Bollitics: The General Election 2010 Exit Poll

[Awol]

Are the Tories really gonna try overturn the ban on fox hunting if they get in(this is a question not sarcasm)?

I believe they are - unless one of those darn Tory boys can show otherwise

I believe not, unless one of those pesky ferret chasing coal eaters can show otherwise.

[Guest Ricardomeister]

Another thing on Clegg, didn't he clearly state pre-election that he would support the party with most number of seats and votes? The records show that wasn't Labour.

Out of interest are none of the Lib Dems on here a little shocked by this?

Wrong! What he said was that he would speak to the party with most seats/votes before anyone else. He made no promise to then support them. Clegg, as an honourable man, has just kept to his word.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I'm more shocked that people would believe Conservatives and Liberals would've happily agreed a deal and got on with it, they are fundementally different right to the core. It was never really going to happen.

I think Clegg knows what he's doing, but i'm starting to think this is all paving the way for a libdem-labour merger. Am I right in thinking this was one of Blairs ideas? One big centre-left party to compete with the main centre-right?

Because if that is the case then they can try and justify they are the majority in government as the left received more votes.

Not sure if it will happen though, many of the socialists became diillusioned under new labour and decided to leg it, and I'm not to sure they will change (although under someone like Milliband/Johnson maybe).

Who knows, but I'm sure Clegg isn't daft. I'm sure Cameron was naive also, in thinking this would be plain sailing.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Are the Tories really gonna try overturn the ban on fox hunting if they get in(this is a question not sarcasm)?

I believe they are - unless one of those darn Tory boys can show otherwise

I believe not, unless one of those pesky ferret chasing coal eaters can show otherwise.

Here

[Awol]

Another thing on Clegg, didn't he clearly state pre-election that he would support the party with most number of seats and votes? The records show that wasn't Labour.

Out of interest are none of the Lib Dems on here a little shocked by this?

Wrong!

Mate, please, read what people write, comprehend and THEN reply. You are no doubt aware what this symbol ? indicates.

Clegg, as an honourable man, has just kept to his word.

Right, in the same way he said the Lib Dems were interested in strong and stable government, presumably? Except Labour cannot provide that even with a formal Lib/Lab coalition, unless your maths is better than mine?

[thetrees]

So let me get this right, they now don't have to go through the terminal they get bussed off the tarmac and away?

If that's right then what the hell is the complaint, don't half wish I could get treated that badly at an airport instead of the usual rigmarole

I agree that it is probably more efficient, but the point is the reason why.

They are not allowed through the terminal as their presence 'offends' people.

Do you think that is correct policy?

IMO if our government are worried about minorities being offended by our troops returning from the the front line, then perhaps we could remove all of the potential for offence by not sending them there in the first place.

[Awol]

Are the Tories really gonna try overturn the ban on fox hunting if they get in(this is a question not sarcasm)?

I believe they are - unless one of those darn Tory boys can show otherwise

I believe not, unless one of those pesky ferret chasing coal eaters can show otherwise.

Here

Yeah that was a joke directed at Ian. Truth be told I think it's foxes that are the murderers. Kill em all!

[thetrees]

Are the Tories really gonna try overturn the ban on fox hunting if they get in(this is a question not sarcasm)?

I believe they are - unless one of those darn Tory boys can show otherwise

Not sure that I'm a Tory boy, but for you Ian I'll put the hat on :winkold:

In my opinion to repeal the ban on fox hunting would be as ridiculous as banning it in the first place.

It was a petty, class-war act that took far too much time and money. To equal the waste and repeal it now would just be a petty class-war reply.

[ml1dch]

I agree that it is probably more efficient, but the point is the reason why.

They are not allowed through the terminal as their presence 'offends' people.

Do you think that is correct policy?

I'm not sure why they bothered putting them through the terminal in the first place. Unless they wanted to take a trip to Cafe Nero surely they're just going to be bussed elsewhere but this way is easier.

