Tory Country

[dennis tooth]

It's mad that they're getting all the blame though but nobody is mentioning these are actually Tory policies. There seems to be more bad feeling around for them than for the conservatives, when it is in fact all their doing - crazy really.

 

Not so crazy,anyone with half a penis spotted it was entirely predictable outcome, either Clegg didn't forsee it or didnt forsee the full gravity of it but plenty did the 2nd they decided to be 'kingmakers' instead of 'liberal democrats' and enter into a coalition the public didn't vote for.

It was the easiest thing to predict since Roy Hodgson walzed into Anfeild with his zimmer frame and 35 year track record that that was going to happen.

And you can horseshoe 75% figures all you like SD, the public disagrees,that's like having 75% of a table and completely useless to them when the public asked for a lampshade.

Nick Clegg is still banging the the empty tin can,saw him on the news saying 'we haven't been vocal enough about the things we have got changed to Tory policy' or words to that effect. No Nick the public heard you loud and clear, they are just very uninmpressed with it as it's very shite indeed and as long as you are even in a coalition then you will never have the publics consent to do any of what you are doing and that could never be righted until you get out of it. If it isn't already too late for the Lib Dems that is, personally I think you'd have an easier time reversing climate changes now snowballing irreversable effects than the Lib Dem's PR restoration but that's just me.

[Albertini]

I am talking about the next 100,000 years not the next 30 which is your own short termist thinking.

 

No Dennis. You asked me a direct question, you asked me "who wants to invade us" to which i replied it's not about who wants to invade us now but about the threats that may come up during the lifetime of the new Trident sytem (which is 30 years).

 

You have never mentioned 100,000 years before.

 

And you accuse me of revisionism!

[Anubis]

If you look at the media coverage of the locals though, there's a lot of unrestrained joy being expressed that the Lib Dems have been drop-kicked into oblivion. The notion is that they've done something terrible, something that deserves punishment, but very little reference to the fact that what they've done - essentially - is side with the Tories, who themselves still enjoy widespread media support and what almost amounts to a blanket policy amnesty of sorts.

 

But the majority of the people doing the kicking are doing so because they can't kick the Tories. The Tories are anathema in these local areas anyway, so they can't do any worse. However, the Lib Dems effectively brought about a Tory government, and they can be got at, and so they are.

[Strontium]

According to the news the LibDems are threatening to derail the Tories NHS 'reform,'AKA cuts.

 

If this is true then go for it Clegg,its what you should have done from the start and not waited until Cameron played you like a fiddle regarding voting reform.

 

 

It's what we have been doing from the start, we just haven't been able to get a word in edgeways. The left-wing media has been parroting the Labour line as if it was gospel truth, and the right-wing media hates us anyway because we're enabling Cameron to sideline the hangers and floggers on the right of his own party.

 

Millions of voters who voted for them would never have done so if they'd made it clear they would form a coalition with the Tories, and that more than anything is the reason for the anger, people feel they were duped.

 

 

Nobody was duped. Nick Clegg said in the event of a hung parliament, the party with most seats and votes should get first crack at forming a government. That happened to be the Tories. I would suggest instead of blaming Nick Clegg for keeping to his word, you direct your anger at the 10.7m people who voted Tory.

 

If the Tories make a pigs ear of the NHS reforms then some of the flak may start coming their way even from their own support.

 

 

One of the most ignored stats in politics is the fact that 99% of Tory members rely on the NHS as their primary healthcare provider. I guess because it doesn't fit the narrative that asserts the Tories want to destroy the NHS.

[mattyq]

Your party just don't get it, SD. They won't improve until they properly understand why they are so despised and then do something about it

Everybody knows tories are lying, self serving and selfish twats. All the bleating from Clegg/Cable about how evil they suddenly are is a bit late in the day.

The rose garden moment - Clegg lost my vote forever there & then. He might as well have fallen to his knees and unzipped Cameron - disgusting.

If you are a progressive politician you do not ever get into bed with a tory - they will fuck you up. Is it not obvious? WWII is an exception

[Section_31]

One of the most ignored stats in politics is the fact that 99% of Tory members rely on the NHS as their primary healthcare provider. I guess because it doesn't fit the narrative that asserts the Tories want to destroy the NHS.

 

Nobody think the Tories are actively trying to destroy the NHS becaue they don't use it, it's the fact the party, its leader and the rank and file swallow the 'private sector knows best' bollocks that's the danger here. They believe the public sector is bloated, incompetent and wasteful, and that the private sector is some silver slick porsche that can reduce cost to the public purse while improving service. Which is just bollocks.

[Anubis]

The rose garden moment - Clegg lost my vote forever there & then....

 

 

Brilliantly described this week in the guardian as a gay wedding. Apparently, there were plans for a one year anniversary repeat, until David broke his promise to Nicky, and allowed the no campaign to get medieval on his ass.

