Cable Forum - The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Page 22 of 32

« First

Last »

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2 (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33663003)

Stuart

20-04-2010 18:07

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35004886)

Sadly due to the dubious nature of our system and the manner in which it has been rigged even if the Lib Dems took the popular vote by some distance they still wouldn't be in power. Even if either opposition party took a considerably higher percentage of the vote than Labour did last time they wouldn't have a majority.

Labour would be the biggest party even if it finished Conservatives 33%, Lib Dems 30%, Labour 27%.

That's the problem with our electoral system. For instance, in my area, I can vote Lib Dem all I want, but it's such a conservative stronghold that essentially Hell would have to freeze over before the area would end up with anything other than a conservative MP. Having said that, the LibDems came close to winning in my area in 1997. Only "Close" though.

Osem	20-04-2010 18:49

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35004972)

There may be other reasons lurking in Nick Clegg's past......

In an interview with the "Cambridge Student" last month he statesWhilst on the ConservativeHome blog site, there appears to be evidence he was a member of the Cambridge University Conservative Association when he was a fresher - Link

Perhaps he's a Tory "sleeper agent"? :D

:D

Whilst certainly not a 'crime' and a long time ago, I think his apparent denials may do him a big disservice.

martyh

20-04-2010 19:05

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

anyone seen this video ...so sad and a bit embarrassing:nono:http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100420/...u-37e89e1.html

Matty_

20-04-2010 19:22

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

The papers really seem to be pushing the "Please don`t let it be a hung parliament" line quite a bit since the t.v. debate, after which Lib-Dems polls rating rose like an eagle.

The bird out of Bucks-Fizz is still a bit of allright :naughty:

Angua

20-04-2010 19:23

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

I like this (acquired from a local forum poster) :rofl:

Quote:

Oxford University researchers have discovered the heaviest element yet known to science. The new element, Governmentium (symbol=Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called pillocks. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact.

A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete. Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2 to 6 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganisation in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganisation will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists
to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as a critical morass. When catalysed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium (symbol=Ad), an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium, since it has half as many pillocks but twice as many morons.

martyh

20-04-2010 19:26

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35005023)

I like this (acquired from a local forum poster) :rofl:

like that :D

Tezcatlipoca

20-04-2010 20:04

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35004892)

On the other hand, if the current polls are an indicator of the outcome, I'd think that all parties should have a serious think about reforming the system as the current one is untenable (imo).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35004931)

Agreed. From that point of view I hope that the election goes down the route of Tories and Lib Dems being 1st and 2nd in the popular vote while Labour are 3rd yet have the most MPs. That would put the issue into very clear focus and both force a closer look at electoral form and a fundamental change in thinking.

Downside said hung parliament will get nothing done until that fundamental change in thinking is done.

Agreed also.

OK, it would probably cause a bit of an outrage & crisis, but I think it would be a good shock to the system, & finally force them to do something about our rather unfair electoral system.

Xaccers

20-04-2010 21:24

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Why does Cleggy have to state who he'll support in a hung parliment?
Surely he, just like any party can say they'll remain independant and support or oppose bills on their merrit?

Osem	20-04-2010 21:39

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35005080)

Why does Cleggy have to state who he'll support in a hung parliment?
Surely he, just like any party can say they'll remain independant and support or oppose bills on their merrit?

He doesn't have to at all but I suspect many people want him to be clear about this and he risks losing their votes if he isn't. Of course his judgement may be that it's a risk worth taking...

Xaccers

20-04-2010 21:48

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35005088)

He doesn't have to at all but I suspect many people want him to be clear about this and he risks losing their votes if he isn't. Of course his judgement may be that it's a risk worth taking...

I think he'd lose more votes by announcing who he'd side with.

People disillusioned with Labour and aren't really Labour voters but are swinging towards LDs will end up with Labour not only with a few extra seats than the other two main parties, but in actual power by being backed by LDs, so as has been pointed out, vote LD and get Labour.
If they state they're going to remain independant and follow their own values, then they can get more people to convince themselves that a LD vote isn't a waste, hung parliment is inevitable so LDs could be the deciding vote on any bill.

Ignitionnet

20-04-2010 21:59

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35005088)

He doesn't have to at all but I suspect many people want him to be clear about this and he risks losing their votes if he isn't. Of course his judgement may be that it's a risk worth taking...

Here's a thought regardless of where the Lib Dems choose to go:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8427233.stm

Quote:

What happens if there is a hung parliament?

The incumbent Prime Minister will remain in power until he or she resigns

Flyboy

20-04-2010 22:42

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35004972)

So unlike the Tories to stoop to smearing, eh? ;)

Osem	20-04-2010 22:42

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35005096)

Well no doubt that's the equation Clegg's wrestling with but I also think there are many people who're crying out for just one of these people to be straight for once and this is where Clegg's image has lost a little of it's sheen IMHO.

Hugh	20-04-2010 22:48

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35005119)

So unlike the Tories to stoop to smearing, eh? ;)

The "sleeper agent" was a joke, hence the :D He wasn't a Tory Party member, just a member of the CUCA.

How can it be a smear, when there is documented evidence? Anyhoo, what is wrong with changing views over time - it's called being open-minded, I believe.

A smear is when a Baron calls someone else "toffee-nosed", imho...;)

Ignitionnet

20-04-2010 22:49

Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35005119)

So unlike the Tories to stoop to smearing, eh? ;)

I'd love to see them do it some more to be honest. It's the only way to have some significant effect against Labour's BS. Policy rooted in the real world isn't going to make much progress against unfunded, unrealistic promises and soundbites. Hate Mandelson for setting the only workable tone of the election to be so incredibly low though I guess there wasn't much else he could do :(

Be good to see the Tories quit trying to rise above it along with giving anything like realistic policy and dive into some hardcore gutter politics, may have some effect on the people who are dumb enough to believe Brown can deliver his guarantees without destroying the country's finances.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:22.

Page 22 of 32

« First

Last »

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page