UK General Election 2015 | Conservatives win with an overall majority

How did you vote in the 2015 General Election?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 67 20.0%

  • Labour

    Votes: 152 45.4%

  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 15 4.5%

  • Green

    Votes: 23 6.9%

  • SNP

    Votes: 9 2.7%

  • UKIP

    Votes: 11 3.3%

  • Independent

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Did not vote

    Votes: 43 12.8%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 4 1.2%

  • Other (UUP, DUP, BNP, and anyone else I have forgotten)

    Votes: 9 2.7%
  • Total voters
    335
  • Poll closed .
Mockney said:
Presumably, but then I'd also assume prospective Green voters aren't expecting them to form a government this year. The whole thing is a long term strategy. I just don't see any harm in floating it. If they ever move closer to (presumably Coalition-based) power, it can be picked apart a lot more thoroughly.

The difference between them and UKIP, is their success at this election wouldn't force the main parties to do anything about these under promoted side-issues in the way UKIP's success would with immigration. Or the NHS.
Click to expand...

Yeah spot on with the first paragraph mate, couldn't have put it better. A strong showing by the Greens as their ideas will get more exposure.

Speaking to a mate who studied politics at Uni, he reckons UKIP is a temporary platform for the "dey turk err jurbs" mob to vote within the confines of legitimacy (basically they're not the BNP) in this time where everyone is suffering economically. Once the economy recovers most UKIP voters will go back to the Tories or Labour whereas that won't be the case for Green voters.
 
Ubik said:
Wait for Charles III to finish the job.
Click to expand...
He's not as entertaining as the other one...seriously though, we've had more unpopular kings than Charles can be (Prince Regent anyone?) and they are still here. When William is king, it'll be all fine and dandy in little England.
 
The Mitcher said:
True, they do not own the debate, but they are a party formed specifically for that particular problem. Either way, I'm not so sure I can vote for them. I would not say it is a wasted vote, I really do not think you can waste votes, at least you are doing something and participating. I'm going to wait until all the manifestos are published and then see. I think the Green's will heavily revise it from the things they've said recently.
Click to expand...

In the foundations upon which their policies rest are found to be weak or suspect, then it won't matter why the party was formed. Their stance on nuclear, and proposals in areas such as wind farms and migration are not without environmental consequences for one. The message isn't coherent.
 
The Mitcher said:
He's not as entertaining as the other one...seriously though, we've had more unpopular kings than Charles can be (Prince Regent anyone?) and they are still here. When William is king, it'll be all fine and dandy in little England.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think we're stuck with them for another century yet at least, unfortunately. Constitutionally we've got other things to sort out before the republic.

In other news, Cameron's got his wish on the debates: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30935369
Wonder if he'll now complain at the inclusion of the nationalists...
 
ThierryHenry said:
It's inevitable in the long run.
Click to expand...

Not for a long time though, unfortunately. As much as their power and genuine influence has largely diminished, the whole monarchy aspect of the UK is still firmly ingrained in things like the national anthem etc. Their power will continue to wane, but they won't actually be abolished for a good while.
 
Hopefully Charles ends up being such a power hungry loon that he speeds up the process a few centuries.
 
I'd much sooner our constitutional monarchy than some EU president or yet another failing layer to the political structure.
 
But parliament came back. Georges I-III were shite too.
 
Weren't the tories desperately distancing themselves from that guy only a few months ago when he had legal issues?
 
I'm not getting this. Why would they accept this guy back when they knew the issues? They've forced UKIP to come out with whatever they have on him and drag both parties down.
 
Green Party leader, Natalie Bennett, joins UKIP under the "pretty amateur" heading:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04y8xtp/sunday-politics-london-25012015
Click to expand...

"Go to our website." "Google Green Party." How the hell did they contrive to get an MP elected to Westminster?

From a personal PoV i think that i may have erred in recent ballots; having a regard for the environment or a few of the Greens' social policies, isn't enough of a justification to use them as a protest vote.


