Search results

Ah, a couple of things here. Nice and dismissive post from you again. I think benefit withdrawal is the key, you've been given an example on this thread, i personally know of others. You've ignored this example, and continue to do so. Ask your wife if she knows of any from her pastoral work...

Ah, well i'm still not sure if your obtuseness comes from a blinkered mindset, or it is deliberate trolling. However... I think many people that use food banks have had their benefits withdrawn or cut. David has cited an example of this, the fact that you have continued to ignore this fact...

Still not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse. You've been given 2 examples. Could you consider what has caused the rise in food banks? Also i disagree with your obviously untrue statement and flawed logic that most people want this. Think about that logical point before you reply.

Hmmm, not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse, however..... It is not necessarily about the amount each benefit is worth, but the amount of people that receive it. David has already told us (iirc) of people he knows that are unfit to work that have had their benefits removed. Perhaps this...

It's a little ironic that a thread apparently started with trollish intentions has actually been relatively free from it, and contained a broad spectrum of opinions.

Perhaps. There would have been a fair bit of brinkmanship. I must admit that when Milliband said there would be no deals with the SNP i didn't believe him. But i think if he had stuck to his guns there would have been very little the SNP could of done without wrecking their own party and support.

Yes i think you're right, the cons would have been the largest party, although bizarrely not in government (in the situation we're talking about). The point i'm making is that i don't believe the SNP would have amended the bills. Labour could have told them where to go, and dared the SNP to...

Apologies for the second post, let me elaborate a bit more. The SNP is a party with many new members. It would appear the majority of them have come from the labour camp and are socialists. If the SNP caused the conservative party to come in, by weakening a labour government, they'd lose the...

1st, see my reply to Buzzer. 2nd, there probably would have been some back room dealings at some point. But, if labour had just stood their ground and refused any dealings with the SNP, what could the they do? If they were to vote the non existent labour government down, they'd just bring in...

Maybe you're right. It does appear that the conservatives were hammering that message for a reason though, i think it swayed a significant (but probably small) portion of the electorate, or perhaps galvanised them to vote. It was a close run thing and i think it helped push them over the line.

I quite agree, but looking how their different campaign messages impacted the polls. It was the late and last message, about the fear of SNP calling the shots in westminster that made the difference. It seems to me that the SNP wouldn't of had the power that many think, as they would have been...

Probably because that is what the campaign became. Here's an article that predicted it (24/04) from the independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-tory-attempt-to-exploit-laboursnp-link-is-shameless-but-it-will-work-10202185.html

Interesting. Although it is clear and admitted that they switched to campaigning in the last weeks to 'vote labour get SNP', the only contested issue about whether the posters statement was a fact seems to be whether this is scaremongering or not.

How poetic.

Troll much?