Am I right in thinking that you vote for whoever, you must support some of their policies/promises.. but what about the ones you don't agree with..grin and bear it! Don't for f--k sake complain....cuz you put em there!
Am I right in thinking that you vote for whoever, you must support some of their policies/promises..
That used to be the case but these days you are expected to vote for whichever party leader (and/or leader's wife) you think looks nicest.
The assembled pundits on the Guardian's politics weekly podcast http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/audio/2010/may/05/general-election-2010-gordon-brown reckon that Dave will have a majority of between 10 and 20 tomorrow (depending on how you count the Ulster Unionists, who will inevitably support the tories) but with only about 20/30% of the electorate actually voting for him.
Buy shares in sandal makers now because with all those Cameron Out protest marches taking their toll sales are going to rocket.
Am I right in thinking that you vote for whoever, you must support some of their policies/promises.. but what about the ones you don't agree with..grin and bear it! Don't for f--k sake complain....cuz you put em there!
Plus, if you dont use your right to vote, you lose your right to complain about anything the government does.
Plus, if you dont use your right to vote, you lose your right to complain about anything the government does.
I competely disagree.. If you vote a party in you can not complain. If you don't vote you can not be blamed.. and therefore can complain about everythying you want!!!!
I think the tendency is to vote for those you disagree least with rather than agree most with.
I disagree most with Labour (war-mongering, economy-wrecking, pension-robbing socialists) Then it's the Lib Dems (who want us to join the mickey mouse euro and get rid of Trident). Then the Greens (who want to legalise drugs, spend a lot we don't have, and get rid of Trident) Then Dave Yates (some nice ideas, but seems unpredictable) Then Brian Burgess (an independent MP should be a good check against WBC's excesses) Then Richard Benyon (for married tax breaks and inheritance/stamp duty reform, but unsure he can defend us against WBC).
IMO, Beynon's better for the country, but Burgess would be better for the constituency.
I think the tendency is to vote for those you disagree least with rather than agree most with.
I disagree most with Labour (war-mongering, economy-wrecking, pension-robbing socialists) Then it's the Lib Dems (who want us to join the mickey mouse euro and get rid of Trident). Then the Greens (who want to legalise drugs, spend a lot we don't have, and get rid of Trident) Then Dave Yates (some nice ideas, but seems unpredictable) Then Brian Burgess (an independent MP should be a good check against WBC's excesses) Then Richard Benyon (for married tax breaks and inheritance/stamp duty reform, but unsure he can defend us against WBC).
IMO, Beynon's better for the country, but Burgess would be better for the constituency.
A tough choice.
I think it's our duty to ensure BB at least has a stab at getting his deposit back, so he got my vote. TBH, I believe that whoever is in power, people like me (middle Englanders who work in the private sector to pay for their home & bring up their families) will be no better or worse off whoever is in power.
Others have vested interests, public sector workers / workshy / very high earners etc. and they will be better looked after by Labour & Conservatives respectively. BB ensured that I turned up and didn't spoil my ballot paper.
At the moment, I suspect that whichever party wins or nearly wins, we, the common people, are about to be crapped on from a great height whatever was in their manifesto. It will be like Greece but a little less pooh and not from such a great height. (I hope)
I competely disagree.. If you vote a party in you can not complain. If you don't vote you can not be blamed.. and therefore can complain about everythying you want!!!!
Example 1 you vote Labour Labour get the majority you are happy as Larry 6 months down the line Labour increase Income Tax by 10% you not so happy but you put them there so you can't complain! Agreed? whereas I didn't put them there so I can complain..agreed? all hypathetical of course!(is that how you spell it?)
...and who was it that either destroyed or sold off most of our manufacturing industries?
Please explain. Notwithstanding that some of our manufacturing plants, like the car and bike industry, could not modernise due to a breakdown in relations between management and militant unions, resulting in our producing inferior product. A situation that was never attempted to be reversed under New Labour.
Now that, more than ever, we need to build our way out of this mess, we have nothing to do it with.
I'm not sure I understand you, but I don't think I agree either. We all share some responsibility for what the Government do.
I agree with the implication that had the Tories been in power over the last 13 years, we would more than likely be in a similar situation with regards things like Iraq and the credit crunch, but it isn't right to say, 'they were just as bad' in justification that the incumbents are OK.
At the end of the day, what the Tories did in the 80s and 90s is on record, and not all was bad, but New Labour's failings and achievements are clear from the late 90s onwards.
If anything, both parties in the last 30 years have sought to bring politics into disrepute. Whether this is worse than what went before, or not, I couldn't say.
There might at this late date be some profit from hanging on to them as they have reported an oil strike. Of course that may galvanise Argentina to have another go. This time and they know it, we no longer have the resources to resist them.
This time and they know it, we no longer have the resources to resist them.
Quite the opposite. Argentina have no useable military to speak of now, and are in an infinately worse financial position than us. There is no way Argentina could try the same again now in it's current state.
Logged
Male
