General election time

[Section_31 19,886]

Its unfair to criticise the whole party because of a poor leader but until the left are given a bigger say the general consensus will be that there is nobody there who can connect with the man in the street.

 

Ed Miliband is supposed to be a left winger but I havent seen much evidence of it myself.

 

In fairness I think Labour has got potential in its current form, I think it genuinely wants to put the New Labour project behind it, and I do think Ed Miliband is genuinely to the left of centre, I just think he's not leadership material - not in a million years, I wouldn't put him in charge of a bumper boat. But I think at grass roots level there are a lot of people with social democrat leanings flocking to the Labour banner.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I recall him saying he never thought they'd do a deal with the conservatives prior to the election, but that's what the people of this country told them to do, so they did it.

 

Which will probably come as news to a majority of the people in the country, especially the Labour voters who voted Lib Dem.

 

That doesn't even make sense, to be honest. If we're going down that route, which I oppose because it's fucking ridiculous, what people voted for was a coalition between Conservatives and Labour.

 

What really happened is this:

 

1) The two best selling papers in the country told a story of how bad Labour were, how great the Tories would be and convinced people to vote, often against their own best interest, for the Conservative party at the election.

 

2) The Conservative party, funded by Ashcroft millions and the very people who caused much of the problems with the economy, convinced those (who often don't know any better, or have very little day-to-day knowledge about government or politics) that the problems in the economy were all Labour's fault. Despite everything they stand for backing deregulation, they blamed Labour for not regulating the banks.

 

3) They managed to get 39% of a 65% turnout - nothing like a majority - and have somehow convinced the Lib Dems to become a sacrificial lamb, for a shot at a miserable compromise on electoral reform. They've taken this power and trebled tuition fees, which Lib Dem voters were broadly against; marginalised us in Europe, which Lib Dem voters were broadly against; they've widened the deficit and slowed the economy, having to borrow perhaps 100s of billions more than they'd planned a few months previous; started a total reorganisation of the National Health Service, despite advice from very serious medical bodies and professionals; and they've heaped the costs of recovery - which isn't working - onto the poorest and hardest working in society.

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: any real democrat should be wincing at this government. If there was an election tomorrow, won easily by the Conservatives, then that's fine; at least it'd be legitimate. At the moment, we've got things happening that were never in either manifesto, and/or haven't even been agreed or consulted with the leader of the Lib Dems. It's a fucking sham. The Lib Dems should be ashamed at their leadership. Labourites had fucking years of it, but at least they were honest enough to jump ship and/or protest/dissent. The LDs just say 'we're making the tough decisions for the best long term future of the country'. Bollocks. I'm disgusted at the state of politics in this country. We don't have a democracy, or anything like it.

[cochcaer 6]

In fairness I think Labour has got potential in its current form, I think it genuinely wants to put the New Labour project behind it, and I do think Ed Miliband is genuinely to the left of centre, I just think he's not leadership material - not in a million years, I wouldn't put him in charge of a bumper boat. But I think at grass roots level there are a lot of people with social democrat leanings flocking to the Labour banner.

 

Trouble is it's not the Labour faithful Ed must reach out to be the centrist floating voter. The whole rejection of New Labour makes me chuckle and I think it'll lead to Labour being marginilised to a few strongholds. They'll get fucked at the elections then there'll be another spell of acrimony and introspection.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Trouble is it's not the Labour faithful Ed must reach out to be the centrist floating voter. The whole rejection of New Labour makes me chuckle and I think it'll lead to Labour being marginilised to a few strongholds. They'll get fucked at the elections then there'll be another spell of acrimony and introspection.

 

I don't understand this. How will they get fucked at the elections? The Tories - even with Ashcroft's millions, Media support, Labour self destruction, wars, and the worst recession for generations - still couldn't win an election, or anything like it. Now they've become less popular, and their bedfellows will have lost many voters, they'll surely do less well against Labour.

 

I don't understand the thinking that Labour, who are only bumbling along, laying the ground-work and watching the coalition self-destruct, are going to be dicked next election. Just don't get it.

[VladimirIlyich 7,553]

I don't understand this. How will they get fucked at the elections? The Tories - even with Ashcroft's millions, Media support, Labour self destruction, wars, and the worst recession for generations - still couldn't win an election, or anything like it. Now they've become less popular, and their bedfellows will have lost many voters, they'll surely do less well against Labour.

 

I don't understand the thinking that Labour, who are only bumbling along, laying the ground-work and watching the coalition self-destruct, are going to be dicked next election. Just don't get it.

 

I think are straw pole on here is the way people feel,not the percentages but the general feeling.

