That UK Election Thing

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

 

Hate it when the guy on the news says "Parliament has been dissolved" and you wait for him to say "..... in acid" but he doesn't.

 

Seen as it's the day of dissolution I'm going to come out and say it... I prefered it when the PM had control over when to call and election, it meant elections were generally more frequent (something I prefer as a keen political watcher) and there was a lot more suspense involved in government difficulties, the fact I haven't experienced a snap election yet ( the last being 1974) probably has something to do with it.

 

At this rate 2001 will go down as the last non-multiple of five election.

 

Been sitting on that controversial nukeshell for a while have you?

 

What I'm saying is........... erm, yeah no shit. It was an absolute stitch up cause they wanted to squash the people's hope of the coalition going down in flames. And the MPs like it just cause anything that gives them an extra sense of 'job' security is good to them.

 

 

 

 

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

That might be hyperbole.

 

The 1992 election was very close. The BBC were planning to go to broadcast with a picture of Neil Kinnock to start with but at the last minute they changed it for a split screen of both him and John Major.

 

The two elections of 1974 are of course very close and the 2010 election was the closest of them all resulting in the first formal coalition for over 70 years.

 

The question is why is this election close we have had five horrible years where it has become evident that we are not "All in it together". My only conclusion is that the Conservatives have created an illusion that it is all the Lib Dems fault and it will all be great tomorrow.

 

Just a note on Cameron and the Third Term issue. What you have to remember about Cameron, for all his faults and insincerity he is as nice as the party gets. If you take a look over the possibly replacements bastards to a man (including Theresa May). Cameron is there because his party need him, not because the want him.

 

 

 

Cameron isn't A. Nice or B. a Tory...........

 

Not reassuring to know we have such ignorant people running the civil service.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218]

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

AFAIK you are not from across the pond so stop using shitty Yank expressions.

[Deathray 2,940]

For all those of you who were asleep during any election ever including by-elections or have been living in caves all your lives the ever hilarious site newsbeat has been very kind to you wee bairns and published the most dumbed down election jargon buster you'll ever find

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/32114560

[themaninblack 2,112]

 

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

 

AFAIK you are not from across the pond so stop using shitty Yank expressions.

He's been doing that from the get-go, LFN...

[Deathray 2,940]

 

 

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

AFAIK you are not from across the pond so stop using shitty Yank expressions.

He's been doing that from the get-go, LFN...

 

 

You really knocked the ball out the park with that joke tmib!!

[themaninblack 2,112]

 

 

 

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

AFAIK you are not from across the pond so stop using shitty Yank expressions.

He's been doing that from the get-go, LFN...

 

 

You really knocked the ball out the park with that joke tmib!!

 

 

I stepped up to the plate, didn't I?

[Magere Hein 1,400]

 

 

 

 

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

AFAIK you are not from across the pond so stop using shitty Yank expressions.

 

He's been doing that from the get-go, LFN...

 

You really knocked the ball out the park with that joke tmib!!

 

I stepped up to the plate, didn't I?

 

All gung-ho, I see.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,218]

Wankers!!

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

 

 

Hate it when the guy on the news says "Parliament has been dissolved" and you wait for him to say "..... in acid" but he doesn't.

 

Seen as it's the day of dissolution I'm going to come out and say it... I prefered it when the PM had control over when to call and election, it meant elections were generally more frequent (something I prefer as a keen political watcher) and there was a lot more suspense involved in government difficulties, the fact I haven't experienced a snap election yet ( the last being 1974) probably has something to do with it.

 

At this rate 2001 will go down as the last non-multiple of five election.

 

Been sitting on that controversial nukeshell for a while have you?

 

What I'm saying is........... erm, yeah no shit. It was an absolute stitch up cause they wanted to squash the people's hope of the coalition going down in flames. And the MPs like it just cause anything that gives them an extra sense of 'job' security is good to them.

 

 

 

 

Cameron has just visited the queen to inform her parliament has been dissolved, first time that she's not been required to dissolve it herself - reckon she's butthurt.

 

This is quite likely to be the closest elections in several hundred years.

That might be hyperbole.

 

The 1992 election was very close. The BBC were planning to go to broadcast with a picture of Neil Kinnock to start with but at the last minute they changed it for a split screen of both him and John Major.

 

The two elections of 1974 are of course very close and the 2010 election was the closest of them all resulting in the first formal coalition for over 70 years.

 

The question is why is this election close we have had five horrible years where it has become evident that we are not "All in it together". My only conclusion is that the Conservatives have created an illusion that it is all the Lib Dems fault and it will all be great tomorrow.

