Poll: Which party will get your vote in the General Election?

[Luseac]

Surely you agree Cameron should put the needs of the country ahead of his own.

If he has thought of an amazing policy of course he should tell us (and by proxy Labour) immediately, for the good of the English people - so it can be implemented as soon as possible. There are logically only 2 reasons for him not doing so

1) Cameron thinks getting power is more important than the English people enjoying his amazing policy ideas early, therefore keeps them a secret

or

2) Cameron hasn't really got any ideas but he can't exactly say that now can he?

Because by logical definition it HAS to be (1) or (2).

Bet no tories can answer the question though.

he could announce ALL the policies at a press conference meaning he still gets 100% credit for them TODAY and give Labour the chance of using them to HELP THE BRITISH PEOPLE. But no -- he's choosing to say 'They're a big secret'. Do you guys honestly not see what is happening here?

Why announce an amazing policy just for labour to steal it and claim the kudos? You just need to look at inheritance tax and airport green taxes as a couple of examples:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/pbr/article2625723.ece

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/3309729/Labour-steals-green-Tory-policies.html

I would also argue that if Cameron keeps his cards close to his chest, stops Labour from stealing his policies and Joe public thinking that Labour are awesome. Then, when in office impliments great policies for the next 4 years then yes, that is better for the country.

 

[Rich_L]

I'd actually agree, the Lib Dems are finally starting to talk some sense economically, now they just need to move back to their liberal roots, rather than liberal on some stuff, and we're getting better.

Looking at the local view, my vote could well be tactical anyway, but I am getting less and less adverse to voting lib dem again than I have been since Paddy was in charge.

Mhm I agree. My constituency is an interesting one as it's a 'new' one, although demographically it seems to be overwhelmingly Labour (something like 40% Lab, 20%Con, 14%LibDem in 2005 for the 'old' constituency) so it's pretty much a 'safe seat' for Labour regardless.

More like reviving old links, although whether it is a good idea or not is probably open to debate. I'm unsure, it will depend really on the stability and success of the peace process. Sinn Fein have gained a lot from 'legitimacy', and therefore have a fair bit to lose.

It seems, if nothing else, shocking timing when there is a difficult enough atmosphere as is, to stick their oar in for the purposes of political engineering.

Will be interesting to (finally) see the manifestos - I've been distinctly unimpressed with the Tories (from being willing to realistically consider them about 6 months ago) who seem to be doing everything in their power to make the election way more close-fought than it should be.

 

[Dolph]

That's just pathetic, by your reasoning i can post that Brown is a pedo and i wouldn't bother posting any links and claim it's common knowledge, but sorry,

you are wrong!

You have back it up, otherwise it's only your opinion based on nothing and we will not be able to treat what you say seriously. Simple as, currently we are generally amusing ourselves with you and you ilk as your level of debate is extremely low. Unless you can pick it up and actually debate properly then me and others here will only continue to see you as the Labour crackpot fanboy you seems to be.

Even more specifically, it is both the fallacy of argumentum ad populum (assuming it is a commonly held belief), and the invoking of 'common sense' as justification for a specific position will generally also create a fallacy of petitio principii (begging the question) by asserting aspects as true that are not accepted by all parties.

 

[Dolph]

I'm glad you've finally recognised your first ever 'conservative failing'. Don't worry, the 'our actual policies are a big secret but trust us they're good 'uns, now go vote for us' conservative spiel is concerning a lot of people.

I'm glad you at least recognise the problem now ..

Why is it a failing to wait for the election lockdown period before revealing your policies?

It could just as easily be argued to be a Labour failing due to their style of government making it necessary...

 

[meghatronic]

Hmmm... where did I put my "I'm gay for Dolph" t-shirt.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGaDahB2Ysk

lol

 

[Dolph]

Mhm I agree. My constituency is an interesting one as it's a 'new' one, although demographically it seems to be overwhelmingly Labour (something like 40% Lab, 20%Con, 14%LibDem in 2005 for the 'old' constituency) so it's pretty much a 'safe seat' for Labour regardless.

You have less to make up to get Labour out than we do. (44% labour in the last election, which was a swing of -14% against them against 2002).

