Your taste in women is appalling, missus excepted (I hope)
UK General Election 2015 | Conservatives win with an overall majority
- Thread starter langster
- Start date
They've run out of anything else to say and it's Lynton's bread and butter, that and racism anyway. Sounds like they've got some nice state-interventionist stuff to announce tomorrow though.
The part about his brother was out of step and a definite risk, however it seems fair enough to question his likely performance in foreign policy matters or play the Trident/SNP angle.Mind you, Cameron himself received a fair bit of criticism for his anonymity throughout the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and previous defence cuts have also left RAF somewhat stretched when confronting Putin's sorties.
And for whose ears was this line of attack intended? If it be wavering Tory voters or recent UKIP converts, people for whom security matters are of importance, there is some method to the move.
And for whose ears was this line of attack intended? If it be wavering Tory voters or recent UKIP converts, people for whom security matters are of importance, there is some method to the move.
Last edited:
Aye, Labour now ahead with paddy power for a minority win, but Tories lead in majority win, oddly. Must admit, I'm sick of hearing Miliband this and Miliband that too.
Government After Next Election
Labour Minority
2/1
Conservative Minority
5/2
Conservative Majority
11/2
Conservative Liberal Democrat Coalition
6/1
Labour Liberal Democrat Coalition
8/1
Labour Majority
14/1
I completely agree it's reasonable to question the leaders on that, which is why I'm surprised they didn't just do that and led with the brother stuff trying to create some tenuous link between the two. I'm just struggling to see who that would play well with. As Jippy's said above, he's sick of hearing it and from his other posts I'm guessing he's a fairly central voter who would potentially vote Conservative. Anyone that agrees with Fallon's comments yesterday is probably already a safe Conservative vote in the bank, so why risk alienating those in the middle with the negative tactics? I think they could have made a decent argument and tapped into a few more people's thinking if they'd just gone in directly and said we're worried that he'll compromise policy trying to woo the SNP.
I assume by Labour Minority, a confidence and supply deal with the SNP counts? I still struggle to see the numbers adding up for any other arrangement, unless the Tories get enough of a boost that another Lib Dem coalition is workable, but I just don't see where that could come from.
For the sake of completion i thought i'd post a link to the BBC's page containing all of the party election broadcasts.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02mbgy3
Labour has opted for a generally negative tone it would appear (and blimey are they conceited), whereas the Conservatives have produced something which sounds like an advert for an insurance company. UKIP's isn't too bad all things considered, only it must be balanced out by Farage's erratic performance in the TV debate. The Lib Dems one is fine, whether the "we're not them" message proves to be enough of an inducement for voters is more doubtful.
Defence isn't an area which either of them should be drawing an excessive amount of attention to, not considering the probability of further cuts. No doubt it was satisfying for Fallon to wave his nuclear missile in Miliband's face, but of more immediate importance to the constituents (and Tory backbenchers too one suspects) is whether there'll be fewer ships, aircraft, and battalions. Both American and NATO officials have been raising concerns about the government's future intentions.
If campaigning had been of a particularly personal nature prior to Fallon's remarks then the public might have looked upon them with a resigned complacence, but as matters stand it comes across like a sizeable misstep. It could perhaps be argued that Ed made some pointed attacks during the seven leader debate, however the time and place for responding to such was in that studio. Admittedly we don't hear about all of what occurs at the constituency level, but i recall a greater negativity from both sides during the years and months building up to 2010.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02mbgy3
Labour has opted for a generally negative tone it would appear (and blimey are they conceited), whereas the Conservatives have produced something which sounds like an advert for an insurance company. UKIP's isn't too bad all things considered, only it must be balanced out by Farage's erratic performance in the TV debate. The Lib Dems one is fine, whether the "we're not them" message proves to be enough of an inducement for voters is more doubtful.
Defence isn't an area which either of them should be drawing an excessive amount of attention to, not considering the probability of further cuts. No doubt it was satisfying for Fallon to wave his nuclear missile in Miliband's face, but of more immediate importance to the constituents (and Tory backbenchers too one suspects) is whether there'll be fewer ships, aircraft, and battalions. Both American and NATO officials have been raising concerns about the government's future intentions.
If campaigning had been of a particularly personal nature prior to Fallon's remarks then the public might have looked upon them with a resigned complacence, but as matters stand it comes across like a sizeable misstep. It could perhaps be argued that Ed made some pointed attacks during the seven leader debate, however the time and place for responding to such was in that studio. Admittedly we don't hear about all of what occurs at the constituency level, but i recall a greater negativity from both sides during the years and months building up to 2010.
Last edited:
If Cameron cannot deliver a second term with the FTSE at >7000, low interest rates, rising house prices, low inflation, low unemployment and decent GDP growth then he should be jettisoned. Perhaps Boris can have the mass appeal of a Thatcher, in this era of celebrity he might be the winning ticket in 5 years. The fact that Cameron couldn't deliver a majority when the economy was on its knees should have been a clue that he just doesn't have the charisma.
