Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
(, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | Popular
So I've missed the deadline for registering to vote in the Election through being an absent-minded prick. I downloaded the form, filled it in, signed it, dated it, put it in an envelope, put in by the door and promptly forgot about it for eight days. I'm now trying to find out if I'm on the Electoral Roll in the probably vain hope that I haven't failed miserably at democracy.
Needless to say, I feel like a right bell-end. Although, it has to be said, there's absolutely nobody who really represents my political viewpoint anymore.
What do you predict to see in the new Government? I strongly suspect it's going to be a highly ineffective coalition of Libs and Labour. I don't think anybody wants Brown again, the proletariat doesn't want to see the Tories get into power and nobody thinks the Lib Dems are capable of the job.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:44, 135 replies, latest was 16 years ago)
i.e. policies designed to try and paper over the cracks quickly and make the government look successful, whilst ignoring the deep seated social and economic issues that cause the original problems.
This is the fundamental flaw in democracy; the politicians have to be popular.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:48, Reply)
I hear a lot of kiddies plan to vote Liberal 'for a change of government' - mostly they have not voted before. If that is correct there could be a whole lot of New Votes about which will cock up any predictions.
Tories will always shaft you: Labour might not. It's that simple.
Edit: and buggar it, I am too busy to really get up on the soapbox today. So apologies for not being able to run with this thread.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:50, Reply)
Gordon Brown is not a decent man. He is a flesh-waste. And as for Tories always screwing you, what has Labour done to us in the last few years? Messed us up royally. When history is written it will not deal kindly with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:52, Reply)
The tories will never change, it isn't in their interest to do so. Thatcher screwed the country and no-one will ever put that right now.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:56, Reply)
but that is ridiculous. A vote for the Conservatives is a vote for Thatcher? By that reasoning we should never vote for Labour again- a vote for Labour is a vote for Tony Blair. The Tories generally fix economic problems, and I like their manifesto especially in education. Labour are fuckers through and through.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:59, Reply)
The underlying principles of modern conservatism have not changed in the way labour has (not for the better I might add). A vote for labour is not a vote for Blair, the same way as a vote for the libs is not a vote for Jeremy Thorpe. In my view the conservatives are the only party who cannot afford to change due to their vested interest in the financial status quo. The other parties can and will change.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:03, Reply)
like Labour that has financially fucked the economy needs to change? Damn right they do. Modern conservatism has changed. It cares about people more than Labour does. Individual people, not some mealy-mouthed socialism that Gordon Brown has wet dreams about and will never implement.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:06, Reply)
Just wait. The tories never reveal their true colours until they are in power. Then all bets are off and it's open trough time. The tories only care about individual people of the right type. The rest are tax fodder. To my mind labour are currently shite because they have forgotten their roots and what they are supposed to stand for.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:10, Reply)
You genuinely don't think the last few years have happened do you? Labour are shit, they've fucked the entire country up. What they've done is worse than Thatcher in most respects. Even setting the economy aside (which is not solely the bankers fault) let's look at their trackrecord in education, health, and most of all foreign policy. Iraq anyone?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:13, Reply)
Education - what I see locally are six school all with new buildings and fully staffed. And only one of them lost their playing fields in the last Tory rule luckily.
NHS - two massive shiny new hospitals for me to choose from.
Iraq - oh, wait, that was American foreign policy. Which we were tied into to pay back Maggie's Falklands fun. America has a rather rightist capitalist government if I recall.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:22, Reply)
Do you think that there has been a 100% increase in quality? this is a classic example of throwing money at a problem. Money borrowed by Labour that we will be paying back for the rest of our lives.
Labour have been shit even when they have borrowed more money than most people can egven imagine. What would have happened had they lived within their means? It doesn't bear thinking about.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:27, Reply)
This is what *I* see
Education - Massive amounts of money wasted on shiny new schools, falling standards of literacy, abdication of teacher power
NHS - Don't even bother telling me a shiny new hospital is worth it. I've spent six months in a hell-hole being absused and mistreated by overworked nurses. Or how about the millions spent on a non-working IT system, or the increase in administration, or the new PFIs?
Iraq - Oh wait Tony Blair couldn't lick George Bush's arse enough. He was Labour. Yeeeeah that was payback for the Falklands. No it was a weak man playing a bad hand badly
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:30, Reply)
That's what I see.
I had to use one of the new hospitals. Very efficient, and while there was a lot of 'management' about, and I did feel a bit like product, the job was done.
That's what I saw.
Iraq - we shouldn't be there. Blair got out as soon as he realised he was not going to come up smelling of roses. But I'm glad you agree it was American policy. Brown would never have got us in.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:40, Reply)
I've been to every type of school, and both my parents are teachers, and I can safely say that standards have dropped massively. Being a teacher is like being a social worker at the moment.
