# UK General Election



## neelyky (Apr 5, 2015)

I know that there's a general forum asking about our political leanings, but since there's an election coming up soon -- and a fairly interesting one by UK standards since we seem to be moving away from the two-and-a-half party system I grew up with -- I thought it might be illustrating to run a straw poll on here and see how my fellow Britfag kiwis would run the country.


----------



## Pickle Inspector (Apr 5, 2015)

I'm in Scotland and locally it's a split between SNP and Labour so I'll probably vote SNP. (I wish that we had proportional representation instead of first past the post)


----------



## neelyky (Apr 5, 2015)

The constituency I'm in is basically 50/50 tory/LD, so every election is a choice between voting where my principles lie (Plaid Cymru), or being cynical and voting for the lesser of two cunts.


----------



## Atsimuel (Apr 5, 2015)

I live in a very secure Conservative seat so it won't really make a difference, but I'm voting Labour - unless I change my mind again. I was thinking about voting Conservative purely because at first I wasn't confident in Miliband, but since my local (incumbent) Conservative MP is a total shitcunt who does dodgy stuff with his funding I was going to spoil my ballot. Miliband has really shone so far in the campaign though, so barring any major scandals or fuck-ups, which is unlikely, I'll be voting Labour - It will certainly be smarter than voting Lib Dem like I did last time.


----------



## WachtAmWeb (Apr 6, 2015)

I voted Labour in 2010 and I'll probably be doing the same this time around, but whereas in 2010 I lived in a pretty safe Labour seat, I live in a completely safe Tory seat (complete with a scumbag authoritarian MP) now so it's pretty annoying. Still, at least my MP's majority is going to be seriously eroded - in my neck of the woods the traditional Tory vote has been slashed by the rise of UKIP, who poll around 16%. 
I don't agree with 100% of Labour's policies, but I'd rather give Ed a try than put up with Cameron for another five years. I work in the NHS (not clinical, I hasten to add) and I see first-hand the damage that this government has done. Furthermore, I don't trust the Tories to maintain spending on Defence, policing, local government and education.
I'd consider the Greens if a) they had a chance in my constituency and b) if they didn't have such batshit international policy. The Lib Dems' record in government hasn't been that bad but I don't think they stand a chance at this election - the rumour mill suggests Clegg might even lose his seat, and Vince Cable is almost certain to lose his. I wouldn't vote UKIP on principle.
I am worried about the rise of the SNP in Scotland - I think it's fair enough that Scots feel alienated by the system and are looking for a party that will represent them to the rest of the country, but I don't like the idea of another Indy ref, and I find Alex Salmond repugnant - I know that if he wins a Westminster seat he'll just take every opportunity to be slimy and annoying. Likewise, while I can understand the SNP's opposition to Trident, and agree that in an ideal world we wouldn't need nukes, my opinion is that given the current state of world affairs it would be very dangerous to give up our deterrent.


----------



## Night Terror (Apr 6, 2015)

I considered voting Green but they're anti-nuclear and they have ridiculous international policies. Plus I'll feel like a washed-up old hippie. It's difficult to choose a party that really fits what I'm looking for - I took the isidewith quiz and got Lib Dem, but >voting for clegg. I'll probably end up voting Labour.


----------



## GV 002 (Apr 6, 2015)

I live in a area that is completely dominated with UKIP propaganda that also happens to be an EDL stomping ground, so I feel riiiiight at home as a huge leftie!  My vote's most definitely going Labour, but my faith in Milliband as a leader isn't the strongest really.  I see him as more of an academic and not someone with enough bite to lead the country, like Prescott (despite all the bad press, I thought he was great) for example.  I voted Lib Dem last year and, along with many like me, boy did I feel silly afterwards.

Both the Tories and UKIP can sit and swivel.


----------



## Night Terror (Apr 6, 2015)

While I don't personally think we need to be in the EU and I'm up for leaving it, the problem with UKIP (other than their obvious racism) is the fact they've got nothing going for them APART from getting the UK out of the EU. They've got nothing after that, except some vague immigration policies. I don't particularly like Milliband and I think he's a bit of a wuss, but I'll still probably vote for Labour. Can't be any worse than the Tories.


----------



## Atsimuel (Apr 6, 2015)

Darky said:


> I considered voting Green but they're anti-nuclear and they have ridiculous international policies. Plus I'll feel like a washed-up old hippie. It's difficult to choose a party that really fits what I'm looking for - I took the isidewith quiz and got Lib Dem, but >voting for clegg. I'll probably end up voting Labour.


Yeah, don't vote Green. My sister works in the adolescent crime deterrent sphere and used to live in Brighton, and apparently the fact that the Greens don't seem to agree with each other on _anything_ apart from environmental issues has meant that there has been a lot of mishandling of council housing and programs aimed at getting young people into work.


----------



## Pickle Inspector (Apr 6, 2015)

WachtAmWeb said:


> I am worried about the rise of the SNP in Scotland - I think it's fair enough that Scots feel alienated by the system and are looking for a party that will represent them to the rest of the country, but I don't like the idea of another Indy ref, and I find Alex Salmond repugnant - I know that if he wins a Westminster seat he'll just take every opportunity to be slimy and annoying. Likewise, while I can understand the SNP's opposition to Trident, and agree that in an ideal world we wouldn't need nukes, my opinion is that given the current state of world affairs it would be very dangerous to give up our deterrent.


I think most people outside of Scotland might be misinformed as to why the majority of Scots vote SNP,  most don't want independence and couldn't care less about Trident but we don't vote for Labour or Conservatives we vote for Scottish Labour and Scottish Conservatives and at the last Holyrood election the majority of the polices were nearly identical between all the main parties with the exception free tuition, free prescriptions and the likes ( http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-labour-plans-to-end-free-universal-benefits-8176116.html ).

Scottish Labour seem to have been pressured into having many of the same policies as the SNP (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31708838) and going further to blatantly pander and say they'd raise money for more nurses in Scotland by creating a mansion tax which would mostly affect London (Which was booed at a Question Time in Scotland) which makes it seem like they think Scottish people hate England and would be for that kind of thing, also the fact they were adamantly against universal tuition fees before and now suddenly add it to their policies make it hard to trust them.


----------



## ATM (Apr 6, 2015)

I wasn't going to bother this year, but having seen the poll and voted analchest I think I may go down the polling station and scrawl #FUKOBEME on the slip. Or perhaps in this case #FUKFAGRAEG or #FUKCUMERUN.


----------



## Gagamaru (Apr 6, 2015)

millibands a feckless cunt, but voting for hims probably the only way to get someone non-tory in, so incredibly relunctant labour voter here, i guess.


----------



## JU 199 (Apr 6, 2015)

Atsimuel said:


> Yeah, don't vote Green. My sister works in the adolescent crime deterrent sphere and used to live in Brighton, and apparently the fact that the Greens don't seem to agree with each other on _anything_ apart from environmental issues has meant that there has been a lot of mishandling of council housing and programs aimed at getting young people into work.



Yeah the Green party's disorganization is somewhat legendary as of late.

I'm probably gonna vote Labour. They're borderline disingenuous but it's the only way of dealing with Cameron and that sly fucker Clegg _(who at the latest polls will probably loose his constituency seat)_


----------



## Picklechu (Apr 6, 2015)

I'm American, but I follow British politics pretty closely. I watched the leader's debate the other day, and that was really entertaining, not to mention the fact that, since the outcome doesn't affect me at all, I was able to go into full-blown political analyst mode. Miliband was probably hurt the most, since (A) he was attacked on his left flank by Sturgeon, Bennett, and Wood, and (B) no one really landed any hits on Cameron since he was able to "hide in plain sight," so to speak, due to the number of individuals on the stage. In addition, Miliband is going to have to do it again in a week and a half during the opposition debate while Cameron (and Nick Clegg, but let's face it, he's irrelevant) kick back and relax. 

Overall, I'd be surprised if there _isn't _a hung Parliament. The Liberal Democrats are going to lose too many seats to be a viable coalition partner, and UKIP, the Greens, Plaid Cymru, et al aren't going to earn enough seats either. The only way I see a hung Parliament being avoided is if Labour and the SNP collectively earn enough seats to constitute a majority (which would seriously make a lot of people in England uncomfortable) or if there's a grand coalition, which just isn't going to happen. There's also the possibility of UKIP earning _barely e_nough seats to form a coalition with the Conservatives, but, as of right now, that's even less likely than a grand coalition (since UKIP is currently projected to win ~4 seats).


----------



## Ariel (Apr 7, 2015)

I'm the only one who voted UKIP

But that was because I want my friend to win his seat! In (unspecified location)


----------



## Pickle Inspector (Apr 7, 2015)

Picklechu said:


> I'm American, but I follow British politics pretty closely. I watched the leader's debate the other day, and that was really entertaining, not to mention the fact that, since the outcome doesn't affect me at all, I was able to go into full-blown political analyst mode. Miliband was probably hurt the most, since (A) he was attacked on his left flank by Sturgeon, Bennett, and Wood, and (B) no one really landed any hits on Cameron since he was able to "hide in plain sight," so to speak, due to the number of individuals on the stage. In addition, Miliband is going to have to do it again in a week and a half during the opposition debate while Cameron (and Nick Clegg, but let's face it, he's irrelevant) kick back and relax.
> 
> Overall, I'd be surprised if there _isn't _a hung Parliament. The Liberal Democrats are going to lose too many seats to be a viable coalition partner, and UKIP, the Greens, Plaid Cymru, et al aren't going to earn enough seats either. The only way I see a hung Parliament being avoided is if Labour and the SNP collectively earn enough seats to constitute a majority (which would seriously make a lot of people in England uncomfortable) or if there's a grand coalition, which just isn't going to happen. There's also the possibility of UKIP earning _barely e_nough seats to form a coalition with the Conservatives, but, as of right now, that's even less likely than a grand coalition (since UKIP is currently projected to win ~4 seats).


The thing about Miliband is before the debates started he had such low personal ratings 



Spoiler









 that unless it somehow was a complete disaster he can only get more popular which is why the Conservative party made demands that parties such as the Greens, SNP and Plaid Cymru be included or David wouldn't participate in any debates, also they made sure it was done at the start of the campaign and not at the end, likely because last time the Lib Dems gained quite a bit of momentum as a result of the debates.

As far as SNP goes they were talks about a coalition which lately has been shot down and instead the SNP suggest a "Confidence and Supply" arrangement might be made, depending on the actual election outcome (None of the major parties will talk about this right now and if asked answer "We are aiming for a majority") so there is a reasonable chance it could be a minority Labour government instead of a coalition this time around.