 

Labour at the moment would probably be the largest party but I'm not sure if they'd get a majority to be honest based on the fact of the ignorance and lack of education of a few of the underclass.These are the people who are the victims of the current recession and blame all politicians for it but would usually vote labour but just maybe wont bother.

The tories will have their supporters and PR machine out in full force to protect their interests and maintain the way things are.

 

The big difference next time is how the people who voted LibDem,some as a protest,last time feel.

[Section_31 19,886]

I think are straw pole on here is the way people feel,not the percentages but the general feeling.

 

Labour at the moment would probably be the largest party but I'm not sure if they'd get a majority to be honest based on the fact of the ignorance and lack of education of a few of the underclass.These are the people who are the victims of the current recession and blame all politicians for it but would usually vote labour but just maybe wont bother.

The tories will have their supporters and PR machine out in full force to protect their interests and maintain the way things are.

 

The big difference next time is how the people who voted LibDem,some as a protest,last time feel.

 

I don't think the underclass are the ignorant ones in this equation, they don't - or didn't - vote Labour because they believed, quite rightly, that Labour didn't give a shit about them.

 

The villains of the piece to my mind are the new middle class, the lower middle class, or upper working class, whatever you want to call them. The local lads/girls done good, people whose parents probably worked in a factory or a shop, but who through Labour's expansion of further education have managed to make themselves teachers etc. These are very often the voters who think 'me me me', while also being too dense to look beyond the ITN footage of Gordon Brown picking his nose. They're also the most likely to repeat the phrase 'scroungers' and 'Labour maxed out the credit card'.

[VladimirIlyich 7,553]

The amount I've heard people that I speak to,I usually only speak to people in the same situation as me,say that they are not interested in politics is a large amount.

These are the people who just wont bother yet are the most affected yet wont vote at all.These are the people Labour should be counting on but cant and these are also the people Labour should be basing their manifesto on rather than the Mr and Mrs Buckets of Milton Keynes.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

The amount I've heard people that I speak to,I usually only speak to people in the same situation as me,say that they are not interested in politics is a large amount.

These are the people who just wont bother yet are the most affected yet wont vote at all.These are the people Labour should be counting on but cant and these are also the people Labour should be basing their manifesto on rather than the Mr and Mrs Buckets of Milton Keynes.

 

They're disenfranchised through hopelessness. I think the best way to get those people to vote isn't just to get fair policies for the poorest, but to make a few steps:

 

1) Change the education system. Have politics and personal finance as parts of the learning experience.

 

2) Entice them with the rhetoric of nationalism and undefined 'hope'.

 

3) Explain, simply, how the measures you'd be bringing in would effect them. Stop using words like 'fiscal stimulus', 'structural deficit', and 'quantitative easing'. Most people working in Tesco or Currys don't know, or care, what quantitative easing is. They care about how things effect them and whether or not they share the vision of the country with those they're voting for.

 

It's not pretty, it's not always right, but it's how you get that sort of person - the cogs of this country - engaged.

[Section_31 19,886]

They're disenfranchised through hopelessness. I think the best way to get those people to vote isn't just to get fair policies for the poorest, but to make a few steps:

 

1) Change the education system. Have politics and personal finance as parts of the learning experience.

2) Entice them with the rhetoric of nationalism and undefined 'hope'.

 

3) Explain, simply, how the measures you'd be bringing in would effect them. Stop using words like 'fiscal stimulus', 'structural deficit', and 'quantitative easing'. Most people working in Tesco or Currys don't know, or care, what quantitative easing is. They care about how things effect them and whether or not they share the vision of the country with those they're voting for.

 

It's not pretty, it's not always right, but it's how you get that sort of person - the cogs of this country - engaged.

 

That's the most important thing for me. People in this country just don't see politics as a potential route for them to go down, they don't feel connected to it or understand its relevence. It's mainly wealthy private school pupils who are tought to think about politics as a possible career - on both sides of the Atlantic - although I'm 100% certain that's by design.

[skend04 2,197]

Its unfair to criticise the whole party because of a poor leader but until the left are given a bigger say the general consensus will be that there is nobody there who can connect with the man in the street.

 

Ed Miliband is supposed to be a left winger but I havent seen much evidence of it myself.

 

I love how peeps think Ed is a poor leader. I don't know if anyone has noticed but we have a PM whose only real job was sorted by his mother-in-law. The nobber also likes to have potraits taken with a pint of Guiness that hasn't settled...but that's the gen.pop. of Britain for you. Thick S*n reading mother inbred fuckers.

[King Emlyn 1,273]

I love how peeps think Ed is a poor leader. I don't know if anyone has noticed but we have a PM whose only real job was sorted by his mother-in-law. The nobber also likes to have potraits taken with a pint of Guiness that hasn't settled...but that's the gen.pop. of Britain for you. Thick S*n reading mother inbred fuckers.