I feel sick at the thought of the damage an SNP/Labour coalition could do in 5 years.
I feel sick at the thought of the damage an SNP/Labour coalition could do in 5 years.
Last edited:
I think it's less Cameron's fault, and more that large portions of the country just don't really like the Tories anymore due to the Thatcher era. I mean, they're largely despised in Scotland, portions of Wales, and across parts of the North of England. Very rare you'd see that for a party who's the biggest in a particular country or state.
Look at this election for example: most accept Miliband is a weak leader, and that Labour aren't particularly strong, yet they're still generally neck in neck with the Tories anyway. Anyone who doesn't really see themselves as right-wing isn't going to vote Tory, and someone like Johnson is unlikely to change that considering some see him as more right-wing than Cameron.
Cameron's individual poll ratings are very good. He's not the problem...his party is.
That all bollocks for the man on average wages, since he's worse off than 5 years ago. You just feel sick because Labour will tax you.
Exactly. He's far from perfect, and at times has been very evasive in this campaign, but he's generally a decent leader for the Tories. Moderate enough so that non-right voters aren't afraid of what he might do, but respected enough within his own party as well.
I see your point, but wasn't that the case all the while Thatcher was winning majorities? They're never going to win in Scotland, the poorer areas of Wales and the Labour heartland of the North. The rest of England needs to be a sea of blue and that only happens if you mobilise the core. I also think that Boris has a Clintonesque charm that might win over some younger voters and undecided voters.
Not really. While Labour was still winning a lot of the densely populated areas, the Tories had a lot more seats in Scotland back then. Yeah, a lot of the working-class were still largely voting Labour, but the Tories were also managing to get a ton more seats than Labour too. Plus their vote efficiency was better back then.
Unless Miliband or any future Labour leaders starts praising the Third Reich during one of their speeches, the Tories are just always going to have a hard time getting majorities. The same could largely be said for Labour since it's hard for them to get a majority as well, but they have a better chance at it than the Tories.
Johnson would only appeal to people who vote based on personality politics. He's very right-wing, so a lot of younger student types who are left-wing wouldn't go for him. Plus he's got a lot of rumoured history of being a complete cnut, which might put a lot off him.
They aren't very good, just better than the other leaders. And Ed's even managed to reduce the gap over the last month.
Boris has too much personal baggage to be Prime Minister. He a serial philanderer who has fathered at least one child as a result of his affairs - that kind of thing is too much for the female half of the electorate of Middle England to accept in a leader, especially with the greater exposure it (and whatever else he's hiding) would receive if he were running for Number 10.
Without those macroeconomic conditions the "man on average wages" is less likely to get a mortgage and his job is less secure. Five years ago he might very reasonably have feared for his chances of staying in employment.
Women in Middle England seem to quite like a bastard! Perhaps that's part of the Clintonesque charm I was talking about. He has a magnetism that's undeniable, obviously the left dislike him but your average bloke would like to have a pint with him. I can't say the same about Cameron.
Your average bloke would not like to have a drink with Boris Johnson.
But how on earth can they prefer the alternative to any significant degree? The others are hardly paragons, and indeed have been both damaging and exploitative. It's why i despair at those who cast their vote in a tribal manner.
It almost makes one sympathise with Churchill's: "the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."
The influence of Thatcher must be in part a generational motive though, for as each year passes it can only be of decreasing relevance.
Given an option between having a pint with Cameron, Milliband, Clegg, Farrage, Johnson or none of them I'd go for none of them - if the none of them option was removed and you had to pick one it would probably be Boris - at least he seems a bit less robotic than Cameron and Milliband and less racist than Farrage.
I think he has received some favourable media coverage and has been lucky that his private life has not had a great deal of exposure. It would be very different if he were running to be PM.
yes - it will be interesting to see how the blair / iraq impacts labour long term as I know many people who they would probably consider likely labour voters who have since that whole debacle refused to vote for them and indeed do so to this day.
I personally have never voted for them since but am begrudgingly thinking of doing so this time just because the three parties with the best chance of winning in my constituency are Labour - the Libs (who had to withdraw their candidate as he has been arrested on peado charges) and UKIP - so basically I am probably going to vote anti ukip and give them my vote - but it will turn my stomach and in future I would rather not vote at all than vote for them
I can't see Boris, Gideon or May being any more electable than Cameron, 2010 was as good as it gets for the modern day Tory party.
The Tories have created a load of McJobs and 'self-employment' that needs to be bolstered by tax credits (ie cheap low-cost labour for employers). The man on average wages can't afford to rent or buy to live in London. Telling him he's better off won't wash.
Are you normally a Lib Dem voter then?
And who's this candidate you're talking about?? I've missed that.
Which Labour was all too happy to provide during its 13 years in government. How much does the party really care about the poorest in society anyway, 100,000s if not millions in a politically susceptible position, they can park them there and exploit the resource as the need arises.
