Should Gordon call an election this year?

Status
Not open for further replies.
[TW]Fox;13279452 said:
Probably because this forum has a disproportionate number of members from a middle class background and Labour is traditionally the party of the working classes (Hence the name - labour, from 'labourer').
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get that. It is a computer hardware forum afterall; regular posters like Dolph seem very right wing and I'd probably disagree with most of what he says but I don't know enough about whatever specific subject, so not really qualified to comment.
 
She killed off public subsidy of industry and jobs for one. Which was very unpopular as it led to mass unemployment, especially in the mining sector, but ultimately dug us out of a financial disaster.

Challenged our EEC contributions, and stood up against the ERM for as long as she could.

She broke the back of the unions, which is vital for any government if you ask me.

She did many bad things as well. Whilst privatisation raised a lot of badly needed money, I think it has caused us to suffer in the long run.

Despite being backed by a UN mandate, ultimately it was her that sent us to war in 1982.
 
Last edited:
Chimerical said:
But what did she actually do that was a) beneficial and b) unpopular at the same time. Please explain? (Genuine question).
Click to expand...

Ended the Unions' stranglehold on the country, which was necessary.

And I wish he would call an election but deep down, I know he won't. As soon as it's called he knows he's out of number 10 and he's waited so long for this that he'll hold out as long as he can. After April's budget he'll be toast when the government's spending and debt projections get revised from the fantasy figures of the PBR and they acknowledge that this recession is going to go on a bit longer than previously admitted. There is no way he comes back after that. He'll cling on for the next 16 months, stealing a few tory policies he'd ridiculed previously.

He promised an end to spin but now labour are spinning more than ever (Mind you, he promised an end to boom and bust and we all saw how that worked out!). The sooner the tories get in, the better.
 
elroberto said:
Ended the Unions' stranglehold on the country, which was necessary.

And I wish he would call an election but deep down, I know he won't. As soon as it's called he knows he's out of number 10 and he's waited so long for this that he'll hold out as long as he can. After April's budget he'll be toast when the government's spending and debt projections get revised from the fantasy figures of the PBR and they acknowledge that this recession is going to go on a bit longer than previously admitted. There is no way he comes back after that. He'll cling on for the next 16 months, stealing a few tory policies he'd ridiculed previously.

He promised an end to spin but now labour are spinning more than ever (Mind you, he promised an end to boom and bust and we all saw how that worked out!). The sooner the tories get in, the better.
Click to expand...

I don't know whether I should post this or not, but heres an 'alternative' view of Thatcher. I'm sure you've heard all the points made before though:

http://neilharding.blogspot.com/2005/10/20-reasons-why-i-hate-thatcher.html

Again, its biased as hell obviously, but I see stuff written in the same emotive style against Labour on these forums all the time.

Personally, I don't believe she was a good thing to the country (from what I've heard about her). I'm from a Labour supporting household but I don't really support Labour myself anymore.

Although they'll never get elected, I probably agree most with the Liberal Democrats policies (i.e. left-wing). Labour with Blair was always Tory-lite and I'd prefer a more left-wing Government personally.
 
[TW]Fox;13279452 said:
Probably because this forum has a disproportionate number of members from a middle class background and Labour is traditionally the party of the working classes (Hence the name - labour, from 'labourer').
Click to expand...

I'm voting tory at the next election and I'm as working class as they come. Son of a factory worker and a receptionist, Grandfather was a miner, Uncle was one of the last deep miners in Wales. I also live in The Rhondda Valley which is probably the ultimate Labour heartland which has voted labour since 1910.

Ultimately, the labour party had done nothing for my area, we are the sort of people that party was founded to look out for, but now all theiy are interested in is staying in power.
 
rypt said:
Our debt, even after all this new spending, will still be less than current French and German levels (we are currently at 40% of GDP, both of them are in the 60s).
Click to expand...

No, our declared debt represents a third of our total debt; the other 2/3rds are from private finance initiatives that Iron man Gordon has managed to keep off the account sheets in a similar way to companies setting up shell companies to be the dumping ground for their toxic debts. How can we trust a man to get us out of this crisis when he employs the same deceiptful tactics of the comapnies that got us into this mess?! Time for them to go!
 
Chimerical said:
I don't know whether I should post this or not, but heres an 'alternative' view of Thatcher. I'm sure you've heard all the points made before though:

http://neilharding.blogspot.com/2005/10/20-reasons-why-i-hate-thatcher.html

Again, its biased as hell obviously, but I see stuff written in the same emotive style against Labour on these forums all the time.

Personally, I don't believe she was a good thing to the country (from what I've heard about her). I'm from a Labour supporting household but I don't really support Labour myself anymore.