As for other potentially naive beliefs, Nicola Sturgeon's views on Trident would appear to fal into that category. The SNP's proposals for land reform may also be similarly ill-conceived, although i am not myself sufficiently well informed to commit to such a statement.

Sturgeon: Scrapping Trident is 'absolute red line' for coalition with Labour.

Does she not foresee the MoD making a strong case for the bulk of any savings? Quite understandably so too.

This business of SNP MPs voting on English health and education matters however, that i would look upon with greater cynicism. One can't but suspect them of being intentionally provoking. lol
 
Last edited:
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
"Go to our website." "Google Green Party." How the hell did they contrive to get an MP elected to Westminster?
Click to expand...
Brighton likes being different and Lucas is good with the media.

Shame she won't be doing the debates. Never thought Bennet comes across that well.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Brighton likes being different and Lucas is good with the media.

Shame she won't be doing the debates. Never thought Bennet comes across that well.
Click to expand...
Lucas suggested on This Week last thursday that if they take part in two debates, there's the potential for them doing one each. Whether Bennett agrees with that I don't know (and I agree with your take on her).
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Brighton likes being different and Lucas is good with the media.

Shame she won't be doing the debates. Never thought Bennet comes across that well.
Click to expand...

The policies appear to be barely costed at present, or entirely contradictory in the case of Defence..


Do you think we'll see any change to the cast of moderators for these debates?

During 2010 they were: Alastair Stewart, Adam Bolton, and David Dimbleby.
 
Last edited:
Ubik said:
Lucas suggested on This Week last thursday that if they take part in two debates, there's the potential for them doing one each. Whether Bennett agrees with that I don't know (and I agree with your take on her).
Click to expand...
Bennet said today she'd be doing both.
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
The policies appear to be barely costed at present, or contradictory in the case of Defence. Neil can make most politicians squirm it must be admitted.


Do you think we'll see any change to the cast of moderators for these debates?

During 2010 they were: Alastair Stewart, Adam Bolton, and David Dimbleby.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't have a clue about Sky or ITV, to be honest, but I'd think David Dimbleby is a given.

Channel Four has one this time, doesn't it? Jon Snow? I think they've got Paxman doing their election coverage, so you never know...
 
Just a quick question regarding Mr Bashir, is he a racist for still wanting to restrict immigration and defecting because he believes that is more achievable with the conservatives? Or is he in the clear of being tarred with that brush now he has left UKIP? Or was he never tarred with that brush in the first place because of his race/ethnicity and background?
 
I don't think he was ever tarred with any brush, regarding his politics. No one had heard of him until claims he'd been up to no good.

I certainly don't think anyone sees being in the Conservative party as a sign you aren't racist though.
 
I wouldn't say no-one had ever heard of him as he is quite a good politician who speaks some sense. If you don't pay attention to UKIP apart from what the papers put out then you might not have heard of him until this scenario. With regards to your last point, of course not but just checking that with his views he is now relieved of the burden of daring to want to restrict immigration and being in UKIP, even though he believes his goals can be better accommodated with a more respectable party, in terms of some.
 
Bit of a PR blow to Ukip, losing their only ethic minority MEP.
 
MajorTom said:
I wouldn't say no-one had ever heard of him as he is quite a good politician who speaks some sense. If you don't pay attention to UKIP apart from what the papers put out then you might not have heard of him until this scenario. With regards to your last point, of course not but just checking that with his views he is now relieved of the burden of daring to want to restrict immigration and being in UKIP, even though he believes his goals can be better accommodated with a more respectable party, in terms of some.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much everyone with every party, though. Very few people can be arsed to do their own research in to a party.

I'd only seen him a couple of times, before the allegations, I think. Certainly wasn't someone that UKIP deemed high up on their list of ambassadors for the party, apart from when they wanted him to say "We're not racist, I'm Indian, I should know". I don't really see how he's any loss, really. Tories are pillocks for wanting him, at present.
 
