LibDems defect to Tories to keep the SNP out ?
Wouldn't be a big change for them as they effectively voted Tory last time.
True kimbers I meant to say nukes aside - leaving aside also don't ask, don't tell, but at least they won't have to pay for them, only pretend they are not there!
Vote for whoever handles your local issues best
The national and foreign policy ones are set largely in stone despite the pretence. Beyond that play the tax trade off game - at least that is simple.
Anyway to answer your question Yes and I would wager most on this thread would say the same.
The polls don't be changing much (barring Labour slipping further back in Scotland) so unless something drastic happens I suspect most people have already made up their minds.
OK. Because I'm an accountant and I'm highly critical of anything which doesn't include a set of numbers which allow me to see how it is all supposed to work. There may be assurances it does, but I don't want that. I want the actual numbers and projections. I get that from colleagues asking me if we can spend £X on their latest idea so I certainly expect it from someone seeking a mandate to run / influence government.Why not just say that and explain why ?
Unfortunately that's also the conclusion I've come to on the other manifestos. Which doesn't really help other than to turn me from considering any national issues to looking simply at local ones - has the current MP justified re-election or not for their constituency work?
It at least gives you an idea of what they're going to prioritise in coalition negotiations. The alternative is not reading them and making a choice based on other people's interpretation of what they stand for and I'd rather read the source material myself.Is there any point reading manifestos
The polling may be accurate but it also might not, polling relies on models, to create accurate models you need past results but we have never had an election like this so we have no real idea of what might happen.
All those saying SNP will have some influence over Labour are not looking at the big picture. Labour can just put their queens speech down and dare the SNP to vote it down. The worst that would happen is the SNP bring down another Labour Government just like they did in 79 but instead of ushering in Thatcher, it will allow Labour to regain its Scottish seats and go for a majority government.
OK. Because I'm an accountant and I'm highly critical of anything which doesn't include a set of numbers which allow me to see how it is all supposed to work. There may be assurances it does, but I don't want that. I want the actual numbers and projections. I get that from colleagues asking me if we can spend £X on their latest idea so I certainly expect it from someone seeking a mandate to run / influence government.
This is also why they tend to be so keen on those vote for policies sites, as there a load of policies on spending commitments, which everyone loves, but far fewer on how you raise the money to fund them.
The guardian's seat projection for scotland is now 57 SNP, 1 Tory, 0 anything else. That's just weird.
If you look at the way they've modeled the data they are assuming that the Labour and Lib Dem votes collapse to SNP, but that the Tory vote essentially remains static from 2010, give or take a few %.
The worst that would happen is the SNP bring down another Labour Government just like they did in 79
Yup, that happened. And why did the SNP have no confidence in the Labour government? Because they reneged on the devolution referendum. Labour brought it on themselves, the Callaghan government was collapsing anyway, and then the electorate voted in Thatcher by a massive majority.
Interesting replies chaps, thanks.
I've not voted (by choice) in the last couple of elections but can not remember there being such a critical time for the electorate.
Tried reading the Green's Manifesto, some good, some shockingly bad. Attempting to read others, it's a slow process.
jambalaya - MemberLibDems defect to Tories to keep the SNP out ?
Nah, Tories were fairly close second in Selkirk with the SNP and Labour about 25 points adrift last time so it doesn't need defections to make it the new panda enclosure, it just needs a Lib Dem collapse. OTOH Electoral Calculus has it as an SNP gain but very marginal. Michael Moore's already clearing his desk though, just a question of who takes it now.
Like I mentioned, the Guardian forecast does incorporate local polling. Though to what extent or weighting I don't know. I don't believe this SNPwash will come true but then, all the way along we've been saying the same thing, "they'll get 10 less seats then projection X", then the next poll says they'll get even more and we say "Ah well they'll get 10 less than that".