The SNP have also said they would try to block any Conservative minority government, on the surface it makes it look good for Labour but a minority government which relies on other parties likely wouldn't be good for them in the long run since they'd be seen as weak, especially with Miliband already seen as a ineffectual leader although the SNP themselves have had a minority government in Scotland which worked out alright for them (They got a majority government in the following Scottish goverment) so who knows.

Also they have been talk of  the Green Party, Plaid Cymru and SNP joining forces for an anti-austerity pact - http://rt.com/uk/214911-snp-cymru-green-austerity/


----------



## Dudeofteenage (Apr 7, 2015)

A minority government doesn't necessarily lead to "weakness".  Western political history is full of minority governments that were successful, some very successful.

And it's quite likely that a Labour minority government with SNP support would actually be fairly stable - if they ever tried to pass some legislation that was unpalatable to the SNP there's a decent chance that they could get Tory support for it.

"Minority government" sounds scary if you've never had one but we are basically seeing the disintegration of a two party system, so there's a lot of things that seem scary simply because they're without recent precedent, but really aren't.


----------



## Pickle Inspector (Apr 7, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> A minority government doesn't necessarily lead to "weakness".  Western political history is full of minority governments that were successful, some very successful.
> 
> And it's quite likely that a Labour minority government with SNP support would actually be fairly stable - if they ever tried to pass some legislation that was unpalatable to the SNP there's a decent chance that they could get Tory support for it.
> 
> "Minority government" sounds scary if you've never had one but we are basically seeing the disintegration of a two party system, so there's a lot of things that seem scary simply because they're without recent precedent, but really aren't.


If Labour did have a successful minority government with SNP support wouldn't that just strengthen SNP support in Scotland? 

I think it'll be more unstable than a coalition since Lib Dems were forced to have a united front for the most part.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (Apr 7, 2015)

Pickle Inspector said:


> If Labour did have a successful minority government with SNP support wouldn't that just strengthen SNP support in Scotland?



Maybe?  Or it might go the other way.  Many minor parties find participation in government quite toxic for them.  The Lib Dems are a textbook case right now.  Admittedly if the SNP was not in a formal coalition with Labour they might well be able to escape this.  But I think the SNP's support is equally likely to surge under a Tory government, because a lot of people seem to be abandoning Labour for the SNP because they think the SNP is a more effective anti-Tory party.

I admit I don't understand exactly what is causing the SNP's surge in support right now, but I think it's clear that the SNP are going to be the dominant force in Scotland in national elections for the immediate future, regardless of who's in government.

In the medium term a Labour-SNP government could work pretty well.  The only substantial things they disagree on are things like Trident (which Labour can just get the Tories to support) and Scottish independence - but Scottish independence isn't going to happen for, at minimum, ten years after the "Nay" vote, so until the SNP starts trying to press for another referendum it could work fairly well.  More devolution for Scotland short of independence is already Labour policy.


----------



## Pickle Inspector (Apr 17, 2015)

Here's a decent article to help understand the upcoming General Elections for any non British people interested:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/15/british-election-for-non-brits-explainer

The Guardian leans slightly to the left (Last time they supported the Lib Dems and this time Labour) but it looks fairly balanced aside from calling UKIP an anti-immigration party. (They are anti open door immigration from the EU but not anti immigration in general)


----------



## Dudeofteenage (Apr 18, 2015)

So, Ed Milliband is gonna be the next PM.  I'm calling it now.


----------



## Vitriol (Apr 18, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> I admit I don't understand exactly what is causing the SNP's surge in support right now, but I think it's clear that the SNP are going to be the dominant force in Scotland in national elections for the immediate future, regardless of who's in government.



There are a few things im hearing from people up here: 1 is that labour have lost touch and are perceived to be more interested in their own interests than that of Scotland whereas the snp after two terms in gov are viewed as quite successful.

2. There is a perception that london has become unfairly advantaged and that we are increasingly governed according to what is best for the capital. Hs2 and the 2012 olympics were not at all popular up here. Labour have become associated with the Islington crowd and a londoncentric view. The snp by contrast are only interested in what is good for scotland (or so they claim)

Finally there is the simple numbers: Scotland is split between a unionist and a seperatist bloc-55/45 the unionist block is split between 3 parties (fptp means Scotland does have thousands of conservative and lib dem voters whose votes are ignored.  The 45% on the other side is largely owned by the snp with tiny slices going to the greens and far left. So despite probly only having 40%ish of the vote the snp will have more than anyone else and in fptp be able to win seats.

We actually already have a uk general election thread: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/uk-general-elections-7th-may-2015.8146/

Perhaps @Surtur could merge them for us?


----------



## Dudeofteenage (Apr 18, 2015)

vitriol said:


> There are a few things im hearing from people up here:



OK, well those are all factors I was broadly aware of.  What I find a little more confusing is why the SNP's membership has surged since last year's election.  None of what you've mentioned has changed since then, so why are people flocking to join and vote for the SNP?  Are people getting even more tired of Labour?  If so, why?  What did Labour do in the last six months to suddenly turn off Scottish people even more (bearing in mind that many of them were already well turned off Labour).  If the only information I had was the poll numbers I'd presume that Ed Milliband shot one of the Proclaimers or something.


----------



## Vitriol (Apr 18, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> OK, well those are all factors I was broadly aware of.  What I find a little more confusing is why the SNP's membership has surged since last year's election.  None of what you've mentioned has changed since then, so why are people flocking to join and vote for the SNP?  Are people getting even more tired of Labour?  If so, why?  What did Labour do in the last six months to suddenly turn off Scottish people even more (bearing in mind that many of them were already well turned off Labour).  If the only information I had was the poll numbers I'd presume that Ed Milliband shot one of the Proclaimers or something.




The political culture changed with the referendum- people engaged in a way ive never seen  before. Everywhere I went I would here people discussing independence. The usual voter apathy was gone, it was quite something. The snp managed to hold onto a portion of those that were re-engaged during the referendum process. I think a big part of why the snp managed this and labour failed was that the independence case was very much selling a dream (or a delusion depending on perspective) whereas the union side was more economic. Its easy to rally people to a dream and fairly hard to maintain enthusiasm for fiscal responsibility! Labour sharing a platform with the Orange order and the conservatives also went down really badly with a lot of their support. especially in Glasgow.

Its not Milliband that's the problem but scottish labour leader  Murphy. he is and was widely despised- the portrayal of him in the media during the referendum campaign did not reflect how he was being viewed by the public- while the rest of the country was having a serious discussion he was touring round with a host of london journalists (also distrusted) and english labour party activists (labour ran out of scots) , standing on his irn bru box and shouting at pensioners. It didnt go down well being viewed as overly theatrical, hyperbolic and attention seeking and kind of bullying aswell. He kept refusing debates with actual snp types which also didnt go down well nor did the former Scottish labour leader quitting about being run as a branch office. Murphy is also widely remembered as being a) an unapologetic blairite and iraq war apologist b) having spent 9 years at strathclyde without getting a degree then voting in tuition fees, c) Unrepentent after claiming a massive amount of expenses and lastly d) he is seen as pandering to his jewish constituents over israel- most of the rest of Scotland favours Palestine. He is not a popular man! He also epitomises the general problem scottish labour have of attacking the snp over everything rather than put forward policies of their own and refusing to awknowledge that they may have made any mistakes. In the last holyrood parliament labour voted against a measure to stop the bedroom tax in scotland while voting against the same tax in westminster, and when the snp accepted one of their policies ( I forget which) they abandoned it rather than agree with the snp on anything. It's been bizarre to watch.

I do agree with you though, Milliband is on course for no.10 though its going to be close, and the polls were wrong on wider margins in 1992.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (Apr 19, 2015)

vitriol said:


> Its not Milliband that's the problem but scottish labour leader  Murphy. he is and was widely despised- the portrayal of him in the media during the referendum campaign did not reflect how he was being viewed by the public-



So you think Scottish Labour would do better under a different leader?


----------



## Vitriol (Apr 20, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> So you think Scottish Labour would do better under a different leader?



Not now, the ship has sailed. But immediately after the referendum when Salmond resigned he earned a lot of peoples respect; by contrast labour went into meltdown with its leader quitting and throwing a huge tantrum over 'being run like a branch office' and then the disaster that is Murphy put in her place. If a) the change in leader had been smoother and b) a more popular leader had been chosen then they might have been able to contest with the snp for the large numbers of newly engaging voters. As it was while the snp were out drumming up new membership from the yes crowd labour were busy fighting each other.

Scottish labour is in a hard place- its politicians are all very much new labour, as they have to be for the labour party to win votes elsewhere in the uk, but the scottish electorate is still old labour. Whatever it was in the culture that kept the electorate with this Old labour view through the thatcher years did the same through blair and brown. Just like the conservatives in the 70's and 80's the current labour party finds it cannot compete with the snp on the left- which is where all the votes are in scotland. Unlike the conservatives it cannot just focus on the right and right off scotland as the conservatives already have that ground. Unable to come up with policies of their own that would win over the electorate here (as it would risk losing swing seat votes down south) SLab are forced to attack the snp instead. So while the SNP are out saying 'yes we can' SL are stuck with 'no we can't' which of course attracts far fewer votes.

They really needed a Donald Dewar- someone who could connect with the electorate and earn their respect, instead they put in a man on the furthest right section of the party to lead in its most leftwing electorate. If Brown had taken over the leadership this likely wouldn't have happened, he was never as unpopular in Scotland as he was in England and comfortably won the 2010 election up here. People are used to seeing the media get Scotland wrong all the time so often were more sympathetic to Brown, seeing him as doing the best he could in a difficult situation with a hostile media. He  also won a lot of respect for his speeches in the referendum campaign. I'm, aware brown is very much newlabour aswell but he is a far more capable politician than Murphy and consequently far more popular!


----------



## Dudeofteenage (Apr 20, 2015)

Apparently they basically offered it to Brown on a platter but he wasn't interested.  I think he's pretty thoroughly burned out on the day-to-day of political leadership - he can dip in on an issue he feels strongly about (like unionism) but the idea of having an ongoing job turns him off.

But broadly, if Brown is popular despite being at the absolute heart of New Labour, I don't think you can really claim that Murphy's New Labour credentials, which are far weaker, are damning him.  Frankly I think your perspective is kind of coloured by your nationalism.  There is frankly a damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't approach here - a leader who tries to distinguish Labour from the nationalists would be seen as fighting against the tide, while one who tried to outflank the nationalists on the left would be seen as indulging as "me-tooism".  It's telling that you criticise the prior leader's fightback against Labour's central office as a "huge tantrum".  Isn't Scottish Labour developing a distinctive Scottish identity, at odds with the mother party if need be, what we want to see?