As for the hospitals on the surface they look good (sometimes) but I'm not merely basing my judgement on my own bad experience, but on other people I know who come out with what are pretty much horror stories. As NakedApe pointed out, it's simply not improved to the extent it should have with it's budget.
Iraq is just a fuck-up plain and simple, but it's Labour's fault for getting in there in the first place.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:45, Reply)
Hi. Sorry to but in - especially as I'm a foreigner and thus don't have a vote in the UK.
From my (limited) knowledge of the Falklands War, why would Iraq be pay-back for the Americans when it was Britain -v- Argentina, without American involvement?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:42, Reply)
They have absolutley no idea about real life. How can they know what's best for us.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:13, Reply)
Or rather any less so than any other politician. Take a look at Nick Clegg's background why don't you?
I think they've got a better handle on what is needed than Labour does
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:14, Reply)
believe it or not, conservatives are people as well, and are much the same sort of people as the other parties, with a sprinkling more toffs.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:15, Reply)
the Lib Dems have more toffs than the Conservatives in my university society
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:19, Reply)
the tosser who runs the Lib Dem society at Exeter Uni is on the Labour propaganda saying that as Lib Dems won't get in he's voting Labour to stop the Tories.
outrageous behaviour from anyone, let alone someone "involved" at university level.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:23, Reply)
students are generally pricks and I say that in the full knowledge that I am one myself
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:26, Reply)
www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/04/21/conservative-general-election-candidate-rates-average-family-home-at-1million-115875-22200124/
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:20, Reply)
also, I didn't say they could relate to the man on the street, just that they weren't really any different from any other politician
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:23, Reply)
However if you live in London, then million pound house are not that unusual, and the family living there may have been there for years riding the property boom. It doesn't mean they are exponetially richer then anyone else.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:24, Reply)
(a) notice the word 'claiming'
(b) the lack of actual statistics
(c) the lack of comparisons
(d) it's The Mirror
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:24, Reply)
So while the rest of the world was propping up their ailing heavy industry base and infrastructure against the day things would improve (and they have), Thatcher dismantled ours thoroughly and effectively. Way to go.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:05, Reply)
But nobody in the Eighties, either in this country or any others could tell what was going to happen in the future. Unlike other European countries at the time, we went for a purely financial economy. Yeah, that screwed most people at the time who didn't have or couldn't afford the education necessary to get into the financial sector and as a humanitarian decision, it was a shit one.
However, her aim was to fix the economy the quickest way she could. Which she did. The Unions, whilst a good idea in general, had grown too powerful and paralised the country by mobolising the workforce every single time something happened that they didn't like. Thatcher did what she thought she needed to do to get rid of them. Once they were gone, the economy started to recover.
I think the whole thing could have been avoided if power-hungry Union bosses hadn't subverted the unions to feed their own agendas, but that's the problem inherent in Socialism, people are naturally out for themselves.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:11, Reply)
Which, considering he worked down the mines during the 1980's is perhaps a bit strange. He thought the sun shone out of Thatcher's arse. Staunch Tory through and through (but by his own admission is unconvinced by Cameron).
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:42, Reply)
That you can't judge a voter by his party. I think Thatcher made some terrible decisions with awful implications for society on a humanist level, but saying that she wrecked the country isn't fair. Certainly you can't expect somebody like Thatcher to be too worried about the people when she's pursuing her goals.
She didn't wreck the country, but I think it's fair to say that when she fixed the country, she shafted society.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:56, Reply)
Labour didn't exactly have a great time in the 70's but I don't automatically rule them out because of this. i rule them out as they are a bunch of incompetent cunts now.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:00, Reply)
But we agree about Blair. He has moved on to lusher pastures and getting fat on it. History will probably record Blair as a continuation of Tory government and note the start of socialist work from Brown taking over.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:01, Reply)
the Tories generally take a line that favours the rich over the poor. That'll shaft you if you're the wrong side of the line, but their policies have had quantifiable benefits to the economy and they have reliably fixed problems the Labour party has caused. Labour have been in power three times within the last thirty or so years and each time there's been a significant recession. Each time the Tories were subsequently voted in, the economy improved.
I don't have any faith in Labour being capable of fixing the economic problems we currently have. The Tories have form in this area.