 

Just a note on Cameron and the Third Term issue. What you have to remember about Cameron, for all his faults and insincerity he is as nice as the party gets. If you take a look over the possibly replacements bastards to a man (including Theresa May). Cameron is there because his party need him, not because the want him.

 

 

 

Cameron isn't A. Nice or B. a Tory...........

 

Not reassuring to know we have such ignorant people running the civil service.

 

 

I made no claim for Cameron being nice, just nicer then the alternatives. He is leader of the Conservative party and therefore the easiest way to describe his is as a Tory unless I opt for the more satisfying Twat.

 

And as I have pointed out before I am not a civil servant.

 

However I am normally civil (except when discussing Tories)

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

Polling from today:

 

LAB 276 CON 274 SNP 47 LD 28 DUP 8 SF 5 SDLP 3 PC 3 UKIP 2 GRN 1 OTH 3

 

Because of the SF prediction the 326 majority requirement can be reduced to 324. On this analysis Labour + SNP = 323

 

Apparently it has been suggested that if there is not a workable coalition the Queen might decline to deliver the speech if it is likely to be voted down. This would then fall to the leader of the house of lords and it would be a low key ceremony.

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

It takes a truly nasty person to act nice while being nasty........ or summat.

And by introducing such colossal cuts (especially to stuff like legal aid) while hiding behind his call me Dave, "look at my Blairy, oh-so-care-y hand gestures" act, he has legitimised a "nastiness" that none of us would have thought was coming in 2009. So..... yeah. I don't believe people would be less comfortable with other Tories as leader.

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

It takes a truly nasty person to act nice while being nasty........ or summat.

And by introducing such colossal cuts (especially to stuff like legal aid) while hiding behind his call me Dave, "look at my Blairy, oh-so-care-y hand gestures" act, he has legitimised a "nastiness" that none of us would have thought was coming in 2009. So..... yeah. I don't believe people would be less comfortable with other Tories as leader.

 

David Cameron is not liked by the right of his party and they would like someone who appears to be a lot like them but Cameron has been able to say to them "Sorry not me the Lib Dems insist on it".

 

He has effectively been running two coalitions the one with the Lib Dems and one with the two wings of the Tory party.

[msc 18,477]

Most of these seat projections aren't taking in the swing from Tory to Labour, I think.

 

And I'd rather have my Tory leader to be someone like Jacob Rees-Mogg. You know where you stand with his brand of anachronistic insane Toryism. None of this Tony Blair Auton Assembly Line David Cameronites.

[Guest Guest]

If David Cameron gets back in as PM he'll be the first British PM in history to have failed to get a majority in parliament twice running.That makes him officially the biggest failure ever as PM surely !

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

If David Cameron gets back in as PM he'll be the first British PM in history to have failed to get a majority in parliament twice running.That makes him officially the biggest failure ever as PM surely !

No, shurely the biggest loser PMs are those who lose a vote of no confidence. Or "win" one if you like.

[Deathray 2,940]

 

 

If David Cameron gets back in as PM he'll be the first British PM in history to have failed to get a majority in parliament twice running.That makes him officially the biggest failure ever as PM surely !

No, shurely the biggest loser PMs are those who lose a vote of no confidence. Or "win" one if you like.

Which PMs have actually lost a vote of confidence in the modern era?

 

Also on the whole speech thing it's the queens duty to read, refusing to do so would be interfering as it could be seen as expecting the speech to fail.

[msc 18,477]

 

 

If David Cameron gets back in as PM he'll be the first British PM in history to have failed to get a majority in parliament twice running.That makes him officially the biggest failure ever as PM surely !

No, shurely the biggest loser PMs are those who lose a vote of no confidence. Or "win" one if you like.

Which PMs have actually lost a vote of confidence in the modern era?

 

Also on the whole speech thing it's the queens duty to read, refusing to do so would be interfering as it could be seen as expecting the speech to fail.

 

 

Callaghan in 1979.

 

That, and issues in 1924 involving Baldwin and MacDonald, are the only ones since Victoria.

 

Earl Rosebery "technically" lost one in 1895, but in actuality, he lost a minor vote, and was so annoyed he retconned it into having been a vote of no confidence, and so resigned. That was more looking for an excuse though.

 

They are, as you can image, quite rare.

[themaninblack 2,112]

If David Cameron gets back in as PM he'll be the first British PM in history to have failed to get a majority in parliament twice running.That makes him officially the biggest failure ever as PM surely !

 

Not if he gets back for another full term. 10 years without a majority. Lucky bugger. That's politics. John Major was seen as a failure, yet he was 6+ years PM and got the largest vote ever in 1992 with 14 million votes. More than Thatcher, more than Atlee, more than Blair, more than Churchill.

[Deathray 2,940]

 

If David Cameron gets back in as PM he'll be the first British PM in history to have failed to get a majority in parliament twice running.That makes him officially the biggest failure ever as PM surely !

