Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 2,638
Hope Ed Balls wins, at least we know labour wont win the next election then
The NEW very important election thread
- Thread starter stockhausen
- Start date
I wonder how people will feel in a couple of years when unemployment and hpouse price crashes kick in.
As for tax rises, well we don't want to borrow any more money do we?
Anyway, I think labours problem is that the left are too loony and the center not left enough.
I will be watching this coalition very closely, so far it has been all about headline grabbing and very little of substance.
As for tax rises, well we don't want to borrow any more money do we?
Anyway, I think labours problem is that the left are too loony and the center not left enough.
I will be watching this coalition very closely, so far it has been all about headline grabbing and very little of substance.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 907
Prime Minister Balls lol.
But more seriously I'd say this is between the two Milibands and Balls. I imagine David would actually take the party to the right being brought up politically by Blair and the two Eds would shift to the left being Browns lieutenants.
Personally I think Ed Miliband will win this one, we know he has the Unions on side and they have a third of the vote. As for MP's that's a hard one as Blairites and Brownites will go for their preferred candidate and the Brownites will be split. But the Labour Membership that's going to be interesting.
But more seriously I'd say this is between the two Milibands and Balls. I imagine David would actually take the party to the right being brought up politically by Blair and the two Eds would shift to the left being Browns lieutenants.
Personally I think Ed Miliband will win this one, we know he has the Unions on side and they have a third of the vote. As for MP's that's a hard one as Blairites and Brownites will go for their preferred candidate and the Brownites will be split. But the Labour Membership that's going to be interesting.
David Miliband is the only person that's put themselves forward that has even a shred of credibility as a potential leader. He's easily the best orator of the lot, and is a lot better at communicating that the likes of David Cameron, or Nick Clegg. But even in spite of that, he doesn't seem like Prime Minister material. But then, neither does Cameron. 
All the rest have about as much credibility as leader of the Labour party as I do.
All the rest have about as much credibility as leader of the Labour party as I do.
True, you make a good point there.
I'd personally like to see John McDonnell take the helm, although its never going to happen due to the fact he leans too far to the left.
I fear David Milliband will become leader due to the support of the party establishment and that a 'younger' face can be more easily sold to the electorate. I don't particularly relish another New Labour attempt at reconciling economic liberalism with watered down socialist policies all while still pretending they are still the party of the working class. Although I'm sure that angle will be emphasised even more in the forthcoming year or two now the middle classes and centrists seem to have 'gone blue'.
I fear David Milliband will become leader due to the support of the party establishment and that a 'younger' face can be more easily sold to the electorate. I don't particularly relish another New Labour attempt at reconciling economic liberalism with watered down socialist policies all while still pretending they are still the party of the working class. Although I'm sure that angle will be emphasised even more in the forthcoming year or two now the middle classes and centrists seem to have 'gone blue'.
It is good to see that the unions are in no way trying to buy influence with their massive contributions to Labour on a scale never achieved by the likes of Ashcroft....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/05/david-miliband-unions-labour-leadership
So essentially, the union is demanding that Milliband senior must abandon the position he's standing on, and be similar to his brother, even if the labour electorate vote against it...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/05/david-miliband-unions-labour-leadership
So essentially, the union is demanding that Milliband senior must abandon the position he's standing on, and be similar to his brother, even if the labour electorate vote against it...
There's slim to no chance of this happening, when the latest YouGov polls put the Lib Dems at 12-13%, with Labour on 37-38% and the Tories at 41-42%. We'll be firmly back to two-party politics in the near future.
Only if the election is in the near future. The lib dems always lose support after an election, although the effect has been more pronounced this time. It is not helped by the fact that many voters expected SDP policies (despite it being clear in the manifesto and the Orange book that the party was shifting) rather than Liberal ones.
It's impossible to predict what will happen if the next election is in 5 years, especially if AV comes into place. At the most extreme, various parties could have split if the new system gives them a chance. (I wouldn't be surprised to see the Liberals and the SDP break up again, nor would I be surprised to see a split in Labour (old and new) and Tories (the right leaning wing splitting from the centre).
A lot of it will depend what happens with cleaning up the mess left by Labour and how successful and fair the process is. The problem is that Labour spent disproportionately on some groups, and people are now complaining that cuts will impact disproportionately. They will, but only because the spending was disproportionate in the first place. It all depends how the parties present it and handle it.
Isn't it obvious that the lib dems are finished? Most of their vote came from people trying to keep the tories out. They have shown themselves to be the least trustworthy of political parties and that's saying something.
I think labour are certain to win the next election, unless the coalition collapses before the cuts really come in. The win will probably be a landslide as well.
People are going to feel so much pain from the cuts, they won't know what hit them.
Don't get me wrong, I think massive cuts are essential for the country, in reality the coalition will not go far enough.
Also understand that I think labour brought about the situation and did nothing to encourage real economic growth.
There is not a political party in existence that understands what is required and one way or the other there will be a lot of pain.