Incidentally, I don't like saying this. If I'm anything, I'm broadly old Labour in political leanings.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 12:55, Reply)
Wouldn't you query the motives of the 100 top companies' CEOs when they support Cameron? When Rose - who is/was GB's highest earning exec - attacks Brown don't you think it is entirely out of self interest?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:07, Reply)
Labour has tried to grow the economy by increasing the size of the state to an enormous percentage of overall GDP, but this approach is limited and consequently we are now burdened with an enormous bill to pay for it.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:12, Reply)
See: Bankers.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:15, Reply)
they did what they did after Labour relaxed the rules.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:13, Reply)
Apart from that slight blip in the mid 80's and later the 90's when unemployment shot up to record levels, traditional industry was royally fucked over and interest rates hit 15%, forcing thousands of homeowners to have their properties reposessed as they could no longer afford to pay their mortgages.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:11, Reply)
If you had investments or capital earning 0.1% that's what you would do. Of course, if you've got a mortgage on a shitty ex-council house higher interest rates hurt. Guess who the Tories listen to?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:15, Reply)
a massive interest rate rise would wipe me out. It's not always the lowest earners who get screwed.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:20, Reply)
But there's a balance between sensible interest rates and ones that are affecting ordinary people's quality of life to the point where they may have no roof over their heads.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:23, Reply)
So don't give a shit about interest rates.
I'm kidding, of course. Whilst it would be very nice for my savings to be returning a decent investment for me, current low rates are not impacting on my general quality of life. I could be a bit less skint at the end of the month, but the debt I am paying off just now is of my own making and I am doing without stuff in order to get it paid off as quickly as I can. On balance, I'd rather have this situation than one that sees ordinary people being squeezed left right and centre.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:40, Reply)
I almost was a few months back anyway.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:43, Reply)
I was pretty young at the time, so my memory's a bit vague. But didn't this coincide when industry and unions were dismantled? In a post higher up I've given my opinion on this, I think.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:40, Reply)
but it was still the result of Government policy decisions. Personally I'm of the opinion that this sort of thing is cyclical; for Brown to have claimed that there would be no more periods of boom and bust was utterly laughable, of course there fucking will be. It keeps bloody happening.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:02, Reply)
They might surprise us.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:03, Reply)
I genuinely don't think they have a clue what they'd be getting into
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:04, Reply)
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:15, Reply)
Unless you give something a go how the hell do you know it will fail?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:25, Reply)
everyone votes the independent candidate?
then what the hell happens?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:27, Reply)
is the biggest change in governmental policy in years, and one very much for the good.
People, with the right support framwork where necessary, must learn to stand on their own two feet, take responsibility for their lives and the lives of those around them and take pride in being a productive member of society.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:08, Reply)
absolutely this. Call it individualism if you want, but that is one thing the Tories are calling for that makes absolute sense, a reinvigoration of society and individual self-respect and responsibility
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:10, Reply)
At least - I hope he was.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:12, Reply)
give people back self-respect. I'm not one of those ghastly people who thinks welfare should be abolished (we know the type of person), or that we should all be happy little cogs (that's socialism for you) but I do think that one of the integral problems of the moment is the lack of motivation and drive in society, the belief that it is both possible and better to do nothing than to do something
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:16, Reply)
Socialism is not about abolishing welfare, you're thinking of Communism.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:18, Reply)
happy little cogs :) Have edited for better grammar
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:19, Reply)
That's a particular little bugbear of mine. As a borderline socialist, I do get tired of being compared to Stalin :D
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:26, Reply)
I'm simply suggesting that until people take responsibility for their lives and work towards enriching them themselves, we will constantly be propping up a society unwilling work for itself.
A housing estate with social issues will not get better with more policing, a youth centre, reach out programs and social workers unless the people there want to make better lives for themselves and are willing to put i the graft to effect that change. (this is an example)
"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:17, Reply)
But interest does not equal competence. There is a big difference between giving someone a voice and forcing them to take responsibility for something when they only have a passing knowledge or experience. The point of a government/administration is to provide those services that are needed by the community, but that require experience or resources that individual members of the community don't have. Abdicating from that obligation, particularly when you're only doing so to a) save the government money and b) woo the electorate by making them feel powerful, is irresponsible in the extreme. Or so I reckon, anyway.
Besides, those who are competent and committed already have the chance to get involved with their community, as school governers or local councillors for example. It's already nigh-on impossible to get people to care about local council elections. That problem's not going to be solved by letting a bunch of busybodies run your local school.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:08, Reply)
Yoyo poitics is no good for anyone. Give me a benevolent dictatorship any day.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:14, Reply)
You and I are actually quite similar in outlook.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:17, Reply)
And my granny was a suffragette (albeit towards the end of the movement). One of the earliest books I remember reading was the Ragged Trousered Philanthropists. This may have coloured my views somewhat.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:27, Reply)
are die-hard southern Tories. This may have coloured mine, slightly :)
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:31, Reply)
aren't of any particular political affiliation but discussion was encouraged and participated in as long as we could provide valid points. I believe my father may have voted Labour once, but I would guess mostly Tory. As a result my families views range from me (Tory centre-right,) my sister (slightly socialist) and my brother (further right than me but doesn't bother to vote)
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:36, Reply)
I read that entirely wrong. In that I thought you were anticipating the reply 'but they're all cunts' in answer to your family thinking the same as you
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:55, Reply)
Conservative. "Because they know how to rule us properly."