Last edited:
I voted lib last time - mainly because I wanted a referendum on PR
Prior to that I didnt vote for anybody in the election before
Prior to that Labour in 2001 and 1997
(demographically I would probably be identified as a likely tory voter but many of my family were miners so I will never vote for them)
Jason Zardonzy was the candidate and id say although libs were close to taking the seat last time (200 votes) they have no chance this time especially after the peado allegations leaving labour and ukip
http://www.chad.co.uk/news/crime/br...ver-historic-child-sex-abuse-claims-1-7177444
Believe it or not Zardonzy is now saying he will stand as an independent - he will probably be lynched on the doorsteps!
http://www.chad.co.uk/news/local/ja...n-ashfield-after-lib-dem-suspension-1-7202704
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/ashfield/
Last edited:
I agree with that - I don't like to see people simply voting for Labour to keep out the Tories and for no other reason, but there are also a lot who simply don't identify as Tory and are unlikely to do so.
I'm not going to defend NewLabour - inequality increased during their tenure. Ed is old Labour and whatever criticisms may be levelled at him, he genuinely does want fairness and and end to severe inequality.
Ed being Old Labour doesn't mean his entire party is, though. There's still a lot of New Labour people in there.
Red Ed had a purge of the shadow cabinet about 18 months ago to clear the decks for the election. I don't think there are many left (Jim Murphy who's popped up in Scotland).
With this following so closely on the bluster of yesterday, Fallon just ends up looking like damned fool. Poor planning from someone.
Though Liam Fox's tenure could be better measured in months and felt compelled to resign, he was still likely remains the best Defence Secretary of the last parliament.
In other news...
David Cameron risks wrath of Devon over cream teas
Cream or jam first? Prime Minister gets in a muddle over the Devon way to eat a scone
By Emily Gosden
10 Apr 2015
David Cameron has risked the wrath of voters in Devon by confusing the Devonian and Cornish methods for eating a cream tea.
Devon tradition is to put cream on the scone, followed by jam. But the matter is fiercely contested by the Cornish, who do it the other way around.
Visiting the Taw cafe in Barnstaple, Devon, the Prime Minister set himself up for a fall when he raised the issue, saying: "When you are in Devon you do the jam and the cream in a different order to Cornwall, is that right?"
"I'm going to get this wrong, aren't I?" he said, before proceeding to do just that.
"In Devon it's... jam first and cream on top?" he ventured, before realising his mistake as he clocked the look on the faces of the staff.
"Wrong way round. I knew I'd get it wrong," he exclaims, adding - controversially, perhaps - "it all tastes the same, doesn't it?".
The North Devon Gazette reported that Mr Cameron made amends by then eating the scone the Devon way and suggesting he would have to consider swapping his regular holidays in Cornwall for Devon instead.
Peter Heaton-Jones, the Conservative candidate for North Devon who accompanied Mr Cameron on the visit, told the newspaper the debate was "enough to slip anyone up".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ron-risks-wrath-of-Devon-over-cream-teas.html
Of course it si the Devonian way. I would mind a scone right about now actually.
This, Cameron is liked as a leader, but his party isn't liked, with Labour it's the reverse.
There are a lot of preconceived notions about Ed which are more or less incorrect and that is what the Conservatives are trying and failing to exploit. Cameron refused a head to head debate, because he feared that if Ed Miliband came across better, then the last hurdle stopping an Labour overall majority would fall and the Conservatives would have zero chance of retaining power.
In spite of their negative campaign the voters are seeing through it and are also starting to see that Ed is not the pillock that the Conservatives want them to believe he is. Labour has pulled away in the polls since the first debate and I don't see a way back for the tories the way they are building their campaign. Negative campaigns always fail because people don't appreciate negativity. Obviously the tories have nothing positive to offer fro mtheir 5 years in power or for the hypothetical 5 to come so their options are limited.
I predict Labour will pull away enough to get a majority or at least very close to it. In any case Cameron will surely not become prime minister ever again.
I think that perception is on the move, Cameron has performed very poorly ducking the 1:1 and doing the invisible man in the 7-sider, Ed as been pretty solid and looks passionate about fairness.
I think Ed will end up in power, despite his leadership. Personally I don't see him as a leader, and don't get any sort of feel of what he stands for, other than taxing the wealthy, and being anti business.
He also stands for nerds everywhere. People will look and say if that man can become prime minister against all odds then I can do [insert impossible task here] too.
In all honesty I think he is just a straight no nonsense guy. He doesn't have an aura about him but neither does he have a facade. People will relate more to a "common" man being prime minister and that is why I think Labour will edge closer to a majority. He has closed the leader gap with Cameron quite a bit since the first debate and I expect he will even more after the next two.
Which polls are these? For several weeks all that has occurred is the two parties exchanging 1-2pt leads.
It's one thing to accuse the Conservatives of needless personal attacks (rightly), but quite madness to suggest that they are the only party with some negative messages. Have you even seen Labour's party election broadcasts? An abundance of negativity and spurious solutions.
Not to mention their continued "Vote SNP get Tory" line which has come across as incredibly patronising in Scotland.