Scottish Labour leader is a shitty job to have at this point, because the tide is going out on the party for reasons that are basically beyond their control.  The best they can do is try to hold it together and control the damage, which is not a compelling narrative but at the same time may be something the party is grateful for ten, twenty or even thirty years down the track.  I actually think Murphy was the right choice (given that Brown wasn't interested).  None of the alternative candidates were any better.  It's true that his leadership hasn't reaped massive electoral dividends, but it would be very shortsighted to blame Scottish Labour's current crisis purely on Murphy's leadership.


----------



## Vitriol (Apr 20, 2015)

Lamont went straight to the Daily Record with her resignation and criticised the party leadership describing them as 'dinosaurs' among other things. That to me is a tantrum. Scottish labour insisted throughout the referendum that they were not being interfered with by the central party and then a month later Lamont quits because the central party was too limiting.

Brown is almost popular despite being new labour rather than for being the heart of it. His popularity was personality based. Murphy has rubbed people the wrong way plus is mired in scandals from the past decade- (tuition fees, iraq and expenses). Brown gets off from these because people up here blame Blair (which i dont really think makes sense but hey politics). Murphy was a student for nine years without graduating then backed the introduction of fees under Blair, claimed a ridiculous amount in expenses and is a member of a right wing think tank. Either Neil Findlay or Sarah Boyack would have been a better choice in my opinion- neither of them had alienated yes voters in the referendum and both have less baggage than Murphy.

I disagree with you about me-tooism, a great many people distrust the snp as it has an ultimate agenda of independence. If someone were to offer the same policies minus the risk of independence they would gain from it- dishing the whigs has long been an effective tool in British politics.

It would make sense for Scottish labour to develop its own personality but bearing in mind Lamount and McLeish have both claimed that as leaders they were run by the main party and that Murphy was the pick of that party and has never been an msp I think it doubtful that he is going to establish a separate political culture in Scottish Labour. 

I agree the job is a poisoned chalice but i think it only got that way because they chose to fight each other rather than consolidate after the election. It was after Lamonts resignation in mid october that snp membership began to skyrocket.


I'll probably vote snp this time but I was a labour voter previously and i promise i dont come across as a nationalist in rl!

In any case looking at the bigger picture this election has become too close to call- I noticed this mornings polls have a swing back to the conservatives.


----------



## Picklechu (May 1, 2015)

POLITICO recently launched a European version. They've had some pretty decent articles on the election, although this has probably been my favorite so far.


----------



## CWCissey (May 7, 2015)

What I'm calling is Tories get more seats, but Labour gets in off the back of an SNP coalition/formal deal. Jockestan will boss England about, while Ed flounders and the ensuing protests/riots will make global news.


----------



## Caddchef (May 7, 2015)

Chanbob said:


> I live in a area that is completely dominated with UKIP propaganda that also happens to be an EDL stomping ground, so I feel riiiiight at home as a huge leftie!  My vote's most definitely going Labour, but my faith in Milliband as a leader isn't the strongest really.  I see him as more of an academic and not someone with enough bite to lead the country, like Prescott (despite all the bad press, I thought he was great) for example.  I voted Lib Dem last year and, along with many like me, boy did I feel silly afterwards.
> 
> Both the Tories and UKIP can sit and swivel.


Rotherham?


----------



## CWCissey (May 7, 2015)

Caddchef said:


> Rotherham?



Rochdale?


----------



## Caddchef (May 7, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Rochdale?


Ah, by the sounds of it you'd feel very much at home in Rotherham and i in Rochdale, politically at least.


----------



## CWCissey (May 7, 2015)

Caddchef said:


> Ah, by the sounds of it you'd feel very much at home in Rotherham and i in Rochdale, politically at least.



Me? Why?


----------



## GV 002 (May 7, 2015)

Caddchef said:


> Rotherham?



Nah, Bournemouth!


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 7, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> What I'm calling is Tories get more seats, but Labour gets in off the back of an SNP coalition/formal deal. Jockestan will boss England about, while Ed flounders and the ensuing protests/riots will make global news.



Yeah, I'm sure those disenfranchised urban youth are going to riot because they think that Scottish MPs shouldn't vote on English laws.

Anyway, I think this scenario is most likely.  Some of the last minute polls think they've detected a micro surge for Labour, but I'm sceptical - this is all well within the margin of error so it's likely to just be noise.

I think we'll get a picture of what to expect around 1AM GMT when Nuneaton declares.  It's a seat held by the Tories with a small majority that is on Labour's hit list.  It's these kinds of seats that are likely to determine the overall balance between Labour and the Tories.  If Labour wins Nuneaton handily, maybe this last minute micro surge is a real thing.  If they lose, perhaps Cameron will have the luxury of departing Number 10 on his own schedule after all.


----------



## Laevateinn (May 7, 2015)

While I'm not going to say who I voted for, I will say that I do indeed believe there is going to be a hung parliament. I've been keeping a close eye on things in parliament and I certainly don't see any major party actually winning the overall vote at the moment.



Dudeofteenage said:


> So, Ed Milliband is gonna be the next PM.  I'm calling it now.



I wouldn't be surprised if this happens either - though I'm not sure how Miliband would handle being PM at all. I mean, one of my biggest concerns is that even though most of the people in the parties have been around for a while, I can't help but wonder if they actually have enough experience to be able to support a government - especially the likes of Miliband. No offence, I know you guys won't flip out like Tumblrinas would, but I still have to choose my words very carefully.

Still, it'll be interesting to see what happens, eh?


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 7, 2015)

Laevateinn said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if this happens either - though I'm not sure how Miliband would handle being PM at all. I mean, one of my biggest concerns is that even though most of the people in the parties have been around for a while, I can't help but wonder if they actually have enough experience to be able to support a government - especially the likes of Miliband.



Not sure what you're getting at 2bh?  Miliband spent three years in Cabinet, two in a fairly important position.  That's more experience than David Cameron had before he became PM.  If anything he might have too much experience with government - he's spent almost his entire professional career working as an advisor or an MP.  Although, again, you could say the same about Cameron.


----------



## Laevateinn (May 7, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> Not sure what you're getting at 2bh?  Miliband spent three years in Cabinet, two in a fairly important position.  That's more experience than David Cameron had before he became PM.  If anything he might have too much experience with government - he's spent almost his entire professional career working as an advisor or an MP.  Although, again, you could say the same about Cameron.



I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it's more his attitude? The same applies to other candidates as well, but there seems to be a lack of... well... polite respect for each other in the House of Commons (as I see it). I know this is the modern era, but I really don't feel that people in government are acting as they should, I guess? I'm sorry if I still haven't made it clear enough - I'm not quite sure how to express it in a way that won't cause a fight in this topic...


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 7, 2015)

Laevateinn said:


> I suppose what I'm trying to say is that it's more his attitude? The same applies to other candidates as well, but there seems to be a lack of... well... polite respect for each other in the House of Commons (as I see it). I know this is the modern era, but I really don't feel that people in government are acting as they should, I guess? I'm sorry if I still haven't made it clear enough - I'm not quite sure how to express it in a way that won't cause a fight in this topic...



Oh, right.  Well, personally, I don't care about that.  People don't vote Labour so they get a candidate who'll be nice to the Tories, and vice versa.  Politicians have been disrespecting each other since the the Glorious Revolution.  If they were all nice and friendly and politely respectful it might make them better dinner party guests but it won't make them better policy-makers.


----------



## Picklechu (May 7, 2015)

This is fun. Assuming that polling is accurate, it paints an interesting picture. A hung parliament is almost certain, although a minority Labour government is a slim possibility.

EDIT: Exit polls are _way _off from the polling. They show the Conservative Party with 316 seats.


----------



## Laevateinn (May 7, 2015)

Picklechu said:


> This is fun. Assuming that polling is accurate, it paints an interesting picture. A hung parliament is almost certain, although a minority Labour government is a slim possibility.
> 
> EDIT: Exit polls are _way _off from the polling. They show the Conservative Party with 316 seats.



Yeah, it's best to take Exit polls with a grain of salt, a little bit like the weather forecast. Still, it's interesting to see that they're predicting that the Conservatives will have the majority.


----------



## JU 199 (May 7, 2015)

I think the exit poll is accurate. _Call it gut intuition  _


----------



## Holdek (May 7, 2015)

vitriol said:


> Not now, the ship has sailed. But immediately after the referendum when Salmond resigned he earned a lot of peoples respect; by contrast labour went into meltdown with its leader quitting and throwing a huge tantrum over 'being run like a branch office' and then the disaster that is Murphy put in her place. If a) the change in leader had been smoother and b) a more popular leader had been chosen then they might have been able to contest with the snp for the large numbers of newly engaging voters. As it was while the snp were out drumming up new membership from the yes crowd labour were busy fighting each other.
> 
> Scottish labour is in a hard place- its politicians are all very much new labour, as they have to be for the labour party to win votes elsewhere in the uk, but the scottish electorate is still old labour. Whatever it was in the culture that kept the electorate with this Old labour view through the thatcher years did the same through blair and brown. Just like the conservatives in the 70's and 80's the current labour party finds it cannot compete with the snp on the left- which is where all the votes are in scotland. Unlike the conservatives it cannot just focus on the right and right off scotland as the conservatives already have that ground. Unable to come up with policies of their own that would win over the electorate here (as it would risk losing swing seat votes down south) SLab are forced to attack the snp instead. So while the SNP are out saying 'yes we can' SL are stuck with 'no we can't' which of course attracts far fewer votes.
> 
> They really needed a Donald Dewar- someone who could connect with the electorate and earn their respect, instead they put in a man on the furthest right section of the party to lead in its most leftwing electorate. If Brown had taken over the leadership this likely wouldn't have happened, he was never as unpopular in Scotland as he was in England and comfortably won the 2010 election up here. People are used to seeing the media get Scotland wrong all the time so often were more sympathetic to Brown, seeing him as doing the best he could in a difficult situation with a hostile media. He  also won a lot of respect for his speeches in the referendum campaign. I'm, aware brown is very much newlabour aswell but he is a far more capable politician than Murphy and consequently far more popular!



Wasn't Scotland an Lib Dem stronghold until the coalition?  I know the leader before Nick Clegg was Scottish.