I despair, I really do.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:37, Reply)
Then sees the smiley. It's just so typical of people who think that their responsibility ends with voting a government in.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:46, Reply)
And Jade Goody.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:26, Reply)
Same as the old boss.
However, where The Who and I part company is that I am certain the majority of people WILL get fooled again. And again. And again...
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:29, Reply)
Lets be honest most people you meet are far to stupid to have any idea about what they might be voting for anyway.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:34, Reply)
and where the Tories' run things for yourself plans fall down
the reason people don't do things for themselves is because they are far too fucking stupid.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:36, Reply)
I do. Mostly. Sometimes. Occasionally. OK I'm lying.
But I think we can make a step towards giving people the tools to help themselves, and trusting that in a generation we'll have made a step forward
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:38, Reply)
They need to have some pride in themselves and their community and they need to realise that the state is there to support you not carry you.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:40, Reply)
I've ceased to be amazed by the depths of stupidity that your average person can plumb.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:40, Reply)
I really wish I could be young and hopeful again instead of generally world weary and cynical.
It was a lovely time of my life.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:41, Reply)
but if I take the world as it probably is, then it would paralyse me completely into inactivity. I can only care and hope about things if I believe there is the possibility of making something better
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:49, Reply)
I was cynical at a yojng age. This is going to be the first time I've ever voted. I'm 29.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:06, Reply)
they were only going to "get on [their] knees and pray we don't get fooled again," so perhaps they just had a little more optimistic faith in the populace than the rest of us.
Still, if things go my way, and my one vote helps to get Brown out of power and also stop the Tories winning a convincing majority, I might call that a bargain - the best I ever had.
*awaits spanging*
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:59, Reply)
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:46, Reply)
There would be no mooslims or terrororialists if all diplomatic relations were built on playing with balls of string.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:58, Reply)
What would we fill our dear ladies heads with then?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:49, Reply)
It's what marks us out from the the lower life forms. (You know who I mean.)
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:53, Reply)
I am on the Electoral Roll. So it's forging ahead with the voting for whoever's least unrepresentative of my politics time!
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:49, Reply)
In my estimation probably the same or worse.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:50, Reply)
resulting in the need to borrow huge sums of money during our prosperous years and leaving us dangerously exposed to the global recession.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:53, Reply)
Vote for us, we promise we'll try to not fuck it up as much as the other bunch would. And if we do, vote for us again so we can try to sort it out.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:56, Reply)
and at least their chancellor wouldn't have looked like he was out of Thunderbirds
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 13:54, Reply)
the Tories would not have increased spending as much, and they are now saying they will cut it radically, the only thing that stopped the country completely imploding was government spending, and that needs to be cut and teh debt paid off, but not as quickly as the Tories say or we will be straight back into recession. The tories have said they won't cunt the NHS, or education, or public services. But they are lying.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:06, Reply)
I think we need somebody to stop talking in politics and present his case clearly. Too many politicians are dressing up what they say in order to present it in a positive, popularist way.
If somebody cam along and said "right, we're fucked. We owe more money than we make and we're going to have to make cuts to fix it. This is what we need to do, this is what we have the money to do, this is what we'd like to do if we have the chance and here's a list of what's currently impossible. We need to get the money from somewhere and we're going to have to cut back on these things for this long."
I'd vote for him, would you?
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:01, Reply)
a lot of people wouldn't. That's why David Cameron is being circumspect about cuts (though it's the only way forward) the average person can't bear the thought and would rather a comforting lie
Edit: which reminds me. I saw a Unite poster with a picture of a massive axe on it saying 'this is what the Tories will do if they come to power.' Of course they will you massive twats. It's what needs to be done!
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:02, Reply)
as the tories are going to do it, then the economy will go straight back into recession.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:07, Reply)
I think the cuts that they want are appropriate for the time and place though there are some things that could be fixed
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:09, Reply)
that would not exist any more without the government spending over the last few years. Yes we need cuts, but I think tax rises have their part to play too.
The problem is the speed of the cuts, we are barely out of the recession and if jobs are cut (which they will be in the tories plans) then it's going to go straight back in.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:13, Reply)
they have actually set out what cuts need to be made, rather than talking about "efficiency savings" which Cameron is on record as saying is "just a trick" and which Labour should have dealt with already.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:05, Reply)
it sounds like they've thought through their policies which makes them sound less like lies.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:10, Reply)
"scrap the '50% of young people going to university' target".
There's no sexier sound to an academic.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:39, Reply)
ANYTHING to curb the revolting surfeit of undergraduates in this department.
(, Wed 21 Apr 2010, 14:51, Reply)
« Go Back | Reply To This »