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who (despite the fact that Labour, statistically, has made things worse for them), believe that Labour have their best interests (and benefit payments) at heart.

It seems, if nothing else, shocking timing when there is a difficult enough atmosphere as is, to stick their oar in for the purposes of political engineering.

This is true, especially with the current problems involving the first minister.

Will be interesting to (finally) see the manifestos - I've been distinctly unimpressed with the Tories (from being willing to realistically consider them about 6 months ago) who seem to be doing everything in their power to make the election way more close-fought than it should be.

The opinion polls seem to disagree, however, as shown earlier in this thread, whether the final makeup of parliament will be even vaguely representative of the vote proportions is going to be debateable.

 

[britboy4321]

Why announce an amazing policy just for labour to steal it and claim the kudos? You just need to look at inheritance tax and airport green taxes as a couple of examples:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/pbr/article2625723.ece

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/3309729/Labour-steals-green-Tory-policies.html

I would also argue that if Cameron keeps his cards close to his chest, stops Labour from stealing his policies and Joe public thinking that Labour are awesome. Then, when in office impliments great policies for the next 4 years then yes, that is better for the country.

Naah - if this was the case you'd be thinking 'Labour did a good job with inheritance tax'.

All he has to do is a press conferance, and all credit forever will go to the conservatives. They could put it on posters .. 'Look .. Labour did this thing we suggested - we came up with that'. It'd be a WIN for them - as it justifies the policy the fact even the opposition thought 'Wow, we'll do that'. And the population benefit from it.

Remember right now, for months, the country is going to suffer from not having these policies because Cameron wants to get in power more than The British people doing well.

You knew about the inheritance tax AND green air thing being tory ideas. Don't you think it's more likely Cameron hasn't got the policies than the 'it's a big secret honest guv' approach?

 

[Dolph]

Naah - if this was the case you'd be thinking 'Labour did a good job with inheritance tax'.

All he has to do is a press conferance, and all credit forever will go to the conservatives. They could put it on posters .. 'Look .. Labour did this thing we suggested - we came up with that'. It'd be a WIN for them - as it justifies the policy the fact even the opposition thought 'Wow, we'll do that'. And the population benefit from it.

Remember right now, for months, the country is going to suffer from not having these policies because Cameron wants to get in power more than The British people doing well.

You knew about the inheritance tax AND green air thing being tory ideas. Don't you think it's more likely Cameron hasn't got the policies than the 'it's a big secret honest guv' approach?

plurium interrogationum is neither convincing nor evidence based...

 

[britboy4321]

Why is it a failing to wait for the election lockdown period before revealing your policies?
...

Put it this way, If the conservatives had a cure for cancer, would it be right or wrong for them to think 'I'm not going to bother revealing it for months, until I'm in power, otherwise everyone will think 'WHOA life's getting better under Labour'. I would rather they all keep suffering/dying until I'M sitting on the throne -- then they can have their cure..


To argue 'well, fair enough otherwise we may forget how 'orrible it was with cancer, when we vote' doesn't really cut the mustard. Hint: They don't have the cure at all. They don't have the amazing policies that have to be kept 'a big secret' from us lowely peasents at all. They are not keeping their ideas a big secret just for the lolz. Although I'm not sure what would be worse -- if they had them and refused to let us benefit from them for the lolz, or if they don't have them at all. Which do you think is worse?

 

[Dolph]

Put it this way, If the conservatives had a cure for cancer, would it be right or wrong for them to think 'I'm not going to bother revealing it for months, until I'm in power, otherwise everyone will think 'WHOA life's getting better under Labour'. I would rather they all keep suffering/dying until I'M sitting on the throne -- then they can have their cure..


To argue 'well, fair enough' doesn't really cut the mustard. Hint: They don't have the cure at all. They don't have the amazing policies that have to be kept 'a big secret' from us lowely peasents at all. THE EMPORER IS WEARING NO CLOTHES ..

Oversimplification again, we've had the discussion about the fallacy of single cause already.

 

[britboy4321]

Oversimplification again, we've had the discussion about the fallacy of single cause already.

I accept your resignation. Nice chatting.

 

[Dolph]

I accept your resignation. Nice chatting.

How is highlighting that you are again basing your questioning and position on fallacy resigning?