----------



## Holdek (May 7, 2015)

As an American, I'm watching returns on C-SPAN, courtesy of ITV.  So far for the few they've announced UKIP voters moved to the Tories at the last minute.

Other observations: it's almost 1:30 in the morning in the UK but they have top political guests for interviews.  Also, I like how they make all the candidates stand on stage on the stage at the same time to hear the results called out one-by-one; it seems appropriately British to make the smaller party candidates be shamed with an low vote haul announced and just two or three people in the crowd applauding.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Holdek said:


> Wasn't Scotland an Lib Dem stronghold until the coalition?  I know the leader before Nick Clegg was Scottish.



No it was always a Labour stronghold. Though they did have a couple of Lib Dem seats in the highlands. That's all changed now.


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)




----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Does anyone know if Paddy Ashdown wants ketchup or barbecue sauce with his hat?


----------



## Holdek (May 8, 2015)

Damn.  These results are shocking.  Conservatives winning an outright majority?  Between this and the US in 2014, I'm wondering if there's a crises in polling.


----------



## Holdek (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> No it was always a Labour stronghold. Though they did have a couple of Lib Dem seats in the highlands. That's all changed now.


Ah, just reading now that Charles Kennedy lost his seat to the SNP tonight.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Holdek said:


> Ah, just reading now that Charles Kennedy lost his seat to the SNP tonight.



The man's a sad drunk anyway. Although I suppose that's par for the course if you're leading the Lib Dems! 



Holdek said:


> Damn.  These results are shocking.  Conservatives winning an outright majority?  Between this and the US in 2014, I'm wondering if there's a crises in polling.



It's not really a crisis in polling, rather a crisis in candidates. All the political parties are fucking awful.


----------



## Gagamaru (May 8, 2015)

farage lost. i laughed.


----------



## gamer2014 (May 8, 2015)

Well Nigel Farage didn't win in Thanet South.

UKIP get 13% of the vote and get 1 seat, yet SNP get 56 seats with less voters.


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

Gagamaru said:


> farage lost. i laughed.



I watched a bit of the post-results livestream and he tried to go in this weird tangent about how UKIP was popular among working women that got booed down.

 He agreed to resign if he lost the seat, right? Has he indicated he's going to go through with that?

Also- why exactly do people hate Ed Miliband so much? He comes across as some kind of weird robot-man, but still, it didn't seem like the Tories needed to do much but go "at least we're better than Labour-SNP" in their campaign.


----------



## Picklechu (May 8, 2015)

The SNP decapitated Labour, Farage lost, UKIP got one seat, and the Tories are at 323 seats as of right now (which is a majority assuming that Sinn Fein refuses to take their seats and is three short if not). I think that a lot of voters (especially UKIP voters and undecided voters in England) swung back to the Tories due to concerns about a potential Labour/SNP coalition.


----------



## Fareal (May 8, 2015)

Holdek said:


> Damn.  These results are shocking.  Conservatives winning an outright majority?  Between this and the US in 2014, I'm wondering if there's a crises in polling.



Tbh apart from fucking Iain Duncan Smith etc, Tories in Britain are no more right wing than Democrats in the US. Less right wing on some things. England naturally votes Tory; it's just gone back to that. Labour have been cleansed from Scotland because they have fucked us for so long.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> I watched a bit of the post-results livestream and he tried to go in this weird tangent about how UKIP was popular among working women that got booed down.
> 
> He agreed to resign if he lost the seat, right? Has he indicated he's going to go through with that?
> 
> Also- why exactly do people hate Ed Miliband so much? He comes across as some kind of weird robot-man, but still, it didn't seem like the Tories needed to do much but go "at least we're better than Labour-SNP" in their campaign.



I think he may. Cameron just claimed three scalps tonight, Ed the Dead Duck, Cleggy and Farage are all indicating that they're resigning.

And everyone hates Ed because he stabbed his more politically astute brother in the back to become the fucktoy of the Unions.

As for UKIP not doing as well as they thought they would, I put that down to strategic voting. A lot of the Northern seats that would have got a UKIP seat (looking at you Rochdale and Rotherham!)  stuck with Labour in an attempt to keep Cameron out.


----------



## Fareal (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> I think he may. Cameron just claimed three scalps tonight, Ed the Dead Duck, Cleggy and Farage are all indicating that they're resigning.
> 
> And everyone hates Ed because he stabbed his more politically astute brother in the back to become the fucktoy of the Unions.
> 
> As for UKIP not doing as well as they thought they would, I put that down to strategic voting. A lot of the Northern seats that would have got a UKIP seat (looking at you Rochdale and Rotherham!)  stuck with Labour in an attempt to keep Cameron out.



Hahahhaa did you jsut see Farage saying he's resigning but will probably run for leader again after the summer? Lying cunt


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

I don't really think anybody cares that Ed "stabbed his brother in the back" any more than they care that he once ate a bacon sandwich awkwardly.  It's amusing to see conservative commentators who had long dossiers about how crap Dave was back in 2010 suddenly signing his praises to the roof as the King over the Water.  Doubtless if Dave had won we'd have heard about how he stomped on his hapless, more politically astute younger brother, and everybody hates him for that.  It's not like the Labour leadership was Dave's by some kind of divine right.  Having said that obviously the electorate didn't respond to him.  The question is, who's gonna be leader now?  Diane Abbott?

It will be interesting to see whether the SNP's electoral dominance is a hangover from the referendum that will slowly fade, or a new established fact of British electoral politics.

And of course, the big loser... the pollsters.  Even internet darling Nate Silver fucked it up.  It's easy to start picking apart polling methodologies but it's also important to remember that the same methodologies were used five years ago and they were extremely accurate.  Have British elections changed so much in five years?

I found myself wondering this morning what will happen to Boris.  His plan A was obviously to replace Cameron after an electoral loss.  Now he's going to be looking for a hefty Cabinet post.  I'm guessing Foreign Secretary since he likes to think of himself as a cosmopolitan and the job's vacant with Hague retiring.  And it would put him in prime position to replace Cameron if he retires in 2018 or 2019.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> I don't really think anybody cares that Ed "stabbed his brother in the back" any more than they care that he once ate a bacon sandwich awkwardly.  It's amusing to see conservative commentators who had long dossiers about how crap Dave was back in 2010 suddenly signing his praises to the roof as the King over the Water.  Doubtless if Dave had won we'd have heard about how he stomped on his hapless, more politically astute younger brother, and everybody hates him for that.  It's not like the Labour leadership was Dave's by some kind of divine right.  Having said that obviously the electorate didn't respond to him.  The question is, who's gonna be leader now?  Diane Abbott?
> 
> It will be interesting to see whether the SNP's electoral dominance is a hangover from the referendum that will slowly fade, or a new established fact of British electoral politics.
> 
> ...



Well people liked David more than Ed, he was an acceptable amount of geeky. I think he'll come back and get the leadership position myself. But Dianne Abbott is a good (yet really fucking scary) option for a betting man.

I think the SNP will stick about, the referendum really smashed Scotland's opinion that Labour fights for them, their campaign was that disastrous.

Boris is obviously going to be in the Cabinet, he's too well loved not to be, I'm wondering if he's in line for Deputy, it'll either be him or Theresa May, and I'd rather have Boris in the wings to be fair.


----------



## Ariel (May 8, 2015)

> 'Smirnoff Ice is the drink of the gods - I cannae handle this c*** man.'
> 
> 'Woke up beside half a can of Tennents and a full pizza and more money than I came out with. I call that a success.'
> 
> ...


 
But seriously why did they have a 20yr old even running? She's going to get wrecked.


----------



## Fareal (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> I don't really think anybody cares that Ed "stabbed his brother in the back" any more than they care that he once ate a bacon sandwich awkwardly.  It's amusing to see conservative commentators who had long dossiers about how crap Dave was back in 2010 suddenly signing his praises to the roof as the King over the Water.  Doubtless if Dave had won we'd have heard about how he stomped on his hapless, more politically astute younger brother, and everybody hates him for that.  It's not like the Labour leadership was Dave's by some kind of divine right.  Having said that obviously the electorate didn't respond to him.  The question is, who's gonna be leader now?  Diane Abbott?
> 
> It will be interesting to see whether the SNP's electoral dominance is a hangover from the referendum that will slowly fade, or a new established fact of British electoral politics.
> 
> ...



Main issue for Boris surely is whether you can practically combine Mayoralty with a major Cabinet post. Or does he resign as Mayor? Might make more sense to hold on as Mayor in a non-Cabinet post, not run for re-election in London and then go into the Cabinet. Boris has a very carefully crafted persona of bumbling eccentric, but in fact he is fiercely intellectual and has a formidable political intuition.


----------



## Picklechu (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> It will be interesting to see whether the SNP's electoral dominance is a hangover from the referendum that will slowly fade, or a new established fact of British electoral politics.


Absolutely. That's what I, as an outside observer, is one of the things I am most interested in seeing. The "2.5" party system has essentially remained intact (at least in terms of outcome), but it's undergone a big shift.



Dudeofteenage said:


> And of course, the big loser... the pollsters.  Even internet darling Nate Silver fucked it up.  It's easy to start picking apart polling methodologies but it's also important to remember that the same methodologies were used five years ago and they were extremely accurate.  Have British elections changed so much in five years?


This is the big one for me. My gut instinct is that a lot of it had to do with a last minute swing to the Conservatives due to concerns about the SNP and vote splitting, but we'll be able to get a better idea in a few days once the nerds and the computers have gotten at it.



Dudeofteenage said:


> I found myself wondering this morning what will happen to Boris.  His plan A was obviously to replace Cameron after an electoral loss.  Now he's going to be looking for a hefty Cabinet post.  I'm guessing Foreign Secretary since he likes to think of himself as a cosmopolitan and the job's vacant with Hague retiring.  And it would put him in prime position to replace Cameron if he retires in 2018 or 2019.


Absolutely. I don't see a scenario in which he doesn't get _something_, but I wonder what will happen if it's something he doesn't really want? He would have a difficult time trying to go back to just being mayor next(?) year.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Fareal said:


> Main issue for Boris surely is whether you can practically combine Mayoralty with a major Cabinet post. Or does he resign as Mayor? Might make more sense to hold on as Mayor in a non-Cabinet post, not run for re-election in London and then go into the Cabinet. Boris has a very carefully crafted persona of bumbling eccentric, but in fact he is fiercely intellectual and has a formidable political intuition.



He's already resigned as Mayor, he's now MP for Uxbridge, and eligible for a Cabinet post, which he will get.

Plan B for him is obviously doing a good enough job to instill confidence for when Cameron leaves after his second term.