The broader narrative over the past week is what i would see as the more damaging for UKIP. These accusations of amateurism were preceded by the departure of the policy chief don't forget, instead of an

The transition from glorified pressure groups into professional and coherent organisations requires a wide base of competent leadership, something you might question either UKIP or the Greens of having at this point.

Son on the one hand we've got established parties who are losing the faith of their core vote, and on the other a pair of young bucks making their way in the metropolis for the first time, or nearly so.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
The broader narrative over the past week is what i would see as the more damaging for UKIP. These accusations of amateurism were preceded by the departure of the policy chief don't forget, instead of an

The transition from glorified pressure groups into professional and coherent organisations requires a wide base of competent leadership, something you might question either UKIP or the Greens of having at this point.
Click to expand...
Would've said the same of the SNP a few years back.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Would've said the same of the SNP a few years back.
Click to expand...

SNP actually have a half decent record of government up here in Scotland though. Neither UKIP nor the Greens have ever been anywhere near that.
 
MajorTom said:
Just a quick question regarding Mr Bashir, is he a racist for still wanting to restrict immigration and defecting because he believes that is more achievable with the conservatives? Or is he in the clear of being tarred with that brush now he has left UKIP? Or was he never tarred with that brush in the first place because of his race/ethnicity and background?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I buy into the idea of "restricting immigration is racist" being even close to a widely held belief. Labour's policy is "no unskilled immigration from outside the EU" if I'm not mistaken. What makes people think UKIP are racist is their candidates saying questionable things
 
soap said:
I'm not sure I buy into the idea of "restricting immigration is racist" being even close to a widely held belief. Labour's policy is "no unskilled immigration from outside the EU" if I'm not mistaken. What makes people think UKIP are racist is their candidates saying questionable things
Click to expand...

Agreed. Most sane parties recognise there has to be restrictions on immigration. No sane party leader fails to make an event, and then blames immigration because there was too much traffic.
 
Cheesy said:
Agreed. Most sane parties recognise there has to be restrictions on immigration. No sane party leader fails to make an event, and then blames immigration because there was too much traffic.
Click to expand...
I believe Farage when he said he was joking, but it still shows how his brain is obsessively wired to the issue.
 
Jippy said:
I believe Farage when he said he was joking, but it still shows how his brain is obsessively wired to the issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I still felt like there was almost a slight bit of believed truth in his statement. Besides, he's hardly the only one.
 
soap said:
I'm not sure I buy into the idea of "restricting immigration is racist" being even close to a widely held belief. Labour's policy is "no unskilled immigration from outside the EU" if I'm not mistaken. What makes people think UKIP are racist is their candidates saying questionable things
Click to expand...

They certainly get beat with that stick time after time because their immigration policy is more aggressive than everyone else's by some margin. Certainly in my eyes as a big fan of the NHS it is more than just in that aspect and also in the aspect of the criteria that will needed to be matched to be able to immigrate to this country in terms of skill-set is more than justified.

Some of the members of UKIP, and it is a very small section of them have made some unjust comments but have been fired without hesitation and their vetting policy is getting stronger in that regard but on a few occasions people have slipped the net. This is just the beginning of UKIP, a vast amount of seats will be won in this election and from 2020 onwards they will be a major threat. By that point in time 2 or 3 members might have already left the EU if projections look to continue and we will not be far behind at that point in time.
 
MajorTom said:
They certainly get beat with that stick time after time because their immigration policy is more aggressive than everyone else's by some margin. Certainly in my eyes as a big fan of the NHS it is more than just in that aspect and also in the aspect of the criteria that will needed to be matched to be able to immigrate to this country in terms of skill-set is more than justified.

Some of the members of UKIP, and it is a very small section of them have made some unjust comments but have been fired without hesitation and their vetting policy is getting stronger in that regard but on a few occasions people have slipped the net. This is just the beginning of UKIP, a vast amount of seats will be won in this election and from 2020 onwards they will be a major threat. By that point in time 2 or 3 members might have already left the EU if projections look to continue and we will not be far behind at that point in time.
Click to expand...
What do you consider vast, out of interest?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.