Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

TSR General Election - Vote here!

Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
  • View Poll Results: TSR MHoC General Election
    TSR Conservative and Unionist Party
    131
    18.35%
    barnetlad, Independent Candidate
    28
    3.92%
    TSR Libertarian Party
    104
    14.57%
    TSR Socialist Party
    94
    13.17%
    JPKC, Independent Candidate
    16
    2.24%
    TSR UKIP
    55
    7.70%
    TSR Liberal Democrats
    67
    9.38%
    TSR Labour Party
    180
    25.21%
    Spoilt ballot
    39
    5.46%

    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TopHat)
    Not to deprive the Lib Dems of a voter, but we always like to reach out to new people. Is there anything you'd like to know about our party or policies?
    Well, one of the thing that's not mentioned it in your manifesto is military (I'm not blaming you. It's a small wordcount ). You've probably already mentioned in the last few pages or so, but what are you positions on a) Trident, and b) Afghanistan.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wizardtop)
    please ask rather me,Thunder_Chunky or Morgsie about the liberal democrats polices and we do our very best to answer any questions you have.
    Alright, to start off your views on Afghanistan and foreign intervention in general.

    Secondly, what would be your position on bailing out another Eurozone country i.e. criteria for bailout etc.?
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DebatingGreg)
    Well, one of the thing that's not mentioned it in your manifesto is military (I'm not blaming you. It's a small wordcount ). You've probably already mentioned in the last few pages or so, but what are you positions on a) Trident, and b) Afghanistan.
    (Original post by TopHat)
    My personal view on Trident renewal is that it simply isn't necessary. Mutually assured destruction holds even if we have no nuclear weapons at all - we're a member of NATO, and were we (in the very unlikely situation) to be attacked, then all of the other NATO members would retaliate for us. I think some level of nuclear capability is probably necessary to justify our position on the Security Council and to act as just a little bit of extra disincentive for any possible aggressors, so I'd steer clear of total disarmament, but the complete renewal of Trident seems totally unnecessary. As Richard Garwin, the US nuclear expert, pointed out, it's just too soon and too expensive when the current nuclear payload system could last until at least 2025. When we reach 2025, and our nuclear systems actually need to updating instead of it simply being a nice thing to do, I'd gladly go ahead, but right now that seems an unreasonable and excessive cost. Our current Trident system works very well, and we don't want to get rid of that at all.

    In terms of defence, I'd like to see staggered retreat from Aghanistan. "Hearts and minds" may have worked if it had been mission goal from the very conception, but US and UK forces are simply tainted now. The longer we stay, the more Taliban converts we create. Our only goal now should be to train the current Afghan troops as best we can - they're the future of Afghanistan. In terms of spending, I think we have to recognise we're not the superpower we once were. It seems almost ridiculous that we have the third largest spending of any country on our military, when we're an island nation which hasn't been engaged in homeland combat since 1945. This doesn't mean we cut down on equipment - ideally, I'd like to direct money towards improving the equipment our soldiers have - but actually reducing the size of the army. A smaller, better equipped, better trained army is the direction in which we need to be headed. Right now, we have an inefficient lumbering army which is endangers the soldiers who serve it unnecessarily. We want the best trained, best equipped troops we can get.
    I hope that helps answer your questions, but please do ask more if you need to!

    As for your earlier concern about our activity, I wouldn't worry. Essentially, a while back, our leader became inactive and the party suffered as a result. Eventually, we had a VoNC in our leader, and replaced him with a new one, davidmarsh01. Since then, we've had a surge of activity and brought in several new MPs, including myself (and hopefully you can see I'm fairly active!). The TSR Conservatives, despite suffering from exactly the same problem of a dying leadership leading to their party going inactive before a last minute recovery, have tried to make this into some petty point-scoring issue. Their plan was to call a VoNC in us as government and then form their own coalition, without ever going to an election. We wanted the people to chose, which is why we called this snap election in the first place.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geetar)
    No Monster Raving Loony this year?
    Yeah, but isn't the barnetlad independent trying to set one up, but was told to try as an independent so there was proof that he would maintain the party rather than let it die? He's got the 99p coin policy anyway...
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angry cucumber)
    Out of interest do any of the parties actively support the ACTA movement?
    I definitely don't. The internet is not a series of tubes.