Incidentally, where is this policy that you speak of laid out and whose 'policy' is it?

[Awol]

I think Clegg knows what he's doing, but i'm starting to think this is all paving the way for a libdem-labour merger. Am I right in thinking this was one of Blairs ideas? One big centre-left party to compete with the main centre-right?

The Labour and Liberal parties are fundamentally different also. Civil liberties versus authoritarian state control. Liberalism and local democracy versus centralised state control, the only things they really agree on are hating those beastly Tories and taxing the nuts off all and sundry.

As for trying to justify retrospectively that they are all the same really and therefore deserve to be in government, surely that prospectus would have to have been presented to the public to hold any credibility whatsoever? Clearly it was not.

[Guest Ricardomeister]

Are the Tories really gonna try overturn the ban on fox hunting if they get in(this is a question not sarcasm)?

I believe they are - unless one of those darn Tory boys can show otherwise

I believe not, unless one of those pesky ferret chasing coal eaters can show otherwise.

Here

Yeah that was a joke directed at Ian. Truth be told I think it's foxes that are the murderers. Kill em all!

Although the real guilty parties are the people who cannot keep their animals safe from the foxes due to either being rather thick or not really bothered.

[snowychap]

AV will change next to nothing about the political system, which is, I suppose, why the Tories are going the 'extra mile' to offer it. Makes them seem reasonable but AV would be like getting a huge empty parcel at christmas.

Well, more like a brick when one was wanting a house.

[thetrees]

I agree that it is probably more efficient, but the point is the reason why.

They are not allowed through the terminal as their presence 'offends' people.

Do you think that is correct policy?

I'm not sure why they bothered putting them through the terminal in the first place. Unless they wanted to take a trip to Cafe Nero surely they're just going to be bussed elsewhere but this way is easier.

Incidentally, where is this policy that you speak of laid out and whose 'policy' is it?

Laid out some while back, when the 'offence' occurred.

By whom, I don't know, possibly airport management? 'advice' of the police? A higher authority?

All civil servants or partial civil servants, so unlikely to find anyone who holds their hand up to it.

[ml1dch]

I agree that it is probably more efficient, but the point is the reason why.

They are not allowed through the terminal as their presence 'offends' people.

Do you think that is correct policy?

I'm not sure why they bothered putting them through the terminal in the first place. Unless they wanted to take a trip to Cafe Nero surely they're just going to be bussed elsewhere but this way is easier.

Incidentally, where is this policy that you speak of laid out and whose 'policy' is it?

Laid out some while back, when the 'offence' occurred.

By whom, I don't know, possibly airport management? 'advice' of the police? A higher authority?

All civil servants or partial civil servants, so unlikely to find anyone who holds their hand up to it.

Fair enough. Who exactly are you blaming for it? You mention 'the government' in your earlier post. What do they have to do with it?

As Bicks says, seems like a much more sensible way of doing things is now in operation - so not really a big deal.

[Awol]

Although the real guilty parties are the people who cannot keep their animals safe from the foxes due to either being rather thick or not really bothered.

Yes the farmers should keep all of their animals here.

[peterms]

So let me get this right, they now don't have to go through the terminal they get bussed off the tarmac and away?

If that's right then what the hell is the complaint, don't half wish I could get treated that badly at an airport instead of the usual rigmarole

I agree that it is probably more efficient, but the point is the reason why.

They are not allowed through the terminal as their presence 'offends' people.

Do you think that is correct policy?

IMO if our government are worried about minorities being offended by our troops returning from the the front line, then perhaps we could remove all of the potential for offence by not sending them there in the first place.

Do you have more information on this, or maybe a source?

I can find a story about returning soldiers having to change into civilian clothes a couple of years ago, because of a long-standing requirement not to wear uniform in places where they might be a target for the IRA (presumably a pretty old instruction), but nothing very recent. I gather this comes from the Army, rather than the company running the airport.

