Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Good post... Can someone rep GC for me please?

Its a nice Call-To-Arms rally cry, and I think things seem to be changing, especially as high profile celebrities like Elton John, Graham Norton (and to a certain extent Will Young) are around to prove you can be gay, and still liked and respected. That helps to remove the stigma of it, I think. Once the older generations lose that, then that will be reflected onto the children.

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Bloody still undecided :(

My head says the tories... my heart says labour.

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Labour for more 'illegal' asylum seekers/immigrants and higher taxes, why do you guys bother?

If I could vote (I can't because I am Canadian) I would vote the Liberal Democrats even though they stand no chance of winning and the party leader is a douchebag; simply because most of their policies are better and different than Conservative/Labour combined. The 50% tax thing works in Canada, Liberals have been in power there for over 20 years and it works. Hint hint :)

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Firstly, the Lib dems can promise anything knowing they won't be called upon to deliver, they cannot and will not form the next government.

Secondly, the whole issue concerning immigration/asylum seekers has been completely overblown, a non story.

Thirdly, Labour is the only party that in government will keep our economy expanding and deliver much needed economic and social reform.

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Hear Hear!

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

looks like the Liberals have a few problems to overcome in Canada, before they can assume another 20 years in office..

http://www.frankw.net/archive/canadi...y_yank_blogger

;)

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

It was a good 20 years though! in UK the tories can't get a decent party leader, and the liberals have done nothing but steadily decline the quality of the country in my opinion. (I have lived here before for several years not just the last few ) :)

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

I wasn't really making any point other than, what appeared to me to be an amusing co-incidence ;)

- my apologies if you already know this, but the author of the blog I linked to is co-founder of this site, who moved to Canada a year or so back. I just happened to glance at his blog not long after reading your post & it tickled my warped sense of humour. ;)

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Somehow I don't think it's quite fair to suggest that the Lib Dem party is a refuge for people that like to talk hot air for the fun of it. They aren't making promises on the basis that they will never have to deliver on them. What would be the point of that? They are making promises on the same basis as all the major parties do; they believe their policies are best for Britain and want the chance to put them into action. Whether they are right about that or not is a different issue, but let's not descend into petty insults. I might as well suggest that Tone has a secret agenda to wreck Britain just because I happen to disagree with most of his ideas. Plain daft.

By the way, I think you're right, they won't form the next Government, but I think it is plain wrong to say they cannot. The Lib Dems have about as much direct experience of the Cabinet room as Labour did in 1997. ;)

The standard retort of a politician who prefers not to engage with a difficult issue. Asylum is a major issue if you live in any community currently being asked to absorb asylum seekers. Labour's record on this is simply abysmal. Let's not forget that it was Labour's complete failure to renew an agreement with the French, initially set up by the Tories, that used to allow the authorities to return anyone found sneaking into the UK from France, back to France, no questions asked. The Sangatte camp would not have been a problem had that treaty still existed. And don't let's start suggesting such a thing was unfair or illegal. Asylum seekers are meant to claim asylum in the first safe country they enter. Last time I checked, France was reasonably safe. But then France is more likely to deal swiftly with economic migrants, while Britain under Labour is known as a place where you can claim asylum and then just disappear when your bogus application is turned down.

With the greatest of respect, that bald statement is just a piece of party political hot air, unless you can back it up with some critical analysis of the various parties and their policies?
__________________

What was below the belt about that? :confused:

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Despite the traditional mindset of their supporters, I think most of the Lib Dems policies are pretty feasible, but also a bit too selective in who they like.

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

out of the main three partys though, i feel the libdems are the only one have stuck to thier true colours since the mid-90's.

the big two are typically trying to scare the electorate to death ... vote for us or DIEEEEEEE !!! ... zeig heil !!!

and remember, sex sells, but it can't hold a candle to fears selling power!

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Immigration, why do people belive this is a problem then?

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

i dont know why but i have always leaned towards giving the liberal democrats a chance, looking over their policies i would say they are attractive to choose as a party to run this country.

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/ar...574089,00.html


labour are also the party of pensions - removing tax advantages from the pension funds plus giving plenty of (other) incentives to make people NOT save for retirement. for example the 'minimum income guarantee' means those who have saved for their retirement can in some cases be no better off than those who didnt.

labour also employ a vast amount of wastage in terms of 'human capital' (Tony's new favorate meaningless buzz words).

Re: Vote 2005, week 2, new poll!
 

Because it causes populations in certain areas of the country to expand at a rate more rapid than public services can cope with, and it causes communities to feel insecure when they believe their established. traditional way of life is under threat from 'imported' culture.

Let's get something clear, however. The Tories are not saying 'immigration is a problem'. They are saying uncontrolled immigration is a problem. It is only Labour smear tactics that is causing some to believe the Conservative policy is anti-immigrant. If we can get control of immigration into this country, by ensuring we limit the numbers to that which we are able to absorb without stressing our public services or risking civil strife ... well, if I could reverse the question, why do (some) people believe that is a problem then?