[VladimirIlyich]

Mate, in the same breath he's saying it should be an evolution not a revolution. What he is effectively saying is he plans to slow it not stop it. These are all things he privately wants to allow it's only the public opinion holding him back.

 

If he couldnt recognise public feelings before the election/AV results then he

is badly out of touch anyway.

 

He has not learned the error of his ways and the arrogance to be trying to be seen to be doing something as opposed to actually do something serious is astounding. And that's from someone whose gut instinct is to want to feel sorry for him and press the Tories who have escaped this kind of sustained pressure and scrutiny.

 

Dennis,I'm not naive enough to believe that Clegg and the Lib Dems will derail the process of NHS annihilation but I just hope that the local elections might be a wake up call that the public want them to change tack and become more of a partner than an unwanted relative.

 

But I'm not holding my breath.

[Section_31]

Apparently some senior Tories are agitating for an early general election because they think they could win outright. Fucking hell.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Apparently some senior Tories are agitating for an early general election because they think they could win outright. Fucking hell.

 

Yeah, I've been talking about that tactic for a while. I think I even mentioned it on here a couple of days ago. If I were a Conservative, it'd be something I'd want to consider.

 

From a tactical point of view, it seems like the best time to do it.

[Section_31]

Yeah, I've been talking about that tactic for a while. I think I even mentioned it on here a couple of days ago. If I were a Conservative, it'd be something I'd want to consider.

 

From a tactical point of view, it seems like the best time to do it.

 

I think I'd seriously have to contemplate leaving the country if that happened. Not just because they'd be in Government, but because I live in a country that elects a Government like that in spite of what they've done in only a few short months. Absolute scum of a party, and scumbag country to boot.

[Kevin D]

Yeah, I've been talking about that tactic for a while. I think I even mentioned it on here a couple of days ago. If I were a Conservative, it'd be something I'd want to consider.

 

From a tactical point of view, it seems like the best time to do it.

 

You think they'd win a majority?

[mattyq]

Yeah, I've been talking about that tactic for a while. I think I even mentioned it on here a couple of days ago. If I were a Conservative, it'd be something I'd want to consider.

 

From a tactical point of view, it seems like the best time to do it.

 

They might be wise to consider this:

 

UK Polling Report

[VladimirIlyich]

I dont think either the Cons or Labour would win a majority,they would just split the Lib Dems vote.

 

The way things are looking the Greens could well become the third party.

[sparta7]

It's what we have been doing from the start, we just haven't been able to get a word in edgeways. The left-wing media has been parroting the Labour line as if it was gospel truth, and the right-wing media hates us anyway because we're enabling Cameron to sideline the hangers and floggers on the right of his own party.

 

Pathetic whining. Absolutely pathetic. The LibDems chose to be the junior partner in a coalition with the tories, what the fuck else was expected?

 

Pathetic.

[sparta7]

It's what we have been doing from the start, we just haven't been able to get a word in edgeways. The left-wing media has been parroting the Labour line as if it was gospel truth, and the right-wing media hates us anyway because we're enabling Cameron to sideline the hangers and floggers on the right of his own party.

 

Pathetic whining. Absolutely pathetic. The LibDems chose to be the junior partner in a coalition with the tories, what the fuck else was expected?

 

Pathetic.

[VladimirIlyich]

The left wing media? Where the fucks that then?

[Section_31]

The left wing media? Where the fucks that then?

 

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I think I'd seriously have to contemplate leaving the country if that happened. Not just because they'd be in Government, but because I live in a country that elects a Government like that in spite of what they've done in only a few short months. Absolute scum of a party, and scumbag country to boot.

 

I'm always shy of the kneejerk 'if they win...' reaction, but I'm leaning that way myself to be honest. I own a place abroad, but don't particularly enjoy the area.

 

 

You think they'd win a majority?

 

I think it's their best chance to do so. I think they know that LDs are about as low as they can get; calling time on the coalition will signal the end of Clegg and a gradual rise in popularity. They know that Labour, despite gaining support, have just struggled in Scotland (although, general elections there are a totally different affair) and that they've got precious little money to fight a strong campaign. Most importantly, they know that they're going down from here. Once the meat of the cuts kick in, they're in for some shit.

 

If they see that the coalition might end before they get chance to 'go beyond anything Thatcher could dream of' and change the country for the long run, they might see it as a better option. A majority means they'll be able to really go to town.

 

That said, my gut-feeling is that I don't think they'll win a majority. They couldn't win one last time, no matter how many of Lord Ashcroft's money they threw at it, no matter how bad the outgoing Labour government were and no matter how much support they got from the media. It'd be fucking hard for them to win it this time.

 

If Labour can gain a lot of the LD support, I can see them winning a slight majority. I might even campaign for them if it transpired.