Do I need to mention again that it is impossible to argue rationally with someone whose thought processes and therefore questions they demand answers to aren't rational?

 

[britboy4321]

Dolph --

1) I've said a statement
2) You've contended it
3) I've proved you wrong absolutely in front of everyone
4) You've quoted random latin and 'it's too simple, I don't understand, I can't hear you lalala' etc.


It's over. Let it go man! Let it go .. get the Mad Hatter in here again! All is forgiven ..

 

[robgmun]

All he has to do is a press conferance, and all credit forever will go to the conservatives. They could put it on posters .. 'Look .. Labour did this thing we suggested - we came up with that'. It'd be a WIN for them - as it justifies the policy the fact even the opposition thought 'Wow, we'll do that'. And the population benefit from it.

It would make the Tories seems pathetic, they are bigger than that.

Remember right now, for months, the country is going to suffer from not having these policies because Cameron wants to get in power more than The British people doing well.

Why, because Labour policy isn't good enough? What are you implying? That Labour can't come up ideas on there own? Make up your mind!

You knew about the inheritance tax AND green air thing being tory ideas. Don't you think it's more likely Cameron hasn't got the policies than the 'it's a big secret honest guv' approach?

Nope, after past records of what happened he's keeping it a secret, an i don't blame him

 

[Dolph]

Dolph --

1) I've said a statement
2) You've contended it
3) I've proved you wrong absolutely in front of everyone
4) You've quoted random latin and 'it's too simple, I don't understand, I can't hear you lalala' etc.


It's over. Let it go man! Let it go .. get the Mad Hatter in here again! All is forgiven ..

Really, that's not how it looks to me.

1) You made a statement.
2) I challenged the satement by advancing that there may be additional causes that you hadn't considered.
3) You repeated the same assertion
4) I call you on the fallacy you have now clearly committed (prior to that, it could have been a lack of awareness of the other causes)
5) You claim victory by suggesting I resigned from the debate while refusing to address the argument under discussion.

Still, keep telling yourself that you're doing well in the eyes of the observers...

 

[robgmun]

Put it this way, If the conservatives had a cure for cancer, would it be right or wrong for them to think 'I'm not going to bother revealing it for months, until I'm in power, otherwise everyone will think 'WHOA life's getting better under Labour'. I would rather they all keep suffering/dying until I'M sitting on the throne -- then they can have their cure..


To argue 'well, fair enough otherwise we may forget how 'orrible it was with cancer, when we vote' doesn't really cut the mustard. Hint: They don't have the cure at all. They don't have the amazing policies that have to be kept 'a big secret' from us lowely peasents at all. They are not keeping their ideas a big secret just for the lolz. Although I'm not sure what would be worse -- if they had them and refused to let us benefit from them for the lolz, or if they don't have them at all. Which do you think is worse?

Well you've at least stuck to Labour ideals for society. Personal greed without personal responsibility. you've highlighted it in a nutshell

Labour made there bed in the last 5 years, they have to suffer the consiquances of there actions and lay in it, ie, lose the next elelction

No cheating your way out this time

 

[britboy4321]

Still, keep telling yourself that you're doing well in the eyes of the observers...

Ok I will.

nice chatting ..

 

[britboy4321]

Well you've at least stuck to Labour ideals for society. Personal greed without personal responsibility. you've highlighted it in a nutshell

Labour made there bed in the last 5 years, they have to suffer the consiquances of there actions and lay in it, ie, lose the next elelction

No cheating your way out this time

I think the right-wing parties are really more about personal greed. Lower tax, less government, worse public sector -- you know the gig. Left wing is more about wealth redistribution than personal greed to be honest. Although you probably don't believe me

 

[Hatter The Mad]

I think the right-wing parties are really more about personal greed. Lower tax, less government, worse public sector -- you know the gig. Left wing is more about wealth redistribution than personal greed to be honest. Although you probably don't believe me

Then Labour != left wing.

The rich are richer, poor are poorer.

The rich better educated, the poor less so.

The rich have a higher life expectancy, the poor a lower life expectancy.

Money does not provide value in public services - we get diminishing returns.

Also, you're completely wrong that 'right wing' = worse public services, and why is lower tax and less government a bad thing?