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> I think he may. Cameron just claimed three scalps tonight, Ed the Dead Duck, Cleggy and Farage are all indicating that they're resigning.


It seems like the Tories pulled off kind of a coup here, yeah.
So is the SNP likely to become the designated kingmaker going forward instead of the Lib Dems?



Dudeofteenage said:


> And of course, the big loser... the pollsters.  Even internet darling Nate Silver fucked it up.  It's easy to start picking apart polling methodologies but it's also important to remember that the same methodologies were used five years ago and they were extremely accurate.



Silver is pretty pessimistic about the state of polling as a whole.


----------



## Picklechu (May 8, 2015)

chimpchan said:


> But seriously why did they have a 20yr old even running? She's going to get wrecked.


I thought it was really interesting that both Mhairi Black and a twenty-three year-old are SNP MPs now. Some young people are quite capable, but--and this is just my white, conservative, American male opinion--she comes across as a bit of a moron.

I felt bad for a second last night as I was watching her speak after the voter totals were announced because I did't realize that she was Mhairi Black and thought she was a little old man at first.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Picklechu said:


> I thought it was really interesting that both Mhairi Black and a twenty-three year-old are SNP MPs now. Some young people are quite capable, but--and this is just my white, conservative, American male opinion--she comes across as a bit of a moron.
> 
> I felt bad for a second last night as I was watching her speak after the voter totals were announced because I did't realize that she was Mhairi Black and thought she was a little old man at first.



The thing about the majority of SNP voters is that they're either fiercely nationalist, dead young, or just bleeding thick. 

Mhairi Black is the middle of the Venn diagram...


----------



## Fareal (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> He's already resigned as Mayor, he's now MP for Uxbridge, and eligible for a Cabinet post, which he will get.
> 
> Plan B for him is obviously doing a good enough job to instill confidence for when Cameron leaves after his second term.



Has he?? I stayed up for his speech last night but didn't see him resign: has he done that this morning? He had said when he was selected in Uxbridge he'd carry on as Mayor although I wouldn't blame him if he changes his mind now.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Fareal said:


> Has he?? I stayed up for his speech last night but didn't see him resign: has he done that this morning? He had said when he was selected in Uxbridge he'd carry on as Mayor although I wouldn't blame him if he changes his mind now.



Well I imagine he'll see his term out. Then he'll say 'Toodle-oo chaps! I'm off to the Cabinet!'


----------



## Fareal (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Well I imagine he'll see his term out. Then he'll say 'Toodle-oo chaps! I'm off to the Cabinet!'



I agree with you he's not a bad shout for Foreign Secretary. He doesn't have to maintain the persona abroad and it's not a job you give to someone who isn't smart. Too Eurosceptic though to hold the post if there is an EU referendum? But for the love of God, Jeremy Hunt has to go. Preferably out of a window.

What do you think happens in the post-election reshuffle? Osborne stays where he is, obvs, but who moves and where? Deputy PM just became vacant....


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Fareal said:


> I agree with you he's not a bad shout for Foreign Secretary. He doesn't have to maintain the persona abroad and it's not a job you give to someone who isn't smart. Too Eurosceptic though to hold the post if there is an EU referendum? But for the love of God, Jeremy Hunt has to go. Preferably out of a window.
> 
> What do you think happens in the post-election reshuffle? Osborne stays where he is, obvs, but who moves and where? Deputy PM just became vacant....



It'll definitely either be Theresa May or Boris. My money's on Boris at the mo, Theresa May has proven herself to be an effective Home Secretary, so I imagine she'll keep her job. Michael Gove will likely remain as Education Secretary and IDS on Work and Pensions despite both being huge mongs. No idea who'll be Foreign Secretary, Boris is a good shout, but Cameron would likely want to keep him close as the man is electoral gold. I'd say Sajid Javid may be in line for a promotion...


----------



## Venusaur (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> I
> 
> And everyone hates Ed because he stabbed his more politically astute brother in the back



I keep hearing this, but I can never find the details. How exactly did he stab his brother in the back?


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Venusaur said:


> I keep hearing this, but I can never find the details. How exactly did he stab his brother in the back?



He did a deal with the Unions so they'd back him as leader of the Labour party rather than David, who had the backing of the party and the public.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Well people liked David more than Ed, he was an acceptable amount of geeky. I think he'll come back and get the leadership position myself. But Dianne Abbott is a good (yet really fucking scary) option for a betting man.



Naw, I think Dave is done with electoral politics.  He might pop up in the House of Lords one day, possibly even show up in a future Cabinet like Mandelson did, but I don't see him standing for Parliament or the party leadership.  I think the next Labour leader will be somebody who wasn't a contender last time.  Maybe Alan Johnson?  I understand the rank and file like him a lot an he's been low profile during this campaign so he may be able to escape responsibility for it.



CWCissey said:


> I think the SNP will stick about, the referendum really smashed Scotland's opinion that Labour fights for them, their campaign was that disastrous.



I've no doubt that the SNP are going to be around for the forseeable future, but it's possible that this election may be a high water mark for them.  I wouldn't be surprised if the next election sees their near-total stranglehold on Westminster seats getting chipped away.  But who knows.  I admit what is happening in Scotland right now, electorally, isn't something I really understand.



CWCissey said:


> Boris is obviously going to be in the Cabinet, he's too well loved not to be, I'm wondering if he's in line for Deputy, it'll either be him or Theresa May, and I'd rather have Boris in the wings to be fair.



Do you know something about George Osbourne's short term plans that the rest of us don't?



CWCissey said:


> He's already resigned as Mayor, he's now MP for Uxbridge, and eligible for a Cabinet post, which he will get.



Nope, he's still Mayor for now.  It's expected he'll resign though.  Combining the Mayoralty with a backbench slot is doable, but combining the Mayoralty with a Cabinet post, even a mid-ranking one (and I doubt he'd be happy with a mid-ranking one) would be practically impossible and against the spirit, if not the letter, of the law.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Pickle Inspector (May 8, 2015)

Poor UKIP, they get 3.73 million votes and 1 seat while SNP get 56 seats with 1.45 million votes.

Also it'll be pretty embarrassing for Clegg to return to the Houses of Parliament as an ex leader with his party wiped out and no longer in power.

I'm looking forward to seeing what's going to happen with Labour though, their leadership battle will be interesting.


----------



## Picklechu (May 8, 2015)

Pickle Inspector said:


> I'm looking forward to seeing what's going to happen with Labour though, their leadership battle will be interesting.


I have twenty Britbux on Harriet Harman.

EDIT: A quick Google search shows that she's been named acting leader.


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Theresa May has proven herself to be an effective Home Secretary, so I imagine she'll keep her job.



Speaking of- it looks like the data surveillance bill is on the cards again. And no Lib Dems to block it this time.



Picklechu said:


> I have twenty Britbux on Harriet Harman.
> 
> EDIT: A quick Google search shows that she's been named acting leader.



Until a new one is found, at which point she intends to resign. Thank god.


----------



## AnOminous (May 8, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> Also- why exactly do people hate Ed Miliband so much? He comes across as some kind of weird robot-man, but still, it didn't seem like the Tories needed to do much but go "at least we're better than Labour-SNP" in their campaign.



He's creepy and looks like an alien.  He is also an ineffectual hack who inspires absolutely nobody.  If anything good comes out of this election for Labour, it is getting rid of that guy as a "leader," because he wasn't one.


----------



## Arctic (May 8, 2015)

AnOminous said:


> He's creepy and looks like an alien.  He is also an ineffectual hack who inspires absolutely nobody.  If anything good comes out of this election for Labour, it is getting rid of that guy as a "leader," because he wasn't one.


This video really explains it all.


----------



## Holdek (May 8, 2015)

chimpchan said:


> But seriously why did they have a 20yr old even running? She's going to get wrecked.


Eh, she's done well so far by winning.



DawnMachine said:


> Silver is pretty pessimistic about the state of polling as a whole.


And that was written last year.  He's got to be even more so now.



Dudeofteenage said:


> Do you know something about George Osbourne's short term plans that the rest of us don't?


Wouldn't Deputy PM be a demotion from Chancellor?  Gordon Brown wasn't Deputy under Blair although he was the heir to Blair.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

Holdek said:


> Wouldn't Deputy PM be a demotion from Chancellor?  Gordon Brown wasn't Deputy under Blair although he was the heir to Blair.



I'm assuming he'd be both.  It seems that Cameron has something different in mind, though - he's made Osbourne First Secretary of State.  Still effectively makes him the #2 in the government, presuming nobody gets appointed Deputy PM (and I can't imagine why they would)

I'm gonna keep disagreeing about Miliband being an innately poor leader.  Whoever Labour had chosen, they'd have been depicted as a useless ineffectual twat by the press.  It just goes with the job.  As I said earlier, if Dave had been leader, we'd have been constantly hearing about how they should have gone with Ed, instead.  Dave became every Tory's favourite leader the moment he lost the contest.


----------



## Fareal (May 8, 2015)

Osborne named First Secretary of State (essentially Deputy PM but no title of Deputy) in addition to Chancellor. None of the great offices of state change hands. Most interesting.


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

thought id throw in my two pennies:

I'm pretty impressed by how the conservatives have done and disgusted at how quickly labour are turning on themselves- party grandees busy tearing the current guard down and accusing each other of being too blairite or too old labour. None f them seem to grasp yet that its patronising policies and a complete champagne socialist disconnect that did for them. They lost a lot of stronghold votes (if not seats) to ukip but are too caught up in a very 'liberal' mindset to see their stance on not giving people a say on europe and insisting there is no problem with islam and excessive immigration is costing them voters.

I quite liked farage's cheeky putinesque manoeuvre. he had me laughing- for a man of the people he's very slippery.

I'm fairly sure the snp vote will hold- they've got the holyrood election to galvanise for next year, then an eu referendum, then either a new indie ref or the next general election. I noticed separatist parties got 55% on a 73% turnout. Cameron will have to do something radical to avoid losing Scotland.

the lib dems got what they deserved i have no sympathy- I understand they couldn't fullfill all their pledges because of coalition but there a big difference between 'we can't scrap tuition fees because of coalition demands' and ' we can't scrap tuition fees instead we're going to treble them'.

FPTP is as broken as ever- greens and ukip both should have far more seats. 

Will be interested to see if Osborne tries some victorianesque century-rents-for-a-pound type deals to rejuvenate the north. He spent a lot of the last parliament visiting what's left of the industries there and the few times he spoke during the election he kept emphasising the importance of rejuvenating the north and re balancing the economy away from London. If he was to succeed he could break labours last stronghold so he might try.


