Why the Tories have lost the Election.
Posted by: Tarquin Maynard - Portly on 29 March 2010
1. "Look at him, he's RUBBISH" is not good enough a critique. "Trust us, we'll be OK" is not exactly a powerful or convincing message.
2. Not raising NICs sounds good, until you recall that they do not have any coherant strategy to raise the monies elsewhere. "Further efficiency savings"? That means not giving the lowest paid 2/3rds of Civil Servants a payrise - which not only penalises the (already low paid) lower grades, it by implication feathers the nest of the higher earners.
3. "We'll re-negotiate cotracts": and get sued for Breach of Contract if the result reduces the profit margins of the counterparty.
4. Increase Inheritance Tax thresholds so that c.1000 can benefit is just looking after the old boy network. Most people here, I strongly suspect, have their house as their Nil Rate Band (£325k. )
5. Cameron sounds like an overexcited school boy, and is rapidly losing credibility. His constant habit of calling for the most obvious solution to any problem and either calling Labour "copycats" or "indecisive" is beneath even the 4t Form Debating Society, let alone a man who wants to lead the UK.
6. Nobody seriously believed that Cameron welcomed the recent announcement of the domicility of his most important donor. He did it to avoid the embarrasment of an FoI disclosure. Lord Paul has been an acknowledged non Dom for many years. Its always been known.
7. The state of the economy, and the Government debt, has been caused by greedy banks, not Gordon Brown. The supposed alternative implicit in the Tory polemic is that they'd have let the UK banking system collapse. This would have been economic disaster on a cliched but unprecedented scale.
The Tories are not good enough.
Posted on: 06 May 2010 by Guido Fawkes
I guess the biggest question facing the country after this election has to be was Jeremy Vine as good as Peter Snow on the Swingometer.
Still one good thing is that the country's future prosperity is guaranteed and Britain will be great again - so everyone's a winner. Has anybody thought about what they'll spend their money on when the promised tax cuts arrive. The future's so bright I gotta wear shades.
Great coverage BTW - I especially like re-counts; it adds to the drama of it all.
As they can't decide who should be the next prime-minister, why not just have a phone-in vote with the winner announced on Sunday?
Posted on: 06 May 2010 by SC
quote:
Originally posted by ROTF:
As they can't decide who should be the next prime-minister, why not just have a phone-in vote with the winner announced on Sunday?
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by Mike-B
Any one notice ITV got the results on screen faster than BEEB
Not that I watched for to long, Alistair Steward makes me cringe.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by Eloise
Okay - so a question to debate...
If the results end up as currently predicted, and Labor and Liberal Democrats form a coalition, can they claim some form of legitimacy because combined they have taked over 50% of the popular vote, especially considering for the last 5 years the Conservatives keep moaning that Labor didn't have the popular vote even though they were in power.
Eloise
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by Jonathan Gorse
Watching this now I have to say I am a firm believer that we desperately need proportional representation in order to better reflect the views of the people in Parliament.
I simply cannot comprehend why Clegg wouldn't use his poition now to obtain it - it would benefit the country and it may be his only chance to get it.
Jonathan
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by MilesSmiles
quote:
Originally posted by Eloise:
Okay - so a question to debate...
If the results end up as currently predicted, and Labor and Liberal Democrats form a coalition, can they claim some form of legitimacy because combined they have taked over 50% of the popular vote, especially considering for the last 5 years the Conservatives keep moaning that Labor didn't have the popular vote even though they were in power.
Eloise
With Lib/Lab having lost close to a 100 seats and the Conservatives won as much, doesn't really seem viable to me.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by shoot6x7
We have a hung parliament (we call it a minority government) here in Canada and it doesn't work very well at all.
The PM uses every trick in the book to make him as powerful as a Majority leader. He has prorogued Parliament twice to keep power and avoid issues (Afghan detainee torture in front of committee this year, last year the four opposition parties threatened to form a coalition to give them a majority). But I hope HM Queen won't be as pliable as our Governor General (supposed Queen's representative in Canada).
Nothing is getting done. The public doesn't want another election so every contentious issue is made a vote of confidence in the government. If the opposition vote against the issue, the Conservatives turn to the public and say that Liberal party wants an election.
It makes me sick, but until one of the parties gets a clear majority were stuck. Interestingly enough, prior to the Conservatives winning, the Liberal party were in power for 11 years.
Another issue that bugs me, the PMO (Prime Ministers Office) is acting like the White House. So basically members of Parliament have no power, they are sheep to be directed by the PM when it comes to voting. Any decention is responded to by expulsion from the party.
He's also stacking the Senate (your equivalent to the House of Lords) with Conservatives. And he's the one wanting to make the Senate seats electable.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by SC
Just watched the Brown statement:
Jesus, the b&*!@*$* is going to try and hang on.....
Unelected as party leader, unelected as Prime-minister and now with the smallest percentage vote since Michael Foot and he is still puffing his chest out.....
Can't we just shoot him, like the good old days...?!
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by MilesSmiles
quote:
Originally posted by shoot6x7:
The PM uses every trick in the book to make him as powerful as a Majority leader.
Having just listened to Mr. Brown that sounds familiar although in his case it looks more like desperately hanging on for a few more days to No.10 after just having delivered one of the worst results for Labour ever.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by living in lancs yearning for yorks
What, Gordon Brown admit he's wrong and should go? As if!
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by rich46
tories have had 12 years to put the party right, and they have not proved to us they are fit for purpose
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by OscillateWildly
quote:
Originally posted by Eloise:
Okay - so a question to debate...
If the results end up as currently predicted, and Labor and Liberal Democrats form a coalition, can they claim some form of legitimacy because combined they have taked over 50% of the popular vote, especially considering for the last 5 years the Conservatives keep moaning that Labor didn't have the popular vote even though they were in power.
