General Election

[Kevin D]

You have to laugh at the Tory manifesto launch. There was a question about the economy asked to George Osborne AND HE DIDN'T KNOW!! He flipped through the booklet for a while and basically shat himself. Confident?!? And no reference anywhere to VAT or Income Tax.

 

Osborne admitted last year to spending "about 40%" of his working time on Economic policy and the rest on marketing. For him to publically say that as if it wasn't a big deal tells you the problem we're going to have if he's chancellor.

 

He's also got this wierd look in his eye that always angers me. I bet when he goes out people are always trying to start fights with him and he can't figure out why.

[Original202]

 

[Section_31]

Osborne admitted last year to spending "about 40%" of his working time on Economic policy and the rest on marketing. For him to publically say that as if it wasn't a big deal tells you the problem we're going to have if he's chancellor.

 

He's also got this wierd look in his eye that always angers me. I bet when he goes out people are always trying to start fights with him and he can't figure out why.

 

He's really not especially bright, that much was clear in the chancellors' debates. Most ministers are pretty sharp, but Osborne has always struck me as being well out of his depth.

 

To be fair though the suspicion is that Ken Clarke is the power behind the economic throne anyway but that maybe his pro-Euro stance is too much of an issue to make him the shadow chancellor.

[Kevin D]

While on the subject of the Economy, I bet that when the Government papers from 2009-2010 containing minutes between Brown and Darling are released that they'll show they "suppressed" economic growth untill the "right time" and helped prime it for Election season. If that's the case, as it was in the Nixon whitehouse, I wonder if criminal charges could be brought against those involved.

 

Ed Balls also has that look I was talking about earlier and I'd quite like him to be imprisoned for my general peace of mind.

[Section_31]

While on the subject of the Economy, I bet that when the Government papers from 2009-2010 containing minutes between Brown and Darling are released that they'll show they "suppressed" economic growth untill the "right time" and helped prime it for Election season. If that's the case, as it was in the Nixon whitehouse, I wonder if criminal charges could be brought against those involved.

 

Ed Balls also has that look I was talking about earlier and I'd quite like him to be imprisoned for my general peace of mind.

 

Yeah that suspicion crossed my mind, we were the least to come out of recession and did so literally weeks before the election was called - surely such machinations wouldn't have gone unnoticed though?!

 

As for your second point, nobody called Balls should be anywhere near children.

[Pdool]

While on the subject of the Economy, I bet that when the Government papers from 2009-2010 containing minutes between Brown and Darling are released that they'll show they "suppressed" economic growth untill the "right time" and helped prime it for Election season. If that's the case, as it was in the Nixon whitehouse, I wonder if criminal charges could be brought against those involved.

 

Ed Balls also has that look I was talking about earlier and I'd quite like him to be imprisoned for my general peace of mind.

 

 

I could happily punch Ed Balls in the face all day long.

[Stu Monty]

Just to challenge Stront's assertion that we are voting with three wildly different parties, and not just three flavours of the same thing, here are three slogans for you. I'll let you guess which party cam up with which and then I'll let anyone who wants to explain to me the vastly different agendas that they are trying to communicate:

 

Change that works for you; building a fairer Britain.

 

A future fair for all.

 

Year for change.

[hamstrung]

I'll vote for the one that provides everyone with a fair.

[Monkeywool]

I have a serious, serious fear that we are going to see more than a healthy share of BNP fucktards in the commons for the next 5 years, I know my constituency, which I haven't even bothered to sign up to vote in will either go labour again or BNP. I fear for the future.

[hamstrung]

If you haven't signed up to vote, and the BNP do get in where you are, aren't you a bit complicit in that?

[Monkeywool]

Not really, I would vote Lib Dem and they have a snowballs chance in hell in getting anywhere near the seat.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Not really, I would vote Lib Dem and they have a snowballs chance in hell in getting anywhere near the seat.

 

Why don't you register and vote for Labour. That would mean less of a chance of BNP getting in. Makes sense, no?

[cochcaer]

I have a serious, serious fear that we are going to see more than a healthy share of BNP fucktards in the commons for the next 5 years, I know my constituency, which I haven't even bothered to sign up to vote in will either go labour again or BNP. I fear for the future.

 

Not really surprising, there's a fag paper between the main parties so those looking elsewhere will be drawn to them - and immigration is a massive policy in some wards. It's the fault of the big three for allowing them to thrive and not tackling the issue.

[cochcaer]

I just did this poll for a laugh: http://www.votematch.org.uk/

 

I got the Conservatives just shading Labour.

[Strontium]

Just to challenge Stront's assertion that we are voting with three wildly different parties, and not just three flavours of the same thing, here are three slogans for you. I'll let you guess which party cam up with which and then I'll let anyone who wants to explain to me the vastly different agendas that they are trying to communicate:

 

Change that works for you; building a fairer Britain.

 

A future fair for all.

 

Year for change.

 

 

That's just glib sloganeering, all parties are guilty of that. You have to look behind all that.

 

Party A and party B might say they want "a fairer Britain", for instance, but if one is offering a £700 income tax cut for the poor and the other is giving a tax cut to the rich, then only one of them is actually delivering on that.

[BexBissel]

Where's Scargills Party option?

Forget it. Just seen poll results. Middle class wankers.

[Jose Jones]

Where's Scargills Party option?

Forget it. Just seen poll results. Middle class wankers.

 

Is Arthur still going? Who's he challenging this time?

 

It amused me that you called everyone middle class wankers after looking at the poll results. Is there any result that wouldn't have led to that comment?

[Section_31]

Where's Scargills Party option?

Forget it. Just seen poll results. Middle class wankers.

 

 

He's head of the Socialist Labour Party.

[Kevin D]

Yeah that suspicion crossed my mind, we were the least to come out of recession and did so literally weeks before the election was called - surely such machinations wouldn't have gone unnoticed though?!

 

As for your second point, nobody called Balls should be anywhere near children.

 

As I alluded to earlier, Nixon did precisely that in his first term( wage and price controls) to ensure that the economy was growing in election year, regardless of the drawbacks in the time after that. That in mind, I don't think it's a strech to envisage Mandelson and Brown making suggestions that ensure growth at the ideal time, even if it was to the immediate detriment of the people.

 

Infact, I can see their rationalisation being along the lines of " what's 200,00 new jobs now, when we'll create 5,000,000 if we win the election" or, more simply, that anything - and everything - they decide to do which ensures the Conservatives don't win the election is justified.

[Anny Road]

Lib Lab coalition after Brown agrees to PR in the next election, as a desperate measure to keep hold of power, after Clegg threatens to team up with Tories.

Vince as Chancellor Clegg as deputy PM. PR will ensure the Lib will be the dominant force in politics for the next decade.

6th April

Peter Snow suck my balls