[Albertini]

Nobody think the Tories are actively trying to destroy the NHS becaue they don't use it, it's the fact the party, its leader and the rank and file swallow the 'private sector knows best' bollocks that's the danger here. They believe the public sector is bloated, incompetent and wasteful, and that the private sector is some silver slick porsche that can reduce cost to the public purse while improving service. Which is just bollocks.

 

Admittedly from 2009 but it gives you a flavour:

 

'Public sector waste costs £58.4bn' - Public Service

 

From 2010:

 

'Public sector Productivity'

 

Here's the interested bit for those not bothered about reading it:

 

From 1998-2007

 

Average Annual Productivity Growth

 

Public Sector = -0.3%

Private sector = 2.3%

 

I don't think anyone really thinks the private sector knows best on everything, clearly it doesn't. Think it's more that the puiblic sector needs root and branch reform so we taxpayers get value for our money and people get the services they need.

 

In relation to the NHS i never quite understand the hysteria about using private companies to deliver services or why that should automatically be labelled as the destruction of the NHS.

 

Health care is not about the NHS as an institution it's about health care as a free at the point of requirement service. How those services are paid for (via NHS or private companies) seems largely irelevant provided the care is free and available for all.

 

If (and it is a big if) private companies running health services results in the quality of the care for patients improving or better value for money being acheived (which can then go to further improve services) i don't see what the problem is to be honest whether it is public or privately run.

[VladimirIlyich]

 

Circulation 14,000 hardly makes it a major editorial mouthpiece though does it really?

[Strontium]

Apparently some senior Tories are agitating for an early general election because they think they could win outright. Fucking hell.

 

 

Of course, if this news is true, it creates a paradox for certain people. Specifically, those people who assert that the Lib Dems are doing nothing to stem Tory excesses. Because if we're not blunting the Tories, why would any of them be pushing for an election?

 

Pathetic whining. Absolutely pathetic. The LibDems chose to be the junior partner in a coalition with the tories, what the fuck else was expected?

 

 

I don't think it's unreasonable for me to complain about a lack of objectivity from the media. It might be unrealistic to expect fair and balanced coverage, but that doesn't mean I should silently accept biased reporting which seeks to portray us as the incarnation of evil.

 

I'm going to give you a local and recent example. An editorial in the Liverpool Daily Post, owned by the Labour-supporting Trinity Mirror, was heavily critical of the coalition government because Liverpool only got £1.06m out of a £200m national fund for road repairs after the bad winter weather. The Post, parroting the Labour council's line, laid into the government for neglecting the city.

 

Yet a year earlier, under identical circumstances, Liverpool only got £381,000 out of a £100m fund from the previous Labour government. Where were the Daily Post editorials or articles then? Where was the condemnation from the Labour-controlled council when Liverpool got a sum of money that was lesser in both quantity and proportion?

 

I can accept fair criticism of the government. I actually would relish and encourage fair criticism, because it can be constructive and help the powers that be to refine and improve the policies they implement. But so much of what we read and hear is desperately unfair and in my opinion lacks any semblance of objectivity.

[Strontium]

In relation to the NHS i never quite understand the hysteria about using private companies to deliver services or why that should automatically be labelled as the destruction of the NHS.

 

Health care is not about the NHS as an institution it's about health care as a free at the point of requirement service. How those services are paid for (via NHS or private companies) seems largely irelevant provided the care is free and available for all.

 

If (and it is a big if) private companies running health services results in the quality of the care for patients improving or better value for money being acheived (which can then go to further improve services) i don't see what the problem is to be honest whether it is public or privately run.

 

 

I know where the hysteria comes from. Quite simply, it's that old Marxist canard about surplus value. Lefties don't like people making money out of healthcare. Somewhere along the way, if someone is making a profit, they believe the end user is inevitably being scammed.

 

I'm with you: I really couldn't care whether a provider is "public" or "private" so long as the service is the best it can be and, in the case of something like the NHS, remains free at the point of delivery. As a general rule, liberals are not dogmatically tied to the belief that the state or the market is the preferred way of delivering a service.

[Guest TK-421]

If (and it is a big if) private companies running health services results in the quality of the care for patients improving or better value for money being acheived (which can then go to further improve services) i don't see what the problem is to be honest whether it is public or privately run.

 

Does your vivid imagination extend to said private companies being solely interested in the bottom line to the detriment of quality service, or is that a quantum leap we're not quite ready for at this stage? If it was your private company, what would mean the most to you?

[Strontium]

Does your vivid imagination extend to said private companies being interested in the bottom line to the detriment of quality service, or is that a quantum leap we're not quite ready for at this stage?

 

 

There are ways of mitigating against this. Just make sure they only get the full allocation of cash if they provide a sufficiently good service. If they don't meet the required standard, they get fined. This happens already, in fact, so it is very definitely workable.