None of which alters the fact that Milliband is a poor leader, in fact he's beyond poor, he's fucking abysmal.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

That's the most important thing for me. People in this country just don't see politics as a potential route for them to go down, they don't feel connected to it or understand its relevence. It's mainly wealthy private school pupils who are tought to think about politics as a possible career - on both sides of the Atlantic - although I'm 100% certain that's by design.

 

Yeah. I mean, I wasn't meaning it like that, but there's definitely a need for a better representation for the working and lower middle classes.

 

I was more talking about giving people the knowledge to know how they're governed and what gives people the legitimacy to govern over them; how the relationship between media and money leads to the powerful having greater influence and representation at the top level. That sort of shiz.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

None of which alters the fact that Milliband is a poor leader, in fact he's beyond poor, he's fucking abysmal.

 

In what way? He has only just taken over, were you expecting people to admit they were wrong to vote for the others and change loyalty the day he took over as leader?

 

I think he has made mistakes, but to call him abysmal is bizarre.

[Section_31 19,886]

In what way? He has only just taken over, were you expecting people to admit they were wrong to vote for the others and change loyalty the day he took over as leader?

 

I think he has made mistakes, but to call him abysmal is bizarre.

 

[YOUTUBE]PZtVm8wtyFI[/YOUTUBE]

 

I've always thought he was wet, but this interview was the suitcase bomb for me. There's just nobody home.

[King Emlyn 1,273]

In what way? He has only just taken over, were you expecting people to admit they were wrong to vote for the others and change loyalty the day he took over as leader?

 

I think he has made mistakes, but to call him abysmal is bizarre.

In just about every way imaginable. Unfortunately politics is Presidential, you have to have appeal to be elected, he has absolutely zero appeal. He looks and sounds like a complete twat and he's weak as piss, he's an embarrassment. Ed Milliband will never be Prime Minister; you can take that to the bank.

[VladimirIlyich 7,553]

I love how peeps think Ed is a poor leader. I don't know if anyone has noticed but we have a PM whose only real job was sorted by his mother-in-law. The nobber also likes to have potraits taken with a pint of Guiness that hasn't settled...but that's the gen.pop. of Britain for you. Thick S*n reading mother inbred fuckers.

 

Yeah but Ed hasnt got a PR machine behind him worth gazillions of pounds and the power and control that goes with it.

 

The people who he needs to become PM arent impressed by his lack of support in their efforts to protect their jobs and pensions and basic standard of living.

[Strontium Dog™ 8,560]

Which will probably come as news to a majority of the people in the country, especially the Labour voters who voted Lib Dem.

 

 

"Labour voters who voted Lib Dem"? Talk about an oxymoron. If they voted Lib Dem, they're a Lib Dem voter. Just because someone voted Labour in the past doesn't mean Labour owns them.

 

Twisted thinking like that is the reason Labour has historically taken a big shit on places like Liverpool. Labour takes your votes for granted which, judging by the results of this forum poll, I don't remotely blame it for.

 

Labour knows that they can pander to middle England, abolish the 10p tax rate, piss away billions on illegal wars, let personal debt spiral out of control, let the housing market bubble out of control, utterly fail to regulate the banks, preside over the largest widening in the gap between rich and poor in history, and generally put two fingers up to the people who they should represent. They know they can do this without consequence, because as sure as eggs is eggs, the little people will trot out faithfully to the polls and cast their vote for Labour.

 

Let us not forget that the ONE SOLITARY REASON we have any Tories in power today is because Labour failed to implement the electoral reform it promised in its 1997 manifesto. It could have excluded the Tories from power for 50 years, but once again it was blighted by the kind of short-sighted thinking that has been its downfall since forever. It enjoyed the landslide majorities it got on 35% of the vote because it's unfortunately dominated by anti-democratic authoritarian control freaks. It didn't think for one second that Basildon man would eventually fall out of love with Labour.

 

Of course, we probably will forget it, because Labour is allowed to break manifesto promise after manifesto promise, whereas other parties aren't.

[VladimirIlyich 7,553]

"Labour voters who voted Lib Dem"? Talk about an oxymoron. If they voted Lib Dem, they're a Lib Dem voter. Just because someone voted Labour in the past doesn't mean Labour owns them.

 

Twisted thinking like that is the reason Labour has historically taken a big shit on places like Liverpool. Labour takes your votes for granted which, judging by the results of this forum poll, I don't remotely blame it for.