----------



## JU 199 (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> Will be interested to see if Osborne tries some victorianesque century-rents-for-a-pound type deals to rejuvenate the north. He spent a lot of the last parliament visiting what's left of the industries there and the few times he spoke during the election he kept emphasising the importance of rejuvenating the north and re balancing the economy away from London. If he was to succeed he could break labours last stronghold so he might try.



Thats assuming Osborne _wants_ to do anything about that. Historically he's had no problem letting the divide stay as it is.


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> They lost a lot of stronghold votes (if not seats) to ukip but are too caught up in a very 'liberal' mindset to see their stance on not giving people a say on europe and insisting there is no problem with islam and excessive immigration is costing them voters.



Someone mentioned this earlier, I think, and it's curious to me -- why would someone swing from Labour to UKIP? Center-left to populist-right seems like more of a stretch than them voting, say, Greens or something. Is it just Labour's blue-collar base going single-issue on immigration?


----------



## JU 199 (May 8, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> why would someone swing from Labour to UKIP? Center-left to populist-right seems like more of a stretch than them voting



(I'm asuming you're american) Our politics is a bit different here. What you mentioned is a possibility with some of the electorate. Labour's strategy assumed UKIP would poach more from the conservatives than they would from them. _In a few constituencies it turned out to be the opposite. _

What really tipped the balance was higher turnout and_ especially _lib-dem defectors- Who against all predictions voted _tory._


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> Thats amusing that Osborne _wants_ to do anything about that. Historically he's had no problem letting the divide stay as it is.


I agree but now he has a chance to break labour and secure tory hegemony for the foreseeable future. Osborneis the heir to a baronetcy and an aristocrat- he's exactly the type of person who took advantage of the 18th century grants. its not like the rich have nothing to gain from being able to open up fresh businesses cheaply!

edit:labour-ukip @DawnMachine

labour used to be the party of the working class and were big on trade unions and the welfare state. Voting labour was part of class culture and loyalty. however since the mid 2000's mass immigration has damaged the wage of the working class and driven house prices up. Labour refuse to acknowledge this and for a long time labled anyone who disagreed with them racist. If your a plumber or joiner who's seen his wage collapse or unemployed and unable to get a job because all the low skilled labour contracts are held by agencies that recruit directly from East Europe and you cant move elsewhere because there isn't enough affordable  housing you might be tempted to vote ukip instead of your typical labour.

You probaly won't vote tory out of class loyalty and ukip hold themselves out as ordinary blokes (this isn't really true but politics amirite!)


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

I think Osbourne will go through with his projects aimed at regenerating the North, he seems dead set on having an economic powerhouse up here, if anything just to shut us up about the country and the economy being too focused on London (which it is).

However, vanity projects like HS2 are not the answer.


----------



## Venusaur (May 8, 2015)

Soooooo...do you guys think Cameron will deliver on the "Leaving the EU" referendum?


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> (I'm asuming you're american)


Nah, I'm from the colonies, sahib. 



Ass Manager 3000 said:


> Labour's strategy assumed UKIP would poach more from the conservatives than they would from them. _In a few constituencies it turned out to be the opposite._



So Labour were banking on UKIP doing well and the Tories were banking on SNP doing well? I'm starting to get an impression of how bizarre this election was.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Venusaur said:


> Soooooo...do you guys think Cameron will deliver on the "Leaving the EU" referendum?



He'll get some minor reforms then say 'lol, we don't need one now'.



DawnMachine said:


> So Labour were banking on UKIP doing well and the Tories were banking on SNP doing well? I'm starting to get an impression of how bizarre this election was.



Particularly as UKIP were targeting a lot of Labour seats, as they wanted to be the new working class party.


----------



## Holdek (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> I'm assuming he'd be both.  It seems that Cameron has something different in mind, though - he's made Osbourne First Secretary of State.  Still effectively makes him the #2 in the government, presuming nobody gets appointed Deputy PM (and I can't imagine why they would)


Yeah, I believe it's not uncommon not to have a Deputy PM.


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

Venusaur said:


> Soooooo...do you guys think Cameron will deliver on the "Leaving the EU" referendum?


his majority is so small i think he'll have too but he'll hobble it like the 1979 scots referendum. 50% of the electorate needed not 50% of votes cast.


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> his majority is so small i think he'll have too but he'll hobble it like the 1979 scots referendum. 50% of the electorate needed not 50% of votes cast.



Even then, a lot of polls say around 80% of people in the UK would like to leave the EU, so hobbling the election wouldn't stop it if this is true.


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Even then, a lot of polls say around 80% of people in the UK would like to leave the EU, so hobbling the election wouldn't stop it if this is true.


stick a two thirds majority of the total electorate down and you only have to win an extra 11%.

but in all honestly if 80% want out we should probably just go and he would stand to gain votes by offering an open referendum.


----------



## JU 199 (May 8, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> So Labour were banking on UKIP doing well and the Tories were banking on SNP doing well? I'm starting to get an impression of how bizarre this election was.



Yes In my opinion this election was about labours bad habits coming to ahead.

The assumptions

1) We don't need a proper counter narrative. We'll poach popular shit from everyone elses agenda. _'People will like us then!'_
2) Scotland will put out for us.
3) The lib-dems will vote for us
4) (Smaller) Ukip wont poach votes from us.



CWCissey said:


> Even then, a lot of polls say around 80% of people in the UK would like to leave the EU



Most polls_ aren't that high. _But they are about 50%

I think Cameron knows that leaving the EU isn't the best idea (from his perspective) and might punt, but it's probably a vote winner anyway.


 If there was one casualty that made me smile it was _Ed Balls_. He was responsible for the modern PFI- a quasi-privatization drive that's cost my nation untold amounts of money now and in the future.

It was good to see him go.

Effectively labour propositioned a _inferior_ shit sandwich. 

If somebody walked up to you and told you that _their_ shit sandwich was better than_ your_ shit sandwich, would you rather-

A) Have the shit sandwich you know
B) Have a _potentially worse_ shit sandwich 

Guess which option everyone took?


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> Anyway, if there was one casualty that made me smile it was _Ed Balls_. He was responsible for the modern PFI- a quasi-privatization drive that's cost my nation untold amounts of money now and in the future.
> 
> It was good to see him go.



Although I do wonder what will now happen to Ed Balls day.


----------



## JU 199 (May 8, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Although I do wonder what will now happen to Ed Balls day.



He'll probably leverage it for feels when his political career stalls again  (I hope)


----------



## GV 002 (May 8, 2015)

Well bugger me, another 5 sodding years of Tories.

Bye bye NHS.

So long Chiltern Hills.

Hello austerity!


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> I'm pretty impressed by how the conservatives have done and disgusted at how quickly labour are turning on themselves- party grandees busy tearing the current guard down and accusing each other of being too blairite or too old labour. None f them seem to grasp yet that its patronising policies and a complete champagne socialist disconnect that did for them.



So which is it?  Labour needs unity, or Labour needs to get rid of champagne socialists?



Ass Manager 3000 said:


> He'll probably leverage it for feels when his political career stalls again (I hope)



For it to stall again it'd have to launch again, and that's beyond unlikely.  He's toast.  I guess it's conceivably possible that in some future Labour resurgence he might be able to crawl back in to a safe seat but any Labour leader with the minimum level of competence necessary to reverse Tory gains will know that Balls is toxic, along with pretty much this entire generation of Labour senior leadership.

Like Big Mils, the best Balls can hope for is a seat in the House of Lords and some kind of quango in ten years.


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

Venusaur said:


> Soooooo...do you guys think Cameron will deliver on the "Leaving the EU" referendum?



Most of the articles I've seen discussing the post-election market results (_great_ day for the FTSE and the pound sterling) also mention that traders are spooked by the possibility of a Brexit and don't seem to consider it a good idea.

Considering that London is one of the world's financial capitals, I'd imagine the opinion of the city's traders carries more than a little weight.


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> So which is it? Labour needs unity, or Labour needs to get rid of champagne socialists?


both. the two aren't mutually exclusive. Labour needs to unite, as either blairites or oldschool socialists and start on concrete pledges without the literal concrete platitudes,



Spoiler: no more of this shit


----------



## CWCissey (May 8, 2015)

So what do you think will actually happen to the EdStone? I like the thought of Cameron putting it in Ed's garden at night to mock him, and he keeps putting it back the following night whenever Ed gets it moved off.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> both. the two aren't mutually exclusive. Labour needs to unite, as either blairites or oldschool socialists and start on concrete pledges without the literal concrete platitudes,



It needs to unite by dismissing half the party?  This must be some new definition of "unite" I'm not familiar with.  The only way for Labour to solidify around one identity or other would be a massive purge which, even if it were possible, would be massively divisive.  Neither the Blairites nor the social democrats are going to just stop being Blairites or social democrats.


----------



## JU 199 (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> oncrete pledges without the literal concrete platitudes,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That publicity stunt was embarrassing.



vitriol said:


> both. the two aren't mutually exclusive. Labour needs to unite, as either blairites or oldschool socialists and start on concrete pledges without the literal concrete platitudes,





Dudeofteenage said:


> It needs to unite by dismissing half the party? This must be some new definition of "unite" I'm not familiar with. The only way for Labour to solidify around one identity or other would be a massive purge which, even if it were possible, would be massively divisive. Neither the Blairites nor the social democrats are going to just stop being Blairites or social democrats.



I agree with @Dudeofteenage. They are _at their core _ideological opponents. Couple that with the Iraq war disaster leads to a group who are only together to spite the conservatives or to _please whatever paymaster is currently fronting._



DawnMachine said:


> Most of the articles I've seen discussing the post-election market results (_great_ day for the FTSE and the pound sterling) also mention that traders are spooked by the possibility of a Brexit and don't seem to consider it a good idea.
> 
> Considering that London is one of the world's financial capitals, I'd imagine the opinion of the city's traders carries more than a little weight.



London's finical sector is so hard-tied into Europe that it's an expected link in it's bailout fund. Any disruption to it could be disastrous.


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> It needs to unite by dismissing half the party?  This must be some new definition of "unite" I'm not familiar with.  The only way for Labour to solidify around one identity or other would be a massive purge which, even if it were possible, would be massively divisive.  Neither the Blairites nor the social democrats are going to just stop being Blairites or social democrats.


they were caught between the two throughout the 80's and 90's. So long as the party is promising both contradictory visions at the same time they come across as insincere and opportunistic. Labour never got in after the 70's until the last of the old guard had gone, if they wait for the same process to rid them of the Balls and Murphy's of the party then they will spend another 18 years out of power.