The FPTP effect will be strong in a lot of these seats- where the SNP were polling 10% or thereabouts and the Tories were in play, tactical voting was the obvious outcome. So the previous election outcomes are going to be misleading in a lot of cases. Anti-Tory sentiment always drove people back and forth between the other parties but I don't think anti-SNP sentiment is strong enough to do the same
dragon - MemberIf you look at the way they've modeled the data they are assuming that the Labour and Lib Dem votes collapse to SNP, but that the Tory vote essentially remains static from 2010, give or take a few %.
Not assuming I don't think, evidence based. Whether they're modelling rightly or not is a fair question but it's not just pulled out of the air.
Tried reading the Green's Manifesto, some good, some shockingly bad. Attempting to read others, it's a slow process.
I read the Green's and it made for some interesting thinking.
On the whole I agree with what they say and genuinely take my hat off to some of the statements they make - genuinely forward thinking or genuinely scary, depending how you view things.
However there's a few areas I can't agree with, such as the disbanding of the armed forces. I understand the reasoning, but I also believe the forces to be very much part of British life and culture, before the more practical sides of being a relatively undefended nation.
What I do like and respect is the party's balls to put these views out there in a serious manner in the first place. I do hope the Tories and Labour are watching and taking notes.
It is interesting that the poll companies are so opaque on their analysis makes it hard to trust them and are the all unbiased?
You could argue it is in the major parties favour to say the SNP are going to win Scotland by a lot, as it will ensure that the anti SNP vote turns out on the day and the SNP vote think it's a done deal.
You could argue it is in the major parties favour to say the SNP are going to win Scotland by a lot, as it will ensure that the anti SNP vote turns out on the day and the SNP vote think it's a done deal.
That's an obvious argument for Labour and the LibDems given they've currently got lots of seats in Scotland. Less so for the Tories though - in their case I'm sure they've just been banging on about the SNP to try and get Labour to rule out any kind of deal with them, given their biggest threat is probably a Labour/SNP coalition.
It is interesting that the poll companies are so opaque on their analysis makes it hard to trust them and are the all unbiased?
I'm not convinced it's an issue of bias - just whether a sample of 1000 people can really give you an accurate forecast given the complexity of the issues, including local factors.
[i]More money into Brand's pocket, well into his tax efficient company structure I am sure. We can watch and make our own minds up about the wisdom of doing the interview.[/i]
I'd rather stick needles in my eyes! 😡
I read the Green's and it made for some interesting thinking.On the whole I agree with what they say and genuinely take my hat off to some of the statements they make - genuinely forward thinking or genuinely scary, depending how you view things.
However there's a few areas I can't agree with, such as the disbanding of the armed forces. I understand the reasoning, but I also believe the forces to be very much part of British life and culture, before the more practical sides of being a relatively undefended nation.
What I do like and respect is the party's balls to put these views out there in a serious manner in the first place. I do hope the Tories and Labour are watching and taking notes.
Yes, you're absolutely right but the arrogance of the usual suspects means they won't give a stuff and won't feel threatened. Understand completely your point about the Armed Forces though and would imagine that many voters would feel unhappy with this.
I read the Green's and it made for some interesting thinking.However there's a few areas I can't agree with, such as the disbanding of the armed forces
As far as I can tell they don't advocate disbanding the armed forces.
[b]Security and defence
[/b]The UK’s recent history has been scarred by involvement in ill-advised military interventions that have undermined our national
and international security. The Green Party opposed these interventions, which have brought havoc to Iraq and Libya and only
fragile gains in Afghanistan, as well as driving an increased terrorist threat closer to home – all at the cost of many precious lives
and vast amounts of money and other resources that could have been better used for other needs.
We will restructure and update the UK’s security and defence establishments and services so that they contribute to the
international good. We will:
• Pursue a policy of ‘defensive defence’, which threatens no one yet makes it clear that threats and attacks will be resisted.