 

Labour knows that they can pander to middle England, abolish the 10p tax rate, piss away billions on illegal wars, let personal debt spiral out of control, let the housing market bubble out of control, utterly fail to regulate the banks, preside over the largest widening in the gap between rich and poor in history, and generally put two fingers up to the people who they should represent. They know they can do this without consequence, because as sure as eggs is eggs, the little people will trot out faithfully to the polls and cast their vote for Labour.

 

Let us not forget that the ONE SOLITARY REASON we have any Tories in power today is because Labour failed to implement the electoral reform it promised in its 1997 manifesto. It could have excluded the Tories from power for 50 years, but once again it was blighted by the kind of short-sighted thinking that has been its downfall since forever. It enjoyed the landslide majorities it got on 35% of the vote because it's unfortunately dominated by anti-democratic authoritarian control freaks. Of course, we probably will forget it, because Labour is allowed to break manifesto promise after manifesto promise.

 

Think this is a pretty good post from you SD but its a bit laughable that a LibDem would criticise another party for breaking election manifestoes.

[lifetime fan 10,872]

"Labour voters who voted Lib Dem"? Talk about an oxymoron. If they voted Lib Dem, they're a Lib Dem voter. Just because someone voted Labour in the past doesn't mean Labour owns them.

 

Twisted thinking like that is the reason Labour has historically taken a big shit on places like Liverpool. Labour takes your votes for granted which, judging by the results of this forum poll, I don't remotely blame it for.

 

Labour knows that they can pander to middle England, abolish the 10p tax rate, piss away billions on illegal wars, let personal debt spiral out of control, let the housing market bubble out of control, utterly fail to regulate the banks, preside over the largest widening in the gap between rich and poor in history, and generally put two fingers up to the people who they should represent. They know they can do this without consequence, because as sure as eggs is eggs, the little people will trot out faithfully to the polls and cast their vote for Labour.

 

Let us not forget that the ONE SOLITARY REASON we have any Tories in power today is because Labour failed to implement the electoral reform it promised in its 1997 manifesto. It could have excluded the Tories from power for 50 years, but once again it was blighted by the kind of short-sighted thinking that has been its downfall since forever. It enjoyed the landslide majorities it got on 35% of the vote because it's unfortunately dominated by anti-democratic authoritarian control freaks. It didn't think for one second that Basildon man would eventually fall out of love with Labour.

 

Of course, we probably will forget it, because Labour is allowed to break manifesto promise after manifesto promise, whereas other parties aren't.

 

You manged to get a few things correct. Congratulations.

[dennis tooth 1,240]

Numero, just to pick you up on one or two things and get up your nose a bit.

What you are saying about education of politics (which I note despite you oft picking me up on not crediting articles and trying to pass off as my own, (ha ha, very funny) you have blatantly copied the idea from me.) and the others 2 and 3 follow naturally from one. (Which only goes to show you poorly thought it out cos your such a big copying bastard).

Secondly if you want to make a short term difference then you must regulate the media before you can regulate power and the wealthy and Im not talking the stuff going on now about existing laws being broken and the crocodiles peeling onions.

Thirdly on milliband, he and his kind, as you say ambling along, its like a boxing bout mate, a challenger has to assert himself, its not enough to equal his opponent, for milliband to win he must be a leader of the country before, he is electable. His chances based on the story so far appears to be hinging on avoiding anything stupid and the economy continuing to go down the pan and being pinned on the tories, although, thats shaky anyway, it didnt stop thatcher oh and there not being a real revolution.

I would rather, personally, keep the current bunch of cocksuckers in charge and lead us into chaos and take a chance on real revolution and uprisings than have Milliband in charge in the vain hope that things will be better, paper thin better at that.

Theyre all the fucking same. These are front men, they arent real people.

[The Bugged Out 18]

There is more chance, though it be slim itself, of instigating true social change by backing the labour party and hoping for the emergence of someone like Tony Benn to lead it, than total revolution in Britain.

 

 

Even though I would prefer the later myself.

[dennis tooth 1,240]

Id say its hard to quantify the odds

[Einch 376]

The only way to be sure is to take off and nuke them from orbit. Get rid of them all and start afresh.

[skend04 2,197]

At the end of the day we can blame the parties all we want but the real unpalatable fact is that the voting public is a bunch of cock suckers detached from reality. We'll vote cyclically for tje same shit, we'll get suckered into the same shit and we'll believe the same shit. So the politicos, why the fuck do they need to change when we the Brits don't want change?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Numero, just to pick you up on one or two things and get up your nose a bit.

What you are saying about education of politics (which I note despite you oft picking me up on not crediting articles and trying to pass off as my own, (ha ha, very funny) you have blatantly copied the idea from me.)

 

You're right, I did copy it from you. I copied it, got into my time machine, then raised the point about 15 years ago. Thanks for the idea.