I don't think this discussion is going to go anywhere but labour have only ever won an election convincingly when they could present a single idealogical front.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

vitriol said:


> I don't think this discussion is going to go anywhere but labour have only ever won an election convincingly when they could present a single idealogical front.



I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that what you're suggesting is not "unity".


----------



## Vitriol (May 8, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that what you're suggesting is not "unity".


apologies i misinterpreted your posts.


edit: 'they need to put on a united front' is probably closer to what i meant.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 8, 2015)

Ultimately I think there's a limit to the degree of ideological unity that Labour (or for that matter the Conservatives) can achieve.  In a First Past the Post system, even one that's fraying at the edges as the British one seems to be, there is a tremendous incentive for people with diverse views to converge in large, ideologically loose parties.  Political scientists often call these "disguised coalitions" and they often display the kind of ideological messiness that Labour (and the Conservatives) have displayed.

This kind of disunity isn't necessarily fatal - the Conservatives have had their share of internal arguments, and it obviously didn't prevent them from exceeding all but their most sunnily optimistic goals electorally.  Even Blair's impressive marshalling of the Labour party behind a common banner was only briefly successful - cracks were already showing by 2002, and the Iraq War blew it wide open.  I don't think disunity has actually been a problem for the Labour Party recently - I'm struggling to think of an instance where a significant Labour figure went "off message", although it's possible I missed it.

Of course there is a risk of a big internal fight in Labour in the near future, but if I was a Labour strategist I would recommend getting it out in the open right now - have the big messy fight soon after you've lost an election, when the public eye is elsewhere.  Better to air your dirty laundry in late 2015 than early 2020.


----------



## Picklechu (May 8, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> Someone mentioned this earlier, I think, and it's curious to me -- why would someone swing from Labour to UKIP? Center-left to populist-right seems like more of a stretch than them voting, say, Greens or something. Is it just Labour's blue-collar base going single-issue on immigration?


The best American analogy is the 1992 presidential election, when Ross Perot--who, while being generally right-leaning, pulled a bit of white, working-class Democratic support from Bill Clinton. George Wallace in 1968 is another similar example (Wallace, a socially conservative Democrat, taking a decent chunk of union workers and traditionally liberal groups, especially in the midwest).


----------



## Pickle Inspector (May 8, 2015)

I think the problem with Labour is ideologically they don't seem to know if they are being too left wing or not left wing enough, the Financial Times seems to think the move to the left lost them the election but on the other hand the popularity of the SNP seems to imply many in the country think they're not left wing enough, they're in a tricky position.



Venusaur said:


> Soooooo...do you guys think Cameron will deliver on the "Leaving the EU" referendum?


I think so but I'm suspicious about what the wording will be and also if they'll let non British EU nationals living in the UK vote, apparently the Lib Dems were going to have that as a "Red line" in any coalition agreement but I'm not really sure how much impact that could have if they did let them vote in the referendum.


----------



## AnOminous (May 8, 2015)

Pickle Inspector said:


> I think the problem with Labour is ideologically they don't seem to know if they are being too left wing or not left wing enough, the Financial Times seems to think the move to the left lost them the election but on the other hand the popularity of the SNP seems to imply many in the country think they're not left wing enough, they're in a tricky position.



It seems like they somehow manage to be both too left-wing and too right-wing at the same time.  They're too left-wing on sucking radical Islamic cock and promising crazy SJW shit like making it a literal crime to criticize terrorism.  Labour to Outlaw "Islamophobia".  And that's an article promoting this as an awesome idea.

But then, when it comes to stuff like actually supporting the rights of workers, you know, that "Labour" shit, they're nowhere to be found.  It's all "New Labour" bullshit, which sounds pretty much like Thatcherite bullshit.

I'm saying that from the burgerland side of the pond, but to me, they make all the wrong noises about all the wrong shit.


----------



## JU 199 (May 8, 2015)

Pickle Inspector said:


> I think the problem with Labour is ideologically they don't seem to know if they are being too left wing or not left wing enough, the Financial Times seems to think the move to the left lost them the election but on the other hand the popularity of the SNP seems to imply many in the country think they're not left wing enough, they're in a tricky position.



It's interesting. If you poll issue by issue labour's 'proposed' polices win more often than they loose, but the public doesn't vote _issue by issue.
_
Winning elections Is about confidence and counter-narrative- something that party has no idea how to manage.



AnOminous said:


> It seems like they somehow manage to be both too left-wing and too right-wing at the same time. They're too left-wing on sucking radical Islamic cock and promising crazy SJW shit like making it a literal crime to criticize terrorism. Labour to Outlaw "Islamophobia". And that's an article promoting this as an awesome idea.



btf that reflects more on my county's relationship with speech _in general_. Labour proposing that policy was more of a tactical _concession_ to many different types of people who would approve of that thinking.



AnOminous said:


> I'm saying that from the burgerland side of the pond, but to me, they make all the wrong noises about all the wrong shit.



That confusion is a key component of modem labour. _"We want to appeal to workers in a way that wont piss off the city."_


----------



## DuskEngine (May 8, 2015)

AnOminous said:


> They're too left-wing on sucking radical Islamic cock and promising crazy SJW shit like making it a literal crime to criticize terrorism.  Labour to Outlaw "Islamophobia".  And that's an article promoting this as an awesome idea.



That doesn't sound broadly out of line with most European countries' attitudes towards speech, though (remember that denying the Holocaust _will _get you arrested in a pretty big chunk of Europe).

Like, I'm not exactly a fan of it, but it doesn't as unusual for a leftist European party as you seem to imply.


----------



## AnOminous (May 8, 2015)

DawnMachine said:


> That doesn't sound broadly out of line with most European countries' attitudes towards speech, though (remember that denying the Holocaust _will _get you arrested in a pretty big chunk of Europe).
> 
> Like, I'm not exactly a fan of it, but it doesn't as unusual for a leftist European party as you seem to imply.



This proposes jacking it through the roof.



> “We are going to make it an aggravated crime. We are going to make sure it is marked on people’s records with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime.”



Not actual crimes, mind you, but mere "Islamophobia."  And whether or not this is a trend in European countries, it is in contravention of the European Convention on Human Rights itself, particularly Article 10.  Even with its carve-outs, it doesn't seem by any reasonable understanding to permit the criminalizing of mere difference of opinion.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 9, 2015)

AnOminous said:


> It seems like they somehow manage to be both too left-wing and too right-wing at the same time.  They're too left-wing on sucking radical Islamic cock and promising crazy SJW shit like making it a literal crime to criticize terrorism.  Labour to Outlaw "Islamophobia".  And that's an article promoting this as an awesome idea.



Having read the piece with an eye to existing British law, I think you may be misreading it.  Miliband talks about "attacks", which makes me think he wants to make anti-Islamic violence a crime.  This is probably unnecessary given that bigotry is already an aggravating factor in sentencing, but he's not proposing anything as silly as outlawing holding an opinion (which would be impossible).

I think you're also exaggerating when you say Labour are "nowhere to be found" on economic issues.  Do you remember the whole thing about ending non-dom status?  Strikes me as a pretty solid bread-and-butter "Labour" policy.


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (May 9, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> So what do you think will actually happen to the EdStone? I like the thought of Cameron putting it in Ed's garden at night to mock him, and he keeps putting it back the following night whenever Ed gets it moved off.


He can have his epitaph carved on it. "Here lies Ed Milliband, unpopular, uncharismatic, unwanted and incompetant leader of the Labour Party. Died 2015 during a bout of post election sobbing when he choked on his own adams apple and his bulging eyes finally left their sockets. Missed by bloody nobody."


----------



## AnOminous (May 9, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> Having read the piece with an eye to existing British law, I think you may be misreading it.  Miliband talks about "attacks", which makes me think he wants to make anti-Islamic violence a crime.  This is probably unnecessary given that bigotry is already an aggravating factor in sentencing, but he's not proposing anything as silly as outlawing holding an opinion (which would be impossible).



This is a more harsh version of previous law, the so-called Racial and Religious Hatred Bill of 2006.  Miliband also voted for that, as well as a previous version of that where the wording would have done what he proposed to do in this new (one would hope never to exist) law.

That law very clearly criminalized pure speech, and even the version that was passed was used to arrest one protester of Scientology literally for nothing more than saying it was a cult.

So this concern isn't just an overseas misunderstanding, though I'll cop to those if I make one.  Previous laws supported by Miliband have been denounced by many British free speech activists including Rowan Atkinson, who has consistently criticized the 2006 law, both as proposed and as actually passed, and urged for its repeal since then.

Of course, I don't believe there is actually proposed legislative text connected to Miliband's proposal, since it appeared to be more in the nature of a campaign promise to a particular voting bloc (especially considering the outlet he gave the interview to), but considering his history, I assumed him to be intending a more sweeping version of legislation similar to that he has supported in the past, which has in fact had tremendously chilling effects on legitimate speech.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 9, 2015)

AnOminous said:


> This is a more harsh version of previous law, the so-called Racial and Religious Hatred Bill of 2006.



That Bill covered all religions, though, right, not just Islamophobia?  I remember Atkinson's objection was in the context of people making fun of the Anglican Church.

I have to say, it's hard to perceive this so-called "chilling effect".  The UK is full of people mouthing off about Islam, often in the pages of widely circulated newspapers, let alone in private.


----------



## CWCissey (May 10, 2015)

So apparently people are pissed off because 63% of all voters didn't vote for the Tories and are now protesting in London.

Hey dipsticks! 69% didn't vote for Labour, 78% didn't vote for UKIP and 92% didn't vote for the Lib Dems! Fuck off to North Korea if you are that opposed to democracy!


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (May 10, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> So apparently people are pissed off because 63% of all voters didn't vote for the Tories and are now protesting in London.
> 
> Hey dipsticks! 69% didn't vote for Labour, 78% didn't vote for UKIP and 92% didn't vote for the Lib Dems! Fuck off to North Korea if you are that opposed to democracy!


Yes and the Green party are running a campaign that states that if proportional mrepresentation was a thing they'd have 25 seats and not 1. Basically "We can't win an election conventionally, change the rules so we can win something!" Greens are Tumblr.


----------



## JU 199 (May 10, 2015)

LazarusOwenhart said:


> "We can't win an election conventionally, change the rules so we can win something!" Greens are Tumblr.



Their grievance is somewhat legitimate. Our electoral system isn't proportional and under-represents smaller parties. Thats been a complaint by many people for a long time now.