• Take a leading role in preventing violent conflict, genocide and war crimes overseas through (i) helping to develop local
capacities to avoid, manage and resolve conflicts; and (ii) enhancing the UK’s well-respected role in genuine peacekeeping
and the protection of non-combatant communities.
• Develop policies and programmes for ‘environmental defence’ and disaster mitigation and relief, drawing on the skills and
activities of our current military forces and increasing gender representation and training to equip the UK to contribute more
effectively in these kinds of human security emergencies.
• Diminish dependence on arms sales through a halt to government subsidies and introducing a strict licensing regime to
prevent sales of weapons and military equipment to undemocratic regimes and those that violate human rights (including, at
the present time, Israel and Saudi Arabia).
• Look after veterans and their families.
Page 70
Rockape63 - MemberI'd rather stick needles in my eyes!
Dont be such a stickinthemud ,the interviews not that bad at all, it is quite Brand but just as valid as Cameron sitting on Loraine kellys couch, and answering a load of pre-prepared questions, infact more valid- Brand has 10million twitter followers I dont think Loraine gets those figures!
Well, 10 million followers is not the same as 10 million people listening to what he says and I'm sure a very small proportion of those 10 million actually watch his Trews (yeah, I follow him). That said, it's a valid point. I would argue so long as Ed hasn't ended up looking stupid (and having only read comments about it, that doesn't seem to be the case) then at worst he'll have made no difference to his success and at best, he'll have persuaded a few of RB's followed to vote for him.
he'll have persuaded a few of RB's followed to vote for him
Will any of those be old enough to vote?
Will any of those be old enough to vote?
Let alone registered, if they took RB's advice
how predictably patronising of the global capitalist elite 😉Will any of those be old enough to vote?
how predictably patronising of the global capitalist elite
I'll have you know I'm one of the few here that's going to be voting for a socialist party. Doesn't stop me thinking Brand is a dick though!
All those saying SNP will have some influence over Labour are not looking at the big picture. Labour can just put their queens speech down and dare the SNP to vote it down.
It's amazing how often this statement of supposed fact goes unchallenged.
The SNP can and probably will support a Labour Queen's speech, after that they can and will choose what motions to support in the commons.
Each new bill passed needs a majority to support it. The SNP can pick and choose what individual bills they support. Its up to Labour to either amend bills to make them amenable to the SNP or go the other way and make bills amenable to the Tories.
That's how a minority government works.
The only support the SNP has to give is to the original confidence motion (The Queen's speech) or any future confidence votes. Everything else they can vote for or against as they please.
Labour might well need active SNP support to form a government anyway, as it's not clear if they're going to get more seats than the Tories (some polls say yes, some say no).
I don't think anyone who had been thinking of voting Labour would have been discouraged by the Brand "interview" and a few waverers may have been pursueded. So all in all you can say it was right for Milliband to do it. Just odd they didn't announce it, all rather clandestine as though they where a bit embarrassed.
Interesting to hear views that local issues weigh heavily on people here. For the GE I am totally national in focus. Local views I express via council elections. Yes the local MP does get involved in local issues but primarily as a conduit to bringing them to central government's attention.
nteresting to hear views that local issues weigh heavily on people here. For the GE I am totally national in focus. Local views I express via council elections.
Same here, especially as my MP was parachuted in due to it being a safe seat so has rarely shown any interest in local issues.
Labour might well need active SNP support to form a government anyway, as it's not clear if they're going to get more seats than the Tories (some polls say yes, some say no).
I think so too, my understanding is they would need a deal with the SNP if they have less seats than the Tories
My gut feel is most likely outcome is the Tories are the largest party but smaller than Labour plus SNP. Outlier outcome is another 5yr Tory/Lib Dem coalition
Just a post to intersect your inevitable next post 😉
Labour wouldn't need [i]a deal[/i] with the SNP. Minority Government would work for them as long as they know the SNP won't vote against them in a Confidence motion.