Who was "offended", what was the nature of the offence, who decided what?

[bickster]

Sorry but Lib / Lab doesn't work, they still wouldn't have a mjority and thus that ARSE Salmond and his Plaid compatriot would also need "sweetening".

I don't like Cameron but Lib / Con with the Libs stopping or at least slowing the worst excesses of Cameron is preferrable.

Personally I don't like that either, I'd force a Conservative minority government.

I guess that you are gambling that the Tories would be too restricted and, in the course of trying to govern with their hands tied behind their back, become unpopular?

A Lib/Lab government are then swept into power with PR pushed through in the life of the parliament, and the Tories on the outside forever.

But then if Labour are swept into power, the Liberals would be turned out into the cold and PR might well disappear onto the back burner.

I certainly don't want to see the Tories in government at this time for the same reasons.

Hmm, no not really but then again yes. I think they've sort of, almost earned the right to have a go, I also think that anything they try to enact be be voted down unless theres some sort of consensus. Trident for example (even though I'm against it) would sail through as both of the centre right big boys are in favour. Increasing VAT to 20% would get through, all of them were very likely to have done that and its almost a cert to happen no matter who gets in. Fox Hunting though whilst being immensely trivial (but important to the posh lot) would never get through as most of the opposition parties would be against it (and imo even trying to reverse it and waste parliaments time with it would speak volumes to the people). I think with it the people would actually get an idea that consensus politics can work if the other two are sensible about it then from there we discuss electoral reform in a year or so's time.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I think Clegg knows what he's doing, but i'm starting to think this is all paving the way for a libdem-labour merger. Am I right in thinking this was one of Blairs ideas? One big centre-left party to compete with the main centre-right?

The Labour and Liberal parties are fundamentally different also. Civil liberties versus authoritarian state control. Liberalism and local democracy versus centralised state control, the only things they really agree on are hating those beastly Tories and taxing the nuts off all and sundry.

As for trying to justify retrospectively that they are all the same really and therefore deserve to be in government, surely that prospectus would have to have been presented to the public to hold any credibility whatsoever? Clearly it was not.

To be fair I was working on the belief that this has been a plan long in the pipeline.

I think we can come to one conclusion though, the country has spoken and has firmly said 'erm..well...hmm'

[Guest Ricardomeister]

Another thing on Clegg, didn't he clearly state pre-election that he would support the party with most number of seats and votes? The records show that wasn't Labour.

Out of interest are none of the Lib Dems on here a little shocked by this?

Wrong!

Mate, please, read what people write, comprehend and THEN reply. You are no doubt aware what this symbol ? indicates.

I did read it actually! Your question was not an open question but a leading question trying to falsely infer that Clegg was not being true to his word. Hence my perfectly reasonable reply to correct you.

[thetrees]

So let me get this right, they now don't have to go through the terminal they get bussed off the tarmac and away?

If that's right then what the hell is the complaint, don't half wish I could get treated that badly at an airport instead of the usual rigmarole

I agree that it is probably more efficient, but the point is the reason why.

They are not allowed through the terminal as their presence 'offends' people.

Do you think that is correct policy?

IMO if our government are worried about minorities being offended by our troops returning from the the front line, then perhaps we could remove all of the potential for offence by not sending them there in the first place.

Do you have more information on this, or maybe a source?

I can find a story about returning soldiers having to change into civilian clothes a couple of years ago, because of a long-standing requirement not to wear uniform in places where they might be a target for the IRA (presumably a pretty old instruction), but nothing very recent. I gather this comes from the Army, rather than the company running the airport.

Who was "offended", what was the nature of the offence, who decided what?

I can dig around for later. If I find it I'll post in a separate thread.

As I stated in an earlier message, no one is likely to hold their hands up to admit the decision.

As some say, it's certainly more efficient, and not a big deal. But for me the fact that the hand was forced is a big deal.