Eloise
Eloise,
No, they didn't vote for a Lab/Lib pact.
Mike-B,
quote:
Any one notice ITV got the results on screen faster than BEEB
Not that I watched for to long, Alistair Steward makes me cringe.
Then I hope you didn't see Alastair Stewart and Ed Balls.
The dung is going to hit the fan re cuts, let Labour and the Liberal Democrats have it; round two within a year. Alternatively, call for another election to be held at the earliest.
Cheers,
OW
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by BigH47
Cameron's statement reminds me of the Spitting Image sketch about the Liberals and the other party merger. We'll take something from our party name ie Conservative and something form your party name ie Party.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by OscillateWildly
quote:
Originally posted by BigH47:
Cameron's statement reminds me of the Spitting Image sketch about the Liberals and the other party merger. We'll take something from our party name ie Conservative and something form your party name ie Party.
Smiley thing.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by living in lancs yearning for yorks
quote:
Originally posted by rich46:
tories have had 12 years to put the party right, and they have not proved to us they are fit for purpose
Labour have had 13 years to put the country right, and they have not proved to us they are fit for purpose
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by Ponty
The answer to the question is simple and falls into two categories.
1. The benefits system
2. The unsustainably inflated public sector
Just look at the results in Scotland. Vote Tory? It's like turkeys voting for Christmas.
Best, Ponty
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by David Scott
Ponty,
Public sector employment in Scotland is about 22%. The UK figure is about 20. Unemployment in Scotland is lower than the UK national rate and even the hotspots aren't as bad as several of the English regions. I think you might need to find another explanation for the Tories dismal standing there.
I knew many people in Scotland who were strongly opposed to the poll tax even though it saved them money, and I think this is pretty typical. I think a sense of fairness and community is very strong there. Perhaps it's because it's a much smaller country.
I'm not being sentimental - there's a LOT of religious intolerance and other crap goes on as well, but it genuinely is a different country with different values and this is reflected in its voting patterns. It's not just self interest.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by David Scott
quote:
Regarding the level; what does GBP one million buy in the metropolis? What if you have lived there for a decade, let alone two or three?
Am I the only one who thinks this is really funny? Sorry OW.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by JamieWednesday
I think the voting map is very interesting - pretty much a north/south divide. By and large, the more heavily state/tax payer subsidised regions voted for the incumbent Government. Those regions that pay the majority of taxes to fund those subsidies voted against it. Is this stating 'The Bleeding Obvious'
Most of England is Blue, much of the North is Red. With scatterings of orange of various hues around the edges.
Now: Since the majority UK population lives in England and the majority of England voted blue, does that mean that PR wise the Tories won that way as well? Or doesn't it work like that? And it follows: Shouldn't all the Oranges get together and run Cornwall, Wales and the Highlands, basically all The Celts in one room. And Labour can have The Wirral, the North East, part of The Borders and East & North London (which is full of Northerners anyway
)
Simples.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by DaveBk
Nicely put James - agreed!
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by John Bailey
quote:
Originally posted by David Scott?:
I knew many people in Scotland who were strongly opposed to the poll tax even though it saved them money, and I think this is pretty typical. I think a sense of fairness and community is very strong there. Perhaps it's because it's a much smaller country.
I'm not being sentimental - there's a LOT of religious intolerance and other crap goes on as well, but it genuinely is a different country with different values and this is reflected in its voting patterns. It's not just self interest.
Well put and my thoughts/experience exactly.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by JWM
quote:
Originally posted by Mick Parry:
...lose this election. That will spell the end for Cameron and then they can get a true blue back at the helm. Cameron is too far to the left for comfort. He is hated by the rank and file...
Mick
I imagine by 'true blue' you mean someone in the mould of Mrs T?
Dav Cam may be too far to the left for [your] comfort and hated by the rank and file...
But he somehow managed to achieve an additional 97 seats, the highest Tory increase in seats since 1931.
Mrs T, in her famous/infamous election victory of 1979, achieved a mere 62 additional seats.
If Cam had had the same starting point as Mrs T in '79, there would be a massive Conservative majority. But as it is, because of the perilous starting point resulting from the Thatcher-legacy electoral failure, they can barely scrape a coalition government.
Nevertheless, Cam acheived 1/2 as many again additional seats as Mrs T in '79.
I could have contemplated voting for Cam, but never for the witch of Finchley. I saw too much of the horror she visited upon much of the industrial north of this Country, the effect of which is stil with us.
Posted on: 07 May 2010 by gone
quote:
Originally posted by JamieWednesday:
Now: Since the majority UK population lives in England and the majority of England voted blue, does that mean that PR wise the Tories won that way as well?
Hey, does that mean we get an English parliament by default?
Oh, and if the Scots keep bleating about the North Sea oil, maybe we can generously offer to give them the stuff they just found in the Falklands. Then we wouldn't need a nuclear deterrent either.
Blimey, politics made simplez
All in jest. I think
Posted on: 08 May 2010 by Salmon Dave
quote:
Originally posted by BigH47:
Cameron's statement reminds me of the Spitting Image sketch about the Liberals and the other party merger. We'll take something from our party name ie Conservative and something form your party name ie Party.
Spot on.
Posted on: 08 May 2010 by John Bailey
quote:
Originally posted by JWM:
I saw too much of the horror she visited upon much of the industrial north of this Country, the effect of which is stil with us.
Although some of the reforms brought about by the Thatcher years were [in my view] necessary, I quite agree - my recollection of growing up in the North East was one of factories closing, mass unemployment, waste ground and dereliction, decrepit hospitals and schools, teachers on strike, communities struggling with the closure of the pit, champagne flowing in the City, people in the south seemingly doing OK despite all of this...