Although they'll never get elected, I probably agree most with the Liberal Democrats policies (i.e. left-wing). Labour with Blair was always Tory-lite and I'd prefer a more left-wing Government personally.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is a bit biased and most of it is rubbish. Yes, she had recessions but the government didn't have to go to the IMF to sort it out and a large cause of the recessions, certainly the first one, was caused by problems inherited from the previous administration. And the Falklands? She did what was necessary and sent such a strong message that the Argentinians wouldn't dare to ever try it again.

And I come from a labour household too, but have actually looked at facts and made my own mind up, hopefully enough people in the country will do that and get these idiots out.
 
I like the ideals of Labour, I don't think Brown is much wose than Tony but some members of his cabinet are a joke.

I like the idea of government control in some areas but not those that take away our freedoms. (Just kill jacuai smith)

But no matter how bad they get I will never vote Conservative.

I think some thinks need to remain publicly funded. Schools, prisons, hospitals etc are better like this. Some say it is inefficient but big business only cares about profit and the way this stuff is usually set up there is no competition there and no free market anyway so it wont work.


we will always need these essentials so while the free market can be more dynamic/efficient I don't care. Essential services shuld be run by the gov. Would prefer leccy/gas to go down this route also.

there is no and never will be a proper free market in these areas, we essentially just pay the french gov for our leccy for example as many energy firms get gov money.

otherwise It just means better services for the rich and worse for the poor. Just what we need..... :(
 
starfighter said:
I think some thinks need to remain publicly funded. Schools, prisons, hospitals etc are better like this. Some say it is inefficient but big business only cares about profit and the way this stuff is usually set up there is no competition there and no free market anyway so it wont work.
Click to expand...
With respect, publicly owned bodies are still obsessed with profit.

starfighter said:
otherwise It just means better services for the rich and worse for the poor. Just what we need..... :(
Click to expand...
But, surely this is your motivation to better yourselves? Granted we need somewhere between the current Labour benefits abortion (why bother working when joe public will pay for your car and sky etc..) and (old) Tory.

platypus said:
Despite being backed by a UN mandate, ultimately it was her that sent us to war in 1982.
Click to expand...
I'm at a complete loss if you think that was a bad thing...?
 
KaHn said:
I see this as a grass is always greener debate, no matter who is in power we all get screwed.

KaHn
Click to expand...

I think you're right tbh.

The only thing that strikes me is that there is no more green grass anymore as the Labour government has scorched our soil. Whoever takes over will have to wallow around in a muddy patch instead of a green pasture like some believe or indeed foresee.

I agree with you and platypus, we can't do eff a about anything as we pretty much have no way of exercising many of our democratic rights. We probably need a clear constitution, but I can only see that making things worse if Gordon was within a five mile radius of the drafting. Joining (fully, and transparently) an EU constitution is not the answer. It's just a simplistic and convenient move: save face and pass the buck onto the collective.
 
[TW]Fox;13280416 said:
I guess when we all go and life in fluffy cuddle land the need for war will vanish, but until then lets live in the real world.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that I don't understand the need for war, now did I?

I was merely highlighting it as one point as to why many people hate Margaret Thatcher, given how many families and lives this war affected.
 
platypus said:
I didn't say that I don't understand the need for war, now did I?

I was merely highlighting it as one point as to why many people hate Margaret Thatcher, given how many families and lives this war affected.
Click to expand...

Because Thatcher did far more than just war? NuLabor is resoundingly tame compared to Thatcher in terms of screwing over the general populace.
 
Genuinely don't mind Gordon Brown, however he needs to fire some staff to stop all of this "spin" lark. It's pretty annoying. Labour are doing OK, not sure I ever want to be under a tory government again. Floating voter though, so if the tories ditched Cameron I'd be tempted to look at supporting them at the next election.

As it stands though, if Dave and the tories got in with their paper thin policies I'd probably vote yes in a Scottish independence referendum. Tories did nothing for Scotland and the north of England last time they were in, I have no reason to think they'd be any less incompetent next time.
 
Voltar said:
There should have been a general election once Tony stepped down. I don't see very much that is democratic in Gordo's reign. He wasn't even elected ffs.

It is pretty sad how in this country we have been manipulated into not knowing what's going on in the running of our own country for which WE elect our representatives. I can't believe more people aren't outraged and disillusioned by what is happening in our politics: no referendum on Europe (the Lisbon treaty et al) and no general election for a new leader, allowing Gordon through the back door.
Click to expand...

There was a suggestion by the Tories that all new people accepted as citizens for abroad should know and be tested on British ways, how Parliament works etc. Looking at some of the rubbish in some forums it should be extended so that citizens who do not know the basics of how Parliament works should have their voting rights suspended until they learn how it does work.

In case you do not know - PM's in the UK have never been, voted in by the electorate. You vote for a party, who elect a leader. If they win he becomes PM.

In my lifetime there have been more than one change of PM between elections. John Major was the last one prior to Gordon Brown.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom