General Election 2015

Iggle Piggle · Apr 16, 2015

Gwylan said:
I keep seeing this and I can't understand it all. As far as I can see, David M was the anointed heir, a shoo-in for the leadership and completely cocked it up. Ed M was the rank outsider (he wasn't even second favourite) but, being a consummate politician, worked the field, built up alliances and set out a vision that won the day. The Labour leadership election demonstrated two things clearly - David is no politician, he was a policy wonk and ace bureaucrat but had no feeling for an electorate; Ed emphatically is, he set out a vision and persuaded enough voters to back him.

Now, people may not like him or reject his policies but to say that his brother is a better politician than him is complete nonsense: Ed wins elections even when the odds are stacked against him; David can't win when everything's in his favour - that counts for a lot

David Milliband had the highest number of votes from MP's
David Milliband had the highest number of Party members voting for him
Ed Milliband had the highest number of votes after a concerted Union campaign by UNITE etc to vote him after he promised the earth to them which tipped the balance.

The older Milliband is statesmanlike, came across well to the general public (Certainly in comparison to the 3 above I mentioned) and quick qitted in interviews - Everything Ed Milliband isn't. This election is an open goal waiting to be tapped in. We will never know, but I'm convinced it would be a Labour landslide if they had chosen the other brother. Another thing, what is the 'Vision' that young Ed has set up? All I hear is a miss mash of un-implementable nonsense. The energy price capping for example.

Jim D · Apr 16, 2015

Machiavelli said:
If there's no overall majority (which seems extremely likely), there are three possibilities:
-- minority government
-- coalition government
-- confidence-and-supply
The Tories problem is that they're far less likely than Labour to form any of these, because so many parties have ruled out working with them, their projected seats are too low to run a minority, and their possible partners (Lib Dems, UKIP and DUP) are unlikely to get enough seats between them to help them run a government.
So, if Labour have more seats than the Tories, they'll be able to form one of those three possibilities, but they're also likely to do so if they have less seats than the Tories.
I dispute your claim that Lab will not be able to form a government without those Scottish seats -- both the above and my previous response to you provides the explanation.

Wow, you seem quite keen to get your point across.

Anyway, I said 'form a government on their own' so that would rule out options 2 and 3. Option 1 would come with the 'lame duck' tag and nothing of any consequence would get done. We'd probably have another election within a year in which the electorate may be sympathetic to them if they're seen as trying to govern but not allowed to (they won't if they try to push through a lot of controversial stuff that has no chance of getting passed).

simmo · Apr 16, 2015

Nibble said:
I think you are making many assumptions here. Your first big assumption is that I vote labour, your second is that I would defend Blair, the third implying that I somehow treat the death of soldiers as something trivial.

As for putting my photos into context, no, I think they both have equal , inherent horror attached to them.

Mmmmmm, One intimates our war dead in Iraq and the other a food bank. Where would you want a loved one to be in a grave in Basra or York city hall picking out a tin a food, I think I know where I would rather them be.

I am trying also to understand what are you infering? Are you saying that there is a food shortage in the UK? Or that some people cannot afford to eat?

If the former how can you not see the row upon row of food (with prices coming down) that are reshelved in our supermarkets every single day. If the latter, why are some UK benefit claimants (whom don't work) such as this couple from Plymouth highlighted in the Mirror (a left leaning paper by the way) from 5th January 2015 morbidly obese? I mean the bloke is only 45, doesn't work, lives off state benefits but yet is so goddam obese he has to go round on a mobility scooter.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/couple-too-fat-work-marry-4922866

They are not a one off either......

Here is a photo of White Dee "star" of Benefits Street that was recently on Channel 4. She doesn't look underfed and malnourished to me, as you seem to be implying occurs in the UK? The questions I actually ask myself is why (from state benefits) is she so fat and overweight and also how does she afford the cigarettes (a luxury) I know she smokes too?

Gwylan · Apr 16, 2015

Iggle Piggle said:
David Milliband had the highest number of votes from MP's
David Milliband had the highest number of Party members voting for him
Ed Milliband had the highest number of votes after a concerted Union campaign by UNITE etc to vote him after he promised the earth to them which tipped the balance.

So in an election with three constituencies, David concentrated on two and ignored the third while Ed worked on all three (while David did indeed win MPs and party members, these elections were quite close), that sounds to me like someone who knows how to win elections. And he's scarcely turned out to be in hock to the unions, severing links over affiliated funding - something that Blair wanted to do but didn't have the nerve.

The older Milliband is statesmanlike, came across well to the general public

There was a poll last autumn asking whether Labour would do better under another leader - this was at the same time as Ed's lowest ever rankings. Despite this, he still came out on top as the best leader against all candidates but one -easily beating his brother. So, there's no evidence that David would be held in any more affection (the politician who was more attractive than Ed was Alan Johnson, who's stated time and again that he has no interest in the leadership)

This election is an open goal waiting to be tapped in.

Totally disagree with this. The consensus after the last election was that it would take two or three elections for Labour to recover from their beating - to be so close is some achievement. It's particularly noteworthy as all the usual economic indicators (unemployment, inflation, growth) are all on the right track. The Labour party has done particularly well countermanding Tory arguments

Another thing, what is the 'Vision' that young Ed has set up? All I hear is a miss mash of un-implementable nonsense. The energy price capping for example.

Have some sympathy with this view: I think too much of the Labour vision is incoherent (I'm not a Labour voter) but I was talking about the vision that Ed sold to the Labour electorate - they clearly bought into it, even if it's not clear to the rest of us

Bold Seagull · Apr 16, 2015

simmo said:
If the former how can you not see the row upon row of food (with prices coming down) that are reshelved in our supermarkets every single day. If the latter, why are some UK benefit claimants (whom don't work) such as this couple from Plymouth highlighted in the Mirror (a left leaning paper by the way) from 5th January 2015 morbidly obese?

Cheap food is fattening innit. Pizza's 79p each, nuggets, sausages, burgers, crips, all cheap as chips, and chips are as cheap as chips. Cheese is cheap as chips too. I've seen rich people obese too, but their's is mainly fine cuts of steak, Bollinger champagne, soufflé, and After Eight Mints....its wafer thin!

ROSM · Apr 16, 2015

Gwylan said:
So in an election with three constituencies, David concentrated on two and ignored the third while Ed worked on all three (while David did indeed win MPs and party members, these elections were quite close), that sounds to me like someone who knows how to win elections. And he's scarcely turned out to be in hock to the unions, severing links over affiliated funding - something that Blair wanted to do but didn't have the nerve.

There was a poll last autumn asking whether Labour would do better under another leader - this was at the same time as Ed's lowest ever rankings. Despite this, he still came out on top as the best leader against all candidates but one -easily beating his brother. So, there's no evidence that David would be held in any more affection (the politician who was more attractive than Ed was Alan Johnson, who's stated time and again that he has no interest in the leadership)

Totally disagree with this. The consensus after the last election was that it would take two or three elections for Labour to recover from their beating - to be so close is some achievement. It's particularly noteworthy as all the usual economic indicators (unemployment, inflation, growth) are all on the right track. The Labour party has done particularly well countermanding Tory arguments

Have some sympathy with this view: I think too much of the Labour vision is incoherent (I'm not a Labour voter) but I was talking about the vision that Ed sold to the Labour electorate - they clearly bought into it, even if it's not clear to the rest of us

I think that the headline policies, attacking murdoch, energy company discipline, and now the non dom/tax avoidance clampdown have all resonated with a significant part of the country. I also don't believe that it's universally accepted that the labour party caused the 2008 financial meltdown. Also I do think there is a greater sense of social conscience now, added to an almost undenied view that Cameron lied last time on nhs and Clegg gave up on tuition fees

When you put these together, that is why I think that labour are neck and neck now.

In most elections there is a step towards status quo just before polling day, definitely seen in all 3 Blair victories, the Kinnock defeat and in 2010. The same will likely happen here so unless labour are 3+ points in the lead by 1st may, they will unlikely be the largest party. However they may well be best placed to achieve a coalition and form a government

Gwylan · Apr 16, 2015

ROSM said:
I think that the headline policies, attacking murdoch,

I think that's a key one: Murdoch terrified all party leaders, including Thatcher and Blair, to see a politician take on News International was an inspiring sight. You could also add his stance on Syria when he became the first opposition politician since the 18th century not to back the PM's call for military action.

They aren't enough of one to convince me to vote Labour but it made me realise that here was a serious contender. It's why all this nonsense about him being a weak leader or a lousy politician really doesn't resonate with me

Deleted member 22389 · Apr 16, 2015

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-to-win-general-election--video-10180885.html

ROSM · Apr 16, 2015

Gwylan said:
I think that's a key one: Murdoch terrified all party leaders, including Thatcher and Blair, to see a politician take on News International was an inspiring sight. You could also add his stance on Syria when he became the first opposition politician since the 18th century not to back the PM's call for military action.

They aren't enough of one to convince me to vote Labour but it made me realise that here was a serious contender. It's why all this nonsense about him being a weak leader or a lousy politician really doesn't resonate with me

I think he is a conviction politician, which means he will rarely appeal to the centre ground. I do hesitate to say this, but there is a lot similar to the Margaret Thatcher approach here

beorhthelm · Apr 16, 2015

ROSM said:
I think he is a conviction politician, which means he will rarely appeal to the centre ground. I do hesitate to say this, but there is a lot similar to the Margaret Thatcher approach here

do you not believe Thatcher appealed to the centre ground? got over 42% in three elections, you don't get that from only appealing to the right or left wing.

ROSM · Apr 16, 2015

beorhthelm said:
do you not believe Thatcher appealed to the centre ground? got over 42% in three elections, you don't get that from only appealing to the right or left wing.

I believe she sensed a directional change away from traditional centrist politics to one where a society wanted more imperialist style direction. In effect she took over the new centre ground which was right of centre previously

In the same way I sense the centre is shifting more left now and I think labour may have talked into that.

Machiavelli · Apr 16, 2015

ROSM said:
I think he is a conviction politician, which means he will rarely appeal to the centre ground. I do hesitate to say this, but there is a lot similar to the Margaret Thatcher approach here

I'm still not sure whether you're right on this. But Miliband himself has pointed out in the past that it's not about appealing to the centre ground; it's about shifting the centre ground. As [MENTION=599]beorhthelm[/MENTION] suggests, Thatcher did this. Attlee (often through Bevan) did it too.

Ernest · Apr 16, 2015

Machiavelli said:
Ernest's political posts are somewhat different to his football ones.

Same with [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] getting harder to work out now if he is being SERIOUS or being a TROLL

Herr Tubthumper · Apr 16, 2015

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/04/16/uk-britain-election-poll-ipsosmori-idUKKBN0N712920150416

Labour still in the box seat. Not long now [MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION]. Come The Glorious Day!

seagullsovergrimsby · Apr 16, 2015

Ernest said:
Did you see the Cameron interview tonight, sounds like that if there is no majority he is off. Which plays into the Labour hands as the Tories will rip themselves to shreds over Europe whilst Ed Miliband can get on with governing the country

He has probably seen the millions Blair is earning as an ex-PM and wants a piece of the action before taking up his seat in the House of Lords.

Ernest · Apr 16, 2015

Herr Tubthumper said:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/04/16/uk-britain-election-poll-ipsosmori-idUKKBN0N712920150416

Labour still in the box seat. Not long now [MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION]. Come The Glorious Day!

Wonderful scenes

Bozza · Apr 16, 2015

Looks like Ed was about to take a swing at an Asian chap before thinking better of it in front of the cameras. Shameful.

[yt]9ZU81D6wZvw[/yt]

drew · Apr 16, 2015

Bozza said:
Looks like Ed was about to take a swing at an Asian chap before thinking better of it in front of the cameras. Shameful.

[yt]9ZU81D6wZvw[/yt]

Obviously not a serious comment. You do yourself a disservice!!!

Bozza · Apr 16, 2015

drew said:
Obviously not a serious comment. You do yourself a disservice!!!

His hand went up to smack the chap in the face is how I saw it. Disgusting.

seagullsovergrimsby · Apr 16, 2015

Its a good job the fella in the turban wasn't sitting next to Johnny Prescott :lol:

#TwoJabs

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

General Election 2015

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

strong and stable with me, or...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Deleted member 22389

Guest

Well-known member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

Well-known member

Stupid IDIOT

Well-known member

#cpfctinpotclub

Stupid IDIOT

You can change this

Drew

You can change this

#cpfctinpotclub

Share this page