Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
[TW]Fox;16534097 said:
It's going to get a lot worse very soon regardless of who 'wins'. 20% VAT?
Poll: *** 2010 General Election Result & Discussion ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
It's going to get a lot worse very soon regardless of who 'wins'. 20% VAT?
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Now now, I can find a few Labour sycophants just going a few pages back!
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Hatter The Mad said:
It's probably the most ridiculous assumption in this thread so far. You are basically saying that everyone who voted for a party agreed 100% with every policy in the manifesto. I doubt there is a single person who had complete 100% support for every word of the manifesto of the party they voted for.
I don't mind being a bit poorer if it means people can stay employed.
Unsurprisingly the Toryboi's can't remember the last recession, made much, much worse by the Conservatives keeping the value of the pound high resulting in 10% unemployment and almost killing off all our manufacturing industries.
I was not having a go at you because you don't agree with me, I was having a go at you for use selective maths to justify things which Labour are doing.
You are categorically falling for Labour spin if you believe their selective maths, if you believe that 'everyone lost' the election and if you routinely add up the support of Lab/Lib and feel there is justification for those two to work together ahead of anyone else.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 5,365
- Location
- West Sussex
Yes but when we came out of it Labour inherited 6bn deficit. look what it has cost us under Labours plan.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
You couldn't make this up, could you? Jeeez. Some people need sedating.
it's been a right laugh listening to you tory boys floundering around now that there is no clear winner.
I do agree though (can't believe I'm saying this) that the guy with the most seats should get the keys and then each policy issue is decided on a case by case basis. If MPs really did want what's in the best interest for the country then they would be following the mandate given to them by their local constituency.
Now sadly the Tories should they gain power have an easy excuse for all their failings (which there no doubt will be since who ever get's in is handed the poison chalice that is the public debt.) as all can be blamed on having to deal with the socialist liberals.
I do agree though (can't believe I'm saying this) that the guy with the most seats should get the keys and then each policy issue is decided on a case by case basis. If MPs really did want what's in the best interest for the country then they would be following the mandate given to them by their local constituency.
Now sadly the Tories should they gain power have an easy excuse for all their failings (which there no doubt will be since who ever get's in is handed the poison chalice that is the public debt.) as all can be blamed on having to deal with the socialist liberals.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
LMAO @ Alan Johnson on the BBC saying Labor have always wanted Electoral Reform - and have this in common with LibDems...
EDIT - He said it: "And LibLab would have more than 51% of the vote, so moral".
EDIT - He said it: "And LibLab would have more than 51% of the vote, so moral".
The meeting has just broken up.
lol what? thats not how economics works. you've been listening, and actually believing, the crap labour spouts.
EVERYONE lost.
Sure someone had to get the most votes. But thats not how it works.
It's like having a foot race where you have to complete it in 10 seconds, but all the runners finished after 10 seconds.
Sure someone still came in first, but they never won
The City and business leaders everywhere are desperate for cuts to happen as soon as possible and for them to be large enough to cut down our deficit and start to deal with the debt. Just cutting down the deficit is going to be a massive undertaking and the deficit is solely created by Labour overspending, yes that's right, Labour overspending.
The Conservatives are the only party who will make the cuts necessary to have a hope of digging us out of this desperate situation.
You Labour folk seem to think that continuing to spend far more than we can afford for another year is a good thing, you seem to think that leaving the lunatics who created the deficit and increased our debt an insane amount in charge is a good thing and that they are best placed to continue in government and deal with the mess (the mess that they alone created).
You even seem to think it's acceptable for them to form an alliance with the nationalists, which as the nationalists have openly said all accross the media, would cost the English taxpayer dearly.
I honestly cannot understand your logic, I really can't.
The Conservatives are the only party who will make the cuts necessary to have a hope of digging us out of this desperate situation.
You Labour folk seem to think that continuing to spend far more than we can afford for another year is a good thing, you seem to think that leaving the lunatics who created the deficit and increased our debt an insane amount in charge is a good thing and that they are best placed to continue in government and deal with the mess (the mess that they alone created).
You even seem to think it's acceptable for them to form an alliance with the nationalists, which as the nationalists have openly said all accross the media, would cost the English taxpayer dearly.
I honestly cannot understand your logic, I really can't.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 5,365
- Location
- West Sussex
Miliband seems to be very happy. Oh dear what a fiasco.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
I think it can be summarised thusly: "They're not Tory".
Some of you really are stupid
The Conservatives won more seats and more votes. If you tally things up, they are the winners. They have the most of both, therefore they won.
They did not achieve enough of a win to get 'past the post' and govern alone with a majority, this doesn't mean they lost. Stop believing the Labour lies, it's simple numbers.
As for the constant stream of tripe where Lab/Lib votes are added together and used as justification for them to govern in the name of the majority of the people, why do you only do the maths with those two parties? If you do the same equation with Con/Lib, then the 'mandate to govern' is even greater based on their much higher percentage?
Why use selective maths? I can't believe how effective Labour's spin is.
Exactly. It's just shocking isn't it, I actually feel sick thinking about it now.
Its no wonder Boulton was almost losing it yesterday on TV with AC trying to spin it to sound like Labour won.
One thing that's annoying me, is when people trot out the line "oh but x% of the population didn't vote for abc party". They always include the numbers of people who didn't vote at all.
For me, if people don't vote then it's utterly irrelevant what they think afterwards, by not voting they have demonstrated they have no interest and no opinion.
Of the remaining people who did actually make an effort to vote (hence they have demonstrated that they have an opinion), there was a clear winner in terms of numbers. Though clearly the winner did not get quite enough seats to win a decisive parliamentary majority under the current rules. They still have more support from the voting public than any other party does, by quite a margin.
The way I see, voters in this country were warned that we were heading for a hung parliament and hence a coalition or minority rule. It seems the public wanted this. In fact I was sure there was a poll which said 60% of the population was in favour of this.
Of course, that doesn't actually mean they understood what they were in favour of or the consequences. However, we are a democracy so the public got what they wanted.
And as for minority rule I can't see the problem with that. It works in Scotland for the last 3 years. It comes down to needing the support of somebody else on the other side to vote with you on that individual policy. Sometimes it might fit with the Lib dem policy, other times somebody else.
The only down side is you will never get a law passed which all the opposition totally oposes which I see as not a bad thing since a higher percentage of the public have voted against that extreme policy otherwise they would have a majority.
Of course, this totally relies on the opposition not voting out the Queen's speech or the budget and to be honest, if the Cons gave it go alone, you can see the Lab and lib Dems doing exactly this which would bring about another election which may have the same hung parliament anyway.
Of course, that doesn't actually mean they understood what they were in favour of or the consequences. However, we are a democracy so the public got what they wanted.
And as for minority rule I can't see the problem with that. It works in Scotland for the last 3 years. It comes down to needing the support of somebody else on the other side to vote with you on that individual policy. Sometimes it might fit with the Lib dem policy, other times somebody else.
The only down side is you will never get a law passed which all the opposition totally oposes which I see as not a bad thing since a higher percentage of the public have voted against that extreme policy otherwise they would have a majority.
Of course, this totally relies on the opposition not voting out the Queen's speech or the budget and to be honest, if the Cons gave it go alone, you can see the Lab and lib Dems doing exactly this which would bring about another election which may have the same hung parliament anyway.
Miliballs wants to be king.