Caporegime
There are various articles on the subject, just no actual footage...because he's not that stupid
Poll: General election voting poll round 3
- Thread starter semi-pro waster
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
Caporegime
Saw it. How is it any different to George Osborne repeating himself twelve time in that interview with Andrew Marr on Sunday?
Soldato
Because people only care about the failings of the 'team' they don't back.
Just look at robgmun, 100's of scandals related to UKIP & not a peep - the second something pops up about another party he's like a rabid dog.
Last edited:
Soldato
Out of curiosity has anybody changed who they are voting for? (I mean genuinely, not pretending you were going to vote for X, but because of A, B & C you are now voting for Y - as a soundboard)
Caporegime
Where's there an article saying he thought he was an intellectual lightweight? That's the important point. And then this was seven years ago, before Obama was President, two years before he became PM and before five years of being PM. Is that relevant now? And why insert the 'intellectual' part? Seems ironic given how Tunney cried about a Labour candidate being smeared, the other day....
I couldn't give a rats **** mate, was just replying and finished with 'no actual footage', which I assume you would have translated to 'standard media BS'.
- Sadly we're in the minority there
- In interviews, he comes over as not very intelligent (by the standard of a person who should be running a country) he got out debated and made to look a fool my Myleene Klass lol.
- In interviews, he comes over as not very knowledgable, I.E when he is asked a question and he is unable to answer due to lack of knowledge as it wasn't on his notes, one example being the average price of a family shop which he was embarrassingly under (by roughly 50%).
- When you compare him to George W Bush (a person known for incompetence) he makes Bush look more competent (this one's hardly rocket surgery).
The poll is exactly the same as the previous one. It was the first poll that didn't have the no voting.
Why do you think there is a difference, UKIP not doing so well?
Funny, because in the last poll someone was trying to claim UKIP support was increasing because UKIP vote share went from 20.5% int he first poll to 24% at that point in the 2nd.
I pointed out 2 things: 1) it is too early in the voting to compare, 2) The addition of "not voting" is affecting the results.
The UKIP slipped back to 21%, so I was right on that front.
This poll is identical to the previous, before you loose any sleep wait a few days to see the UKIP % climb up.
Secondly, you can make a direct comparison to the the fist poll if you really want, just calculate a new total.
Soldato
I haven't and dont know anyone who will
Interesting I was just talking to a mate and said on the face of it Labours policies would be better for me, but I wouldnt trust them based on previous experience. He said and hes right, thats a massive issue for them, because in reality tey have the policies that would benefit far more of the electorate with the current positioning of the parties so they are doing something wrong to not be clearly ahead in the polls. I guess thats history, not matter how hard they try they cant shake off memories. I dont mean from Bliar days but previous labour governments.
Within this election or in general?
Within this election I have been firmly Green, last election i voted Conservative, before that labour.
I might vote tactically though, which likely means labour but possibly lib dems if I can find some good evidence for recent polling.
I can't vote for the outcome I want, so still unsure.
Caporegime
Not at all.
Vote with your convictions. Tactical voting leads to the same two parties staying in power and ignoring the electorate. Every vote will give the green party more credibility for the future and others more confidence to vote for them next time.
Vote with your convictions. Tactical voting leads to the same two parties staying in power and ignoring the electorate. Every vote will give the green party more credibility for the future and others more confidence to vote for them next time.
The Green party needs more coherent policies before it can gain any real credibility. They are just as fringe and just as loony as UKIP just in different ways.
Apologies, I put the quotation mark in the wrong place. Obama called Cameron a "lightweight" when referring to him as a politician rather than an "intellectual lightweight". The meaning was clear though - Obama doesn't believe that Cameron is the calibre of person who should be leading Britain.
Vote with your convictions. Tactical voting leads to the same two parties staying in power and ignoring the electorate. Every vote will give the green party more credibility for the future and others more confidence to vote for them next time.
That is why i am still undecided The green party is growing strongly and it would be great to increase support further. but my vote will be in Scotland and voting labour may help block the SNP.
As everyone else is jumping on UKIP for every tiny thing i'm balancing things out a bit. I decided to post every embarrassing thing about other parties and more than half the time it much worse then anyone in UKIP has ever done.
More evidence of UKIP's decline:
http://may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/
Ladbrokes have UKIP expected seats down to 3.5.
Back in January it was 5.5 seats. I pointed out that the slow decline in UKIP voter share will likely eventually result in lower expected seats and that is what we are seeing.
Of course the kippers will completely ignore such evidence, proclaim it an uneducated guess and that magically UKIP will get 18 seats on may 7th.
For reference the Guardian also had 5 seats for UKIP and that is down to 4, May2015 had 4 seats and that is down to 3.
One can also see how precarious the Conservatives lead is, a great many seats with less than 3% lead of second candidate labour, while labour has much less close seats and more of them have non-Tory runners up. Wouldn't take much to push them above 300 seats, but still short of a majority but sufficient to form a majority coalition with the lib dems. I think the odds of that are low right now but the possibility is there.
http://may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/
Ladbrokes have UKIP expected seats down to 3.5.
Back in January it was 5.5 seats. I pointed out that the slow decline in UKIP voter share will likely eventually result in lower expected seats and that is what we are seeing.
Of course the kippers will completely ignore such evidence, proclaim it an uneducated guess and that magically UKIP will get 18 seats on may 7th.
For reference the Guardian also had 5 seats for UKIP and that is down to 4, May2015 had 4 seats and that is down to 3.
One can also see how precarious the Conservatives lead is, a great many seats with less than 3% lead of second candidate labour, while labour has much less close seats and more of them have non-Tory runners up. Wouldn't take much to push them above 300 seats, but still short of a majority but sufficient to form a majority coalition with the lib dems. I think the odds of that are low right now but the possibility is there.
You're voting out of spite? You're probably the same type of person that would vote to get rid of Farage because he said, if he doesn't win South Thanet he'll step down. Or the Kate Hopkins remark…. To vote Labour so she'll "supposedly" leave the country.
For all your fluff and bluster
Andrew Neil @afneil 5h5 hours ago
UK Poll of Polls on eve of the manifestos:
Labour: 34%
Tories: 33%
Ukip: 15%
Lib Dems 8%
Greens 5%
Still on 15%, not going anywhere
EDIT - Even the BBC poll of polls have gone up 1 to 14%, so it makes you look a little weak there D.P
Last edited:
- Status