Of course acting like the salty, petulant children of #toriesoutnow will get you nothing, but its not an illegitimate complaint.


----------



## CWCissey (May 10, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> Their grievance is somewhat legitimate. Our electoral system isn't proportional and under-represents smaller parties. Thats been a complaint by many people for a long time now.
> 
> Of course acting like the salty, petulant children of #toriesoutnow will get you nothing, but its not an illegitimate complaint.



Oh definitely not, I'm for Proportional Representation, but I imagine the same people in #toriesoutnow would soon complain about that too because UKIP would have 80 seats in Parliament and would likely work with the Tories, as well as being a force to be reckoned with.

I would actually argue that #toriesoutnow could be called an anti-democracy protest, because on the whole, it's a bunch of people whinging that their party didn't win.


----------



## JU 199 (May 10, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> I would actually argue that #toriesoutnow could be called an anti-democracy protest, because on the whole, it's a bunch of people whinging that their party didn't win



They're some of the most salty losers I've seen in a while.... 

...And i'm a regular user of the farms.

One of them also defaced a war memorial







Asshole


----------



## CWCissey (May 10, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> One of them also defaced a war memorial
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Of course they're blaming a police plant, or claiming that this doesn't invalidate the already invalid protest.


----------



## JU 199 (May 10, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Of course they're blaming a police plant, or claiming that this doesn't invalidate the already invalid protest.



The whole protest is a vortex of autism. Nobody there knows/cares how everyone else is viewing them.


----------



## CWCissey (May 10, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> The whole protest is a vortex of autism. Nobody there knows/cares how everyone else is viewing them.



And if they find out that people think they're dumb and should shut up and take the democratic result like an adult, you're an indoctrinated right winger who loves tipping disabled people out of their wheelchairs.


----------



## JU 199 (May 10, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> And if they find out that people think they're dumb and should shut up and take the democratic result like an adult, you're an indoctrinated right winger who loves tipping disabled people out of their wheelchairs.



Yeah ^this^. 

The salt from labour voters in my country is insane at the moment. I'm embarrassed to be one of them, 

They have no dignity in their defeat. A new conspiracy involving the use of pencils on ballots is gaining steam.

I think the defeat broke my parties base.... but that's what you get when you fuck around for five years and let the Tories run rings around you. 

Nick Cohen said this in a guardian piece that sums it up perfectly-

_“The biggest failure of understanding is the most paradoxical. Labour and the left do not take the right seriously. They dismiss its leaders as greedy fat cats and public school toffs, and do not grasp how formidable they have become.”_

_“In other words, the power of one of the world’s great trading centres is behind the Tory party. The power is manifest not just in campaign donations, but in the arrogance of financial capitalists, who never allow any number of market failures to dent their self-confidence or the self-confidence of their political allies. If you are going to take them on, you need to be good. In fact, you need to be brilliant.”
_


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 10, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Oh definitely not, I'm for Proportional Representation, but I imagine the same people in #toriesoutnow would soon complain about that too because UKIP would have 80 seats in Parliament and would likely work with the Tories, as well as being a force to be reckoned with.



I'm very much against UKIP and just about everything they stand for, but this isn't a good argument against PR.  If people are going to vote for UKIP, even if it's against their best interests, then UKIP deserves to get represented.  The flip side is that there are plenty of left-of-Labour parties who would also do well under PR, so I don't think the system would really swing Parliament rightward.  I guess you could argue that from a leftwing perspective a UKIP-Tory coalition would be worse than a pure Tory administration, but it's splitting hairs - there are plenty of people on the Tory right who are essentially UKIPers who just don't want to join a small party.

If anything it's faintly admirable to see Labour supporters supporting PR, because PR is not really going to help the Labour party.  If the last election had been run under some kind of PR system, Labour would still have lost.


----------



## CWCissey (May 10, 2015)

Dudeofteenage said:


> I'm very much against UKIP and just about everything they stand for, but this isn't a good argument against PR.  If people are going to vote for UKIP, even if it's against their best interests, then UKIP deserves to get represented.  The flip side is that there are plenty of left-of-Labour parties who would also do well under PR, so I don't think the system would really swing Parliament rightward.  I guess you could argue that from a leftwing perspective a UKIP-Tory coalition would be worse than a pure Tory administration, but it's splitting hairs - there are plenty of people on the Tory right who are essentially UKIPers who just don't want to join a small party.
> 
> If anything it's faintly admirable to see Labour supporters supporting PR, because PR is not really going to help the Labour party.  If the last election had been run under some kind of PR system, Labour would still have lost.



Oh I'm not arguing against PR. I'm just pointing out that these numpties would just complain about that instead.


----------



## Ariel (May 11, 2015)

I said this awhile ago that UKIP was Bertie Wooster tricking Barry the boomer from Leicester into voting for them. If UKIP were running here i'd have preferenced them after the conservative party that I have a membership.


----------



## CWCissey (May 11, 2015)

chimpchan said:


> I said this awhile ago that UKIP was Bertie Wooster tricking Barry the boomer from Leicester into voting for them. If UKIP were running here i'd have preferenced them after the conservative party that I have a membership.



I would have too. The Labour party have nothing to offer me as a working white British male under the age of 50.


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (May 11, 2015)

Ass Manager 3000 said:


> One of them also defaced a war memorial
> 
> 
> 
> ...


See I would bring back public flogging for people like this. They have no respect for history and their actions are reprehensible. A fitting punishment would be to make whoever vandalized it, clean it off, with an audience and a tv crew on national TV whilst some aging female WW2 veterans hurled abuse and derision at them. #triggered


----------



## Picklechu (May 11, 2015)

Apparently, tabloids are offering a cash reward for anyone who can locate the "Ed Stone."


----------



## LazarusOwenhart (May 11, 2015)

Picklechu said:


> Apparently, tabloids are offering a cash reward for anyone who can locate the "Ed Stone."


I'd imagine somebody high up in the Labour spin department got quite loud into a phone as the exit polls began to come in demanding that it never see the light of day again. I would imagine by now its been crushed and turned into oversight fill for a new house or is fast on the way to becoming a nice new patio for some middle class English retiree.


----------



## Fareal (May 11, 2015)

....and now Farage has unresigned, allegedly at the behest of UKIP HQ (or what passes for it).

It's like if Alan Partridge became a politician, only Partridge is actually more likeable. You can at least feel pity for him.


----------



## CWCissey (May 11, 2015)

Picklechu said:


> Apparently, tabloids are offering a cash reward for anyone who can locate the "Ed Stone."



The Sun are actually offering a replica of the Ed Stone as a prize in a competition. 

http://www.sunnation.co.uk/win-ed-miliband-edstone-labour-general-election/


----------



## Picklechu (May 11, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> The Sun are actually offering a replica of the Ed Stone as a prize in a competition.
> 
> http://www.sunnation.co.uk/win-ed-miliband-edstone-labour-general-election/


If they would ship that thing to the United States, I would totally try to win it.


----------



## CWCissey (May 11, 2015)

Oh and it seems we aren't rid of Nigel.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32696505

Good, the man's a laugh riot to have around!


----------



## gamer2014 (May 12, 2015)

A Boris Johnson impersonator speaks his mind about England.


----------



## CWCissey (May 12, 2015)

He looks like Boris Johnson but the voice is terrible.


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 14, 2015)

It seems there's been a grassroots uprising within UKIP over Nigel's "I'm quitting, no I'm not" thing.  I suspect this whole thing with the party begging him to stay has been stage managed, and doesn't actually reflect the real feelings of a lot of UKIP members.  I realise I don't have a huge amount of insight into the perspective of UKIP voters but I've always been moderately surprised to see people saying that Farage is personally responsible for UKIP's success.  There seem to be a lot more people who like some of UKIP's ideas but don't like Farage than vice versa.


----------



## Holdek (May 24, 2015)

CWCissey said:


> Oh and it seems we aren't rid of Nigel.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32696505
> 
> Good, the man's a laugh riot to have around!



Not sure they should laugh so hard.  UKIP got the third most number of votes in the last election (more than the Lib-Dems, SNP and others) even though they only won one seat.  The day of the election I noticed his talking points shifted almost exclusively to electoral reform, but seemed a bit little too late.  Still, it would be hard to jettison as leader after such a meteoric rise in voter preference.

By the way, can someone tell me why all the news reports talk about Plaid Cymru winning three seats but don't mention the parties of Northern Ireland winning numerous seats (only Sinn Fein abstains, from what I recall)?  And also why the NI parties were excluded from the debates but PC wasn't?


----------



## Vitriol (May 24, 2015)

Holdek said:


> Not sure they should laugh so hard.  UKIP got the third most number of votes in the last election (more than the Lib-Dems, SNP and others) even though they only won one seat.  The day of the election I noticed his talking points shifted almost exclusively to electoral reform, but seemed a bit little too late.  Still, it would be hard to jettison as leader after such a meteoric rise in voter preference.
> 
> By the way, can someone tell me why all the news reports talk about Plaid Cymru winning three seats but don't mention the parties of Northern Ireland winning numerous seats (only Sinn Fein abstains, from what I recall)?  And also why the NI parties were excluded from the debates but PC wasn't?


the logic behind the NI parties being excluded is that none of the non irish parties run against them so it would be strange for them to be debating with parties they are not running against. I would presume bbc NI held a separate debate. 

politics in NI is a bit of a mess but broadly speaking the unionist separatist vote stays roughly the same with seats shifting more between union parties than from unionists to separatists or vice versa. PC by contrast is a separatist party so seats going from lab/lib/con to them is considered more newsworthy because it potentially indicates a rise in nationalism. I'm not all that up to speed on welsh policies but i think the welsh vote has a reputation for see-sawing.


----------



## Holdek (May 24, 2015)

vitriol said:


> the logic behind the NI parties being excluded is that none of the non irish parties run against them so it would be strange for them to be debating with parties they are not running against.



The Conservative Party runs in NI (though, they don't have anyone elected there, even at the local level, so maybe that's why).


----------



## Dudeofteenage (May 24, 2015)

Labour seems to be doing a better job holding on in Wales than it did in Scotland.  Just like Scotland, Wales (especially the industrial south) has a long tradition of diehard Labour loyalism, but unlike in Scotland Welsh Labour loyalism seems to still be going strong.  Plaid have always identified strongly with the SNP and hoped that Scottish independence would spark greater interest in Welsh independence, but it doesn't seem to be happening, although I guess if Scottish independence actually does happen all bets are off.


----------