I'm agreed with Dolph that the next election is a very difficult call- it really could go either way. I suspect that the impact of the cuts may take some time to register- at the moment we are still wallowing in the generous spending of the past thirteen years, but already unemployment has shot up and will probably continue to rise over the next eighteen months. I really do hope that we experience a private sector boom to counter the public cuts, reductions in corporation tax are the right steps to be taking but it is almost impossible to instigate an economic boom- it will happen naturally.
I caught a snippet yesterday that Ed Balls was planning a £250 million "job fund" if he and Labour are re-elected. Quite interesting that even now, amidst all the cuts and belt-tightening, they are once again planning their next spending spree.
I caught a snippet yesterday that Ed Balls was planning a £250 million "job fund" if he and Labour are re-elected. Quite interesting that even now, amidst all the cuts and belt-tightening, they are once again planning their next spending spree.
The fact that many idiots voted for them without paying attention to what they actually were and what the party leadership actually believed is not the party's fault, and certainly doesn't reduce their trust to rational people.
You are joking, right? The only one who might actually be electable as PM is Milliband snr, but the unions have said they will cut off party funding if he doesn't do what they want, and the party is some £20m in debt already. The left leaning members of the party may appeal to the party faithful, but they won't appeal to the general public, indeed they never really have.
The blame for that belongs to the party that got us into this situation, not the two that will get us out of it.
And a great many people also realise this.
The problem is an ill-educated electorate and not enough restrictions on the ability to appease the mob...
Well we don't know what influence Ashcroft obtained from the Conservative party leadership do we? It was all done in private in smoky rooms of old boys clubs. Given what we've seen so far from the government, with other tax cheats brought into government and a dramatic planned reduction in the number of tax inspectors I think we can guess though. At least the Unions are open and honest about it.
in the short term we will have a massive reduction in the private sector because external spending will be the first to be cut in all public bodies, it will affect everyone from the park keeper to the submarine supplier. Then in the later short term we will see retail being affected and medium term real job losses from the public sector. At the same time, the cost of benefits will increase despite being cut.
The private sector will have to totally re-baseline it's revenue sources before it can begin to grow again. This will take several years and require a huge reduction in cost base, a large part of this fixed cost base will definitely increase (energy and raw materials) so the other large part will have to reduce (wages).
It's not that complicated and not rocket science.
It only appeared mystical because they thought the economics of the consumer economy could carry on for ever.
So that's why labour will win..
edit: oh yes, unions will be come a lot stronger and a lot more militant.
The private sector will have to totally re-baseline it's revenue sources before it can begin to grow again. This will take several years and require a huge reduction in cost base, a large part of this fixed cost base will definitely increase (energy and raw materials) so the other large part will have to reduce (wages).
It's not that complicated and not rocket science.
It only appeared mystical because they thought the economics of the consumer economy could carry on for ever.
So that's why labour will win..
edit: oh yes, unions will be come a lot stronger and a lot more militant.
Last edited:
Tax avoidance isn't cheating, and simplfying the tax structure is one of the aims of the coalition which will reduce the number of inspectors required.
I find your continued apologetics for the behaviour of the left a constant source of entertainment
Presumably you plan to excuse away the huge difference between ashcroft's contributions (circa 4%) and Union contributions (circa 75%) and pretend they are similar as well
forget all this and look at the bigger picture. Where the funding comes from is irrelevant, the people will vote for what they think is best for them. The money cannot control that sentiment.Tax avoidance isn't cheating, and simplfying the tax structure is one of the aims of the coalition which will reduce the number of inspectors required.
I find your continued apologetics for the behaviour of the left a constant source of entertainment
Presumably you plan to excuse away the huge difference between ashcroft's contributions (circa 4%) and Union contributions (circa 75%) and pretend they are similar as well
That's why it's important to make the case clearly and concisely that this is all a result of Labour's policies in office.
As for political party funding being irrelevant, I strongly disagree when the funders are trying to directly influence the party leadership by threatening them to change their policies or else... Of course, the solution to that is party funding reform, but Labour opposed that last time...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
No surprise there Dolph.
If the unions had their way, Britain would grind to an industrial halt.
David Miliband is the only real candidate to make Labour remotely electable again.
I do wonder two things though.
Firstly, why didn't David Miliband challenge Gordon Brown in 2007 when Blair resigned ? He is a very shrewd and clever man and surely knew then that Labour would crumble under Brown.
Secondly, Ed Miliband who continually says we didn't listen to the electorate. Surely he grasped that they were mightily hacked off prior to the election and in the run up to it ? This from the man who wrote Labour's manifesto.
I don't think Gordon Brown is the sort of person who takes to being challenged from anybody, least of all a relative junior! He would have stepped aside for no-one.
When people lose their source of income and have a huge mortgage to pay with the cost of food and energy rocketing, all they will want is a saviour.
edit: as shown from the previous election, detail policies are irrelevant to the voter, just package it nicely and promise the people what they want, labour will promise jobs for all.
Cameron and Clegg for instance promised more helicopters, don't see that happening do you. Also the NHS was ringfenced and frontline services were safe.
Last edited: