General Election Countdown who is going to win

Paven wrote:

Depends, he's never been overly popular with a lot of MP's. I really would worry if I was a Conservative because as far as I can see there's nobody half respectable to take the job. May, David, Hammond, Osborne.. Hardly very thrilling options.

James May, Larry David, Richard Hammond, Ozzy Osborne..........

Les Miserable wrote:

Paven wrote:

Depends, he's never been overly popular with a lot of MP's. I really would worry if I was a Conservative because as far as I can see there's nobody half respectable to take the job. May, David, Hammond, Osborne.. Hardly very thrilling options.

James May, Larry David, Richard Hammond, Ozzy Osborne..........

Id vote for James May

Angry wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Paven wrote:

Depends, he's never been overly popular with a lot of MP's. I really would worry if I was a Conservative because as far as I can see there's nobody half respectable to take the job. May, David, Hammond, Osborne.. Hardly very thrilling options.

James May, Larry David, Richard Hammond, Ozzy Osborne..........

Id vote for James May

Yeah, James May would make an interesting PM. Jeremy Clarkson would be ideal as Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.

Carol Vorderman could be Chancellor.

Rachel Riley for chancellor foreshore.

Iggy wrote:

Rachel Riley for chancellor foreshore.

Absolutely.

Anyone watching this question time special? The bias broadcasting corporation have been kind enough to allow the dying lib dems a few minutes tonight aswell

Anyone else see Miliband nearly trip up as he walked off Bleddy shame he managed to stay on his feet, it would have been his Kinnock moment.

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

I don't think they should, but holding a balance of power isn't unreasonable. They should be allowed a proportional voice, which is essentially what they would have in a coalition agreement. Why should England dictate how the other three countries are run, when they've not been democratically elected within those countries? 

I can see what Ed's doing, he's pandering to the concerned rhetoric that England would be run by the SNP - a fallacy that you have expressed. Personally, I see the SNP as filling the void that Labour left as they pandered towards Tory politics - I wouldn't have had any protest to a Labour/SNP coalition, they might have dragged Labour back into a political stance closer to where I'd like to see them.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

I don't think they should, but holding a balance of power isn't unreasonable. They should be allowed a proportional voice, which is essentially what they would have in a coalition agreement. Why should England dictate how the other three countries are run, when they've not been democratically elected within those countries? 

I can see what Ed's doing, he's pandering to the concerned rhetoric that England would be run by the SNP - a fallacy that you have expressed. Personally, I see the SNP as filling the void that Labour left as they pandered towards Tory politics - I wouldn't have had any protest to a Labour/SNP coalition, they might have dragged Labour back into a political stance closer to where I'd like to see them.

SNP represent scotlands interests only and for that they would not make a good partner for any party running the UK. Plus rab c nesnitts wife isnt even going to be an mp come the end of this election so who does take the token title of dep pm alex salmond i bet.

Actually I think Sturgeon has done well to acknowledge the British issues rather than exclusively referring to Scotland. Scotland's issues will be more relevant to her, no one's bullshitting that, but she's not ignored the fact that many of those issues extend across boundaries. Just saying it wouldn't have bothered me.

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

I wouldn't be swayed by the right-wing propaganda about an SNP coalition. Their bargaining power wouldn't be as great as the press are making out. Anyway the media and the 3 main parties wanted them to stay in the Union, so now they are staying the media and the main 3 parties are complaining about them using their democratic power to try and get what they want. You can't have it both ways! If they'd got independence they wouldn't have any say over how Britain was run.

In any case, you can argue the opposite. Why should Scotland have to put up with a Tory government when almost no-one in Scotland votes for them? The right wing press are stoking all this anti SNP feeling to deflect the attention away from the fact that Cameron's Tories have little to offer the country - they've failed/lied on immigration, lied on the NHS, failed to reduce the UK debt, or make much impact with the deficit, are confused over the EU and have resorted to a relentlessly negative election campaign. No wonder many right wingers are turning to UKIP!

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

I wouldn't be swayed by the right-wing propaganda about an SNP coalition. Their bargaining power wouldn't be as great as the press are making out. Anyway the media and the 3 main parties wanted them to stay in the Union, so now they are staying the media and the main 3 parties are complaining about them using their democratic power to try and get what they want. You can't have it both ways! If they'd got independence they wouldn't have any say over how Britain was run.

In any case, you can argue the opposite. Why should Scotland have to put up with a Tory government when almost no-one in Scotland votes for them? The right wing press are stoking all this anti SNP feeling to deflect the attention away from the fact that Cameron's Tories have little to offer the country - they've failed/lied on immigration, lied on the NHS, failed to reduce the UK debt, or make much impact with the deficit, are confused over the EU and have resorted to a relentlessly negative election campaign. No wonder many right wingers are turning to UKIP!

they had the choice of going it alone or staying put. they chooseto remain in the uk for payrise and perks they made their choice concerning another tory government. England, Wales and N.Ireland cant choose the snp.

Angry wrote:

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

I wouldn't be swayed by the right-wing propaganda about an SNP coalition. Their bargaining power wouldn't be as great as the press are making out. Anyway the media and the 3 main parties wanted them to stay in the Union, so now they are staying the media and the main 3 parties are complaining about them using their democratic power to try and get what they want. You can't have it both ways! If they'd got independence they wouldn't have any say over how Britain was run.