 

Not if he gets back for another full term. 10 years without a majority. Lucky bugger. That's politics. John Major was seen as a failure, yet he was 6+ years PM and got the largest vote ever in 1992 with 14 million votes. More than Thatcher, more than Atlee, more than Blair, more than Churchill.

 

 

Think it would be much fairer to compare largest vote on percentage terms (since the war for ease) given the massive fluctuations in turnout and population:

 

Eden 1955 - 49.8%

MacMillan 1959 - 49.6%

Wilson 1966 48.0%

Churchill 1951 - 48.0%

Attlee 1945 - 47.7%

Heath 1970 46.4%

Attllee 1950 - 46.1%

Wilson 1964 44.1%

Thatcher 1979 43.9%

Blair 1997 43.2%

Thatcher 1983 42.4%

Thatcher 1987 42.2%

Major 1992 41.9%

Blair 2001 40.7%

Wilson Oct 1974 39.2%

Heath Feb 1974 - 37.9% (or Wilson Feb 1974 37.2% if we're only including PMs)

Cameron 2010 36.1%

Blair 2005 35.2%

 

The trend is pretty clear, our electoral choices have massively diversified with 1974, 1983, 1987, 2005 and 2010 elections being clear indicators of this. For a government in our country to have any legitimacy at all we need a reform in voting system otherwise were stuck in this situation where more than 50% of the country can vote for a left-leaning party but the Tories get in (1987, 1983). Problem is with the electoral system being designed in a way that the two parties who would never push through that reform, or be interested in convincing people of why that reform is necessary, are going to eternally govern us. My personal suggestion would be for all parties that support voting reform to start hammering the benefits to people now and stand unity candidates in 2020.

[YoungWillz 21,050]

Got my polling card today, so I'm still registered, however there seems to have been a drop in those registered overall in my part of the Kingdom. Hmmm. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32168635

 

Edit: watching the debate tonight, so could any possible deceasers hold off until later. Ty.

[Deathray 2,940]

Got my polling card today, so I'm still registered, however there seems to have been a drop in those registered overall in my part of the Kingdom. Hmmm. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32168635

 

Edit: watching the debate tonight, so could any possible deceasers hold off until later. Ty.

 

Will also be watching the debate. Personally would have preferred a separate debate for each country, as the SNP and Plaid have no relevance to me and similarly the Green Party of England and Wales have no relevance to Scottish voters.

[Paul Bearer 6,102]

 

Got my polling card today, so I'm still registered, however there seems to have been a drop in those registered overall in my part of the Kingdom. Hmmm. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32168635

 

Edit: watching the debate tonight, so could any possible deceasers hold off until later. Ty.

 

Will also be watching the debate. Personally would have preferred a separate debate for each country, as the SNP and Plaid have no relevance to me and similarly the Green Party of England and Wales have no relevance to Scottish voters.

But as members of parliament, they will have a big impact and relevance to the rest of the UK.

[Guest Guest]

I have my pop corn ready for the big debate. I'm expecting Nicola Sturgeon to make a big impression.By the end of the night a lot of English voters will want to vote for the SNP !

[the_engineer 1,415]

A guy at work was talking about the election today he seems to think Ed Milliband will be another Neil Kinnock .

 

I'm predicting another lib dem / conservative coalition , cons short by 10 to 12 lib dem will retain that amount of seats (they're actually people still dumb enough to vote for them) and the status quo will always be favourable to politicians.

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

A guy at work was talking about the election today he seems to think Ed Milliband will be another Neil Kinnock .

 

I'm predicting another lib dem / conservative coalition , cons short by 10 to 12 lib dem will retain that amount of seats (they're actually people still dumb enough to vote for them) and the status quo will always be favourable to politicians.

I think shit's too serious these days for it to be decided on a "We're alright!" moment. Then again, there are some incredibly thick people out there obviously. But IMO, to anyone who wouldn't vote for him because of it, it's already clear that he's a huge dork.

 

For those who are struggling as badly as me the choice comes down to do I believe Labour would do enough financially for me to forget about how pro that-frothing-at-the-mouth-religion-we're-not-allowed-to-criticise they are. Or do I think whatever "help" I would get would be worth it for that horrendous price. At the moment it's a major no and I don't believe that will change.

 

I've thought for a while, the same as you that Labour would somehow blow it and Cameron will be re-elected....... however don't forget, how many young'uns who've been having their brains pummeled since they were in nappies by the likes of Russell Howard and Mock the Week (and as of more recently, BuzzFeed), who weren't old enough to vote in 2010 but will be voting this time. And yes some of them will even be thick enough to vote Lib Dem.