Meanwhile the SNP can propose, say, an end to the nuclear deterrent and when the majority of Labour MPs and all the Tory MPs vote against them they can bank that as proof that Labour aren't in tune with the Scottish Electorate.
Labour wouldn't need a deal with the SNP. Minority Government would work for them as long as they know the SNP won't vote against them in a Confidence motion.
Not if the Tories have more MP's than Labour does, which some polls are suggesting is likely.
[quote=epicsteve ]
Labour wouldn't need a deal with the SNP. Minority Government would work for them as long as they know the SNP won't vote against them in a Confidence motion.
Not if the Tories have more MP's than Labour does, which some polls are suggesting is likely. If the differential is less than the number of SNP MPs it doesn't matter (depending on how other parties vote too, obviously).
The question is quite simple - which party can get their policies implemented and survive a vote of No Confidence? That one will form the government.
If the differential is less than the number of SNP MPs it doesn't matter
Only if the SNP actually vote for a Labour government. If they abstain, and the Tories can muster more votes than Labour (with the LibDem and DUP say), then it's possible no-one would be able to form a government i.e. Labour and SNP can vote down the Tory option, but the Tories and their buddies could vote down the Labour option if the SNP abstain.
deleted
[quote=epicsteve ]the Tories and their buddies could vote down the Labour option [b]if the SNP abstain.[/b]And the likelihood of this given that Nicola Sturgeon is calling on Ed Milliband to "lock" David Cameron out of number 10?
And the likelihood of this given that Nicola Sturgeon is calling on Ed Milliband to "lock" David Cameron out of number 10?
Not sure - but Milliband has pretty much said he doesn't want their support. If I was Sturgeon in that scenario I'd let the Labour party know I'd allow them to form a government, but only if they changed leader. They'd also be the SNP's bitches for the rest of the parliament anyway, because if the Tories have more seats then Labour wouldn't be able to do anything without actual support from the SNP or others.
You can do a huge amount in government without passing bills, as long as you can raise money (get a finance bill through) and survive a confidence motion you can govern.
EDIT: SNP can only put forward bills if they win the private members bill ballot, and these can be talked out, only governments put forward bills otherwise.
nemesis - MemberWell, 10 million followers is not the same as 10 million people listening to what he says and I'm sure a very small proportion of those 10 million actually watch his Trews
The joy of it for Miliband is that nobody has to watch it- they just have to think "Russell Brand's alright" "Miliband went on the Trews, he must be alright" and "David Cameron was a dick about it". Uncharacteristically good (and somewhat brave imo) move from him tbh.
Just finished watching the Scottish news, Ruth Davidson's having a brilliant war isn't she? Driving around in a tank, skidding around on a quad bike, blowing on some guy's chanter... Being Ruth Davidson looks way better than being David Cameron.
You lot still discussing who to vote? FFS! 😯
Debate Me!(x2) is going to be next PM like it or not so why are you lot still trying to justify your chosen one eh?
Scotland will be an independent nation under PM Debate Me!(x2) and history will be created when the dream of the union break-up has finally been fulfilled.
Hell yes!
Long live Robert the Bruce!
😆
Sam cam was sent out to pound out the streets of Brentford and iselworth today, in an attempt to save the Tory incumbent , shame I moved away 2 weeks ago I could've told her what I think of Dave*
* not really I'd probably have been all pitr and nice
But we did have an absolutely die hard labour supporter down our street, obsessed with getting the Tories out his house covered in labour banners , I'd loved to have seen his reaction, I imagine that security detail would've been involved
kimbers - Member
But we did have an absolutely die hard labour supporter down our street, obsessed with getting the Tories out his house covered in labour banners , I'd loved to have seen his reaction, I imagine that security detail would've been involved
My colleagues are socialist hammer, communist, Green, Labour die hard and they have intense hatred for anything Tories or Tories related ... 😯
They are really angry people aren't they ... 😛
Terry wasn't angry just sad that the evil Tories were out to shaft the poor