In any case, you can argue the opposite. Why should Scotland have to put up with a Tory government when almost no-one in Scotland votes for them? The right wing press are stoking all this anti SNP feeling to deflect the attention away from the fact that Cameron's Tories have little to offer the country - they've failed/lied on immigration, lied on the NHS, failed to reduce the UK debt, or make much impact with the deficit, are confused over the EU and have resorted to a relentlessly negative election campaign. No wonder many right wingers are turning to UKIP!

they had the choice of going it alone or staying put. they chooseto remain in the uk for payrise and perks they made their choice concerning another tory government. England, Wales and N.Ireland cant choose the snp.

But that's my point, if they have to put up with a tory government voted for by the English, surely we have to put up with them voting for the SNP. In terms of the SNP not being available for rest of Britain, there's nothing to stop us creating our own party along similar lines. Indeed the Welsh have Plaid CymrU, in Yorkshire there is a 'Yorkshire First' party campaigning for more powers for the English regions, the Cornish have that Kernow/nationalist party. There are other left-of-centre parties available in the UK. It seems perverse to blame the Scots for actually getting up and trying to change the corrupt 2-party system we have. Defeatism, apathy and demonising those who try and make a difference is exactly what the ruling class want. They're happy for the English to just sit back a complain about 'the bloody SNP' rather than to try and take a stand against the wealthy, south-east centric nature of power in the UK.

And so on to Europe

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Angry wrote:

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Just switched off. Cameron was confidently not answering every question that came his way, and Ed just pissed off our Northern neighbours. To be fair, he pissed me off with that and all. I understand where he's coming from, but Scotland's democratic right should be respected and if they vote SNP then so be it.

but why should the SNP dictate how the other 3 countries that are part of the UK the very thing they want out off when no one in those countries can vote for them. Too right labour shouldnt do a deal with them to see them into power.

I wouldn't be swayed by the right-wing propaganda about an SNP coalition. Their bargaining power wouldn't be as great as the press are making out. Anyway the media and the 3 main parties wanted them to stay in the Union, so now they are staying the media and the main 3 parties are complaining about them using their democratic power to try and get what they want. You can't have it both ways! If they'd got independence they wouldn't have any say over how Britain was run.

In any case, you can argue the opposite. Why should Scotland have to put up with a Tory government when almost no-one in Scotland votes for them? The right wing press are stoking all this anti SNP feeling to deflect the attention away from the fact that Cameron's Tories have little to offer the country - they've failed/lied on immigration, lied on the NHS, failed to reduce the UK debt, or make much impact with the deficit, are confused over the EU and have resorted to a relentlessly negative election campaign. No wonder many right wingers are turning to UKIP!

they had the choice of going it alone or staying put. they chooseto remain in the uk for payrise and perks they made their choice concerning another tory government. England, Wales and N.Ireland cant choose the snp.

But that's my point, if they have to put up with a tory government voted for by the English, surely we have to put up with them voting for the SNP. In terms of the SNP not being available for rest of Britain, there's nothing to stop us creating our own party along similar lines. Indeed the Welsh have Plaid CymrU, in Yorkshire there is a 'Yorkshire First' party campaigning for more powers for the English regions, the Cornish have that Kernow/nationalist party. There are other left-of-centre parties available in the UK. It seems perverse to blame the Scots for actually getting up and trying to change the corrupt 2-party system we have. Defeatism, apathy and demonising those who try and make a difference is exactly what the ruling class want. They're happy for the English to just sit back a complain about 'the bloody SNP' rather than to try and take a stand against the wealthy, south-east centric nature of power in the UK.

Geddon, Flatters for PM.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Scuffles greet Jim Murphy and Eddie Izzard while campaigning in Glasgow.

VillageGreen wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Scuffles greet Jim Murphy and Eddie Izzard while campaigning in Glasgow.

Eddie back in drag

It looks like the Independent newspaper has backed another Tory/Lib Dem coalition.

I have to say that I've done alright personally under the current government, but I'm a self-employed freelancer, I'm not a student, or disabled, or a regular user of the NHS or public transport.  As the Indy says, the government can be proud of creating a couple of million extra jobs, but it's open to question how many of them are skilled, highly-paid permanent positions.

I'll be voting Lib Dem on Thursday, not that there's much point. My constituency has a Conservative minority of less than 500, but the Libs seem to have more or less given up on it.  I've had one black-and-white pamphlet through the letterbox, whereas the Tories have plastered every available vertical surface with disturbing pictures of Sarah Newton gurning.

Looks as though the Dems might even hold onto a couple of their seats in Cornwall, too.  I really hope Andrew George hangs on in St Ives & the Islands - he's a perfect example of the phenomenon where the locals hate every politician apart from the one they know.

Support for staying in the EU remains much more popular than the alternative.

When the question is "If there was a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, how would you vote?", In leads by 45%-33%.

When the question is "Imagine the British government under David Cameron renegotiated our relationship with Europe and said that Britain's interests were now protected, and David Cameron recommended that Britain remain a member of the European Union on the new terms. How would you then vote in a referendum on the issue?" In leads by 57%-22%.

If we have a ref. on Europe then the details will be discussed in much more depth, at the moment all the public are being told is that exit from Europe will have us back ploughing the fields with oxen and single share ploughs. What's more no one will accept any promises from the government after the u turn by Cameron on the Scottish separatists.

A nice takedown of the Green Party manifesto from the New Statesman here.

A referendum on the EU.....will be decided by how the question is asked.....Cameron, if he gets re-elected, will word it in such a way that the question will not be a straight yes or no answer.....you can bet on that........there is only one party that will give you the truth about the EU and it ain't Tory/Lab/Lib/Green.