    Another couple of interests; what are the parties foreign policies regarding things like the pull out of Afghanistan and the threat from Iran.
    I'm in favour of complete military withdrawal from Afghanistan, though I reckon that we should continue to emphasise our support for democracy and freedom in the country - international aid spending should target Afghan infrastructure and help set up institutions like the legal system and police force to preserve the transition that Britain and NATO have secured. We cannot let the Taliban back in.

    Finally the parties opinion on defibrillators in schools as promoted by the Oliver King Foundation
    I believe we should have regulations that ensure they're present in every public building. Had one not been available last weekend, Patrice Muamba would have died (though obviously that's not the sole reason).

    Thank you for taking the time to read this
    No probs.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TopHat)
    I hope that helps answer your questions, but please do ask more if you need to!

    As for your earlier concern about our activity, I wouldn't worry. Essentially, a while back, our leader became inactive and the party suffered as a result. Eventually, we had a VoNC in our leader, and replaced him with a new one, davidmarsh01. Since then, we've had a surge of activity and brought in several new MPs, including myself (and hopefully you can see I'm fairly active!). The TSR Conservatives, despite suffering from exactly the same problem of a dying leadership leading to their party going inactive before a last minute recovery, have tried to make this into some petty point-scoring issue. Their plan was to call a VoNC in us as government and then form their own coalition, without ever going to an election. We wanted the people to chose, which is why we called this snap election in the first place.
    Good to know, and yep that was perfect.

    More generally, where do your party stand to real labour in economic and social terms (again, I could probably browse through a few bills to find out, but oh well )
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    Labour is quite inactive, but so were most parties last term. I was a Labour member until I left last weekend, any chance I can waft you over my way?

    I've been a member for two months and have contributed a lot to each debate in the House despite only having been a Labour MP for one week. I've authored two bills in the last two months, and have many more in the pipe.

    (Btw, the Lib Dems have been worse than Labour in terms of activity, according to the Speaker's figures at least.)
    Yeah, I saw that you just set up the new Progressive Party. Could be interesting...

    Anyway, could you just sum up in a sentence, not caring for practicalities too much, what your ideal society would be i.e. a society of universal equal opportunities? Know it's vague but it can help me see what your general direction is
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The TSR Labour Party covers quite a wide spread on both. Given the Socialists are the only truly and really inactive party, and as such many people avoid them, the "left" tends to split between us and the Lib Dems, where as on the right, it goes between the Conservatives, UKIP, and Libertarians, meaning they're a bit better defined. We cover everything them from Socialists to New Liberals in economic terms.

    Socially, we're a lot more liberal than our real life equivalent.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The trouble with JPKC is that a vote for JPKC is a wasted vote. Once he wins his seat, which he only needs 2% to do, any further votes don't go down the list, they just get wasted. That means he is draining votes from other similar parties, like us. Given I imagine he will get 2% fairly quickly, there's not much point in voting for him after that - it just damages the left. Not that I think he's a bad candidate, just that electoral arithmetic means voting for him isn't the same as voting Labour or Lib Dem or what have you.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TopHat)
    The TSR Labour Party covers quite a wide spread on both. Given the Socialists are the only truly and really inactive party, and as such many people avoid them, the "left" tends to split between us and the Lib Dems, where as on the right, it goes between the Conservatives, UKIP, and Libertarians, meaning they're a bit better defined. We cover everything them from Socialists to New Liberals in economic terms.

    Socially, we're a lot more liberal than our real life equivalent.
    Sounds good. Thanks


    (Original post by TopHat)
    The trouble with JPKC is that a vote for JPKC is a wasted vote. Once he wins his seat, which he only needs 2% to do, any further votes don't go down the list, they just get wasted. That means he is draining votes from other similar parties, like us. Given I imagine he will get 2% fairly quickly, there's not much point in voting for him after that - it just damages the left. Not that I think he's a bad candidate, just that electoral arithmetic means voting for him isn't the same as voting Labour or Lib Dem or what have you.
    Yeah, I guess there was always going to be problems with this sort of election when you include entities which can only put forward, no matter how many votes they get, one candidate
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wizardtop)
    okay xXediXxx sorry if i didnt answer your whole question,what do u want to ask me or the liberal democrat party concerning our election manifesto?
    Nothing.

    I just said that I laugh every time I see a picture of a Lib Dem with the "pledge" to vote against tuition fees.
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Vote Socialist everybody
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why should they vote Socialist when the Socialists were the only truly inactive party?
    • 18 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    That is incorrect, on the first page it says the following: "*If you meet this criteria but have neg rep, you may find yourself unable to vote. If this is the case, PM me and I'll add your vote in." usainlightning meets the requirements but just needs to PM Metrobeans.

    Do you trust Labour? after this display of lacking knowledge in voting procedures and spreading false information, you should not and should instead vote Conservative.
    A little mistake on my part hardly means voting tory. Look at the **** we have to put up with and have had to over the past 2 years?
    • 22 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mevidek)
    Look at the **** we have to put up with and have had to over the past 2 years?
    Bringing Real Life into it are we? TSR Conservatives are not the same as the RL Tories.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Bringing Real Life into it are we? TSR Conservatives are not the same as the RL Tories.
    But the same doesn't go for Labour?

    If you're not a hypocrite you'd remove the picture of Monsieur Miliband.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Bringing Real Life into it are we? TSR Conservatives are not the same as the RL Tories.
    Says the person whose signature features Ed Miliband.
    • 18 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Bringing Real Life into it are we? TSR Conservatives are not the same as the RL Tories.
    Okay, let us consider what you've done so far in our last term: you simply put up a fight to any bill that the government wrote, meaning that there was a state of nothing-ness, and some of your bills/motions were very unfair for the working-class.

    AND GET ED MILIBAND OUT OF YOUR DAMN SIG!!!

    Spoiler:
    Show
    If tehfrance actually deletes the picture and claims he's not a hypocrite, here's the picture:
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TopHat)
    In terms of defence, I'd like to see staggered retreat from Aghanistan. "Hearts and minds" may have worked if it had been mission goal from the very conception, but US and UK forces are simply tainted now. The longer we stay, the more Taliban converts we create. Our only goal now should be to train the current Afghan troops as best we can - they're the future of Afghanistan. In terms of spending, I think we have to recognise we're not the superpower we once were. It seems almost ridiculous that we have the third largest spending of any country on our military, when we're an island nation which hasn't been engaged in homeland combat since 1945. This doesn't mean we cut down on equipment - ideally, I'd like to direct money towards improving the equipment our soldiers have - but actually reducing the size of the army. A smaller, better equipped, better trained army is the direction in which we need to be headed. Right now, we have an inefficient lumbering army which is endangers the soldiers who serve it unnecessarily. We want the best trained, best equipped troops we can get.
    It's good you want to improve technology but huge amounts of manpower is necessary if we ever want to have a ground based mission. Furthermore we have troops based in about 30 different countries in the world at the moment and we need troops for ceremonial duties, in reserve etc.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DebatingGreg)
    Alright, to start off your views on Afghanistan and foreign intervention in general.

    Secondly, what would be your position on bailing out another Eurozone country i.e. criteria for bailout etc.?
    We should stick to the 2014 troop withdrawal deadline, earlier if it could be done. There should also be diplomatic efforts aswell. Regarding Foreign Intervention, UNSC Resolution and backing.

    The Eurozone, we are not part of it and it is in our national interest that the Eurozone survives because most of our trade is done with the Euro. We are part of the IMF.
Updated: March 31, 2012
New on TSR

Personal statement help

Use our clever tool to create a PS you're proud of.

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.