories equally changed from the Thatcher Tories? In my opinion, no

I would love for this to be true, but I just don't think it is. Unfortunately the Tories of late have moved towards the center and are somewhat spineless and don't want to make any big decisions.

How anybody can think Labour are better for the majority is beyond me. Firstly, they're intent on keeping the flawed welfare system running and they're so obsessed with "equality" that they discriminate against the majority in favour of the minority.