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 Tory Question Time

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    So now it's Lab+Soc+a party which is politically about the same as Lab, and suddenly it's OMG the worst thing evarrr?
    Yet their leader said he was going to vote Tory and shares almost all our beliefs in civil liberties and individuality?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)


    We cover only a marginally lager area of the political spectrum than the Tory party does. So is that two Tories who think their own party should be dissolved since it's made up of people with no common ideological ground but who just want to get into power?
    So, you're honestly going to act as though this coalition was purely done for ideological reasons, rather than political malice? You did this because you didn't want a right-wing government, non? Which is fair enough, although slightly pathetic, but at least admit to it. If the Tories hadn't have had the majority vote (and the threat of holding government), then none of the left would have made a coalition; a tripartite coalition especially.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nativeenglish)
    As somebody pointed out, you don't care who you're in coalition with, you're more than willing to align yourself with any party as long as you have power. Nobody can pretend that lib-lab-soc has strong ideological grounds for making a coalition, is was for one thing only; to stop a right-wing government. That's what's politically inept.
    So, on the one hand you denounce the Lib Dems for claiming to be centrist and actually being socialist, but when it suits you to say that our coalition has nothing in common, we're suddenly chalk and cheese.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nativeenglish)
    So, you're honestly going to act as though this coalition was purely done for ideological reasons, rather than political malice? You did this because you didn't want a right-wing government, non? Which is fair enough, although slightly pathetic, but at least admit to it. If the Tories hadn't have had the majority vote (and the threat of holding government), then none of the left would have made a coalition; a tripartite coalition especially.
    Of course there was a political element, this is essentially a politics game. But that's not what you asked. You claimed we had no ideological similarities and just wanted power. I showed we were fine ideologically. And the Tories didn't have a majority, they had a plurality, and actually the left won the popular vote. So what, out of interest, was the purpose of the Tory-Liber coalition, if not to keep the left out?

    As far as I can see this is fairly typical "oh crap, reframe the question, change the topic, go off on a random attack, anything so people forget how dumb what I said was!" behaviour. You've obviously been to the davireland [sic] School of Public Relations :p:
    • Thread Starter
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jace Falco)
    So say that. "None of your business" sounds defensive and secretive. Is it really something you feel you have to hide?

    Well, I shan't push you.
    No its not. In our coalition bills will still be submitted by the parties however they will be sent to our partners to check them and make suggestions, then we will vote together on them. If for some reason a bill is too economically Libertarian for our liking and too socially Conservative for them then we will submit a bill independent of the other.

    What about yours?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nativeenglish)
    You did this because you didn't want a right-wing government, non? Which is fair enough, although slightly pathetic, but at least admit to it.
    It is, surely, in the interests of the Left not to have a Right-wing government which retards the advancement of left-wing policies. It's not pathetic, it's a perfect playing out of game theory.

    Consider, after all, the prisoners' dilemma.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jace Falco)
    So, on the one hand you denounce the Lib Dems for claiming to be centrist and actually being socialist, but when it suits you to say that our coalition has nothing in common, we're suddenly chalk and cheese.
    Another one who's completely missed the point. You did not do this for political worth, you did not do this on ideological grounds. You would not have done this if there was no threat of a Tory government. You did this because you're all so desperate for power, on something that means so little, merely to spite the right-wing that you made a tripartite coalition (and it's legitimacy is still questionable). Seriously, you need to focus more on political rather than gaining one over the opposite wing.

    And I never claimed that the Lib Dems were socialist, I believe they are far from it.

    Also, the Socialist leader is an absolute joke.
    • Thread Starter
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    Of course there was a political element, this is essentially a politics game. But that's not what you asked. You claimed we had no ideological similarities and just wanted power. I showed we were fine ideologically. And the Tories didn't have a majority, they had a plurality, and actually the left won the popular vote.

    So what, out of interest, was the purpose of the Tory-Liber coalition, if not to keep the left out?
    How do u justify that to your voters though?

    No cos if we wanted to keep the left out we would have took Dayne up on his offer.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nativeenglish)
    So, you're honestly going to act as though this coalition was purely done for ideological reasons, rather than political malice? You did this because you didn't want a right-wing government, non? Which is fair enough, although slightly pathetic, but at least admit to it. If the Tories hadn't have had the majority vote (and the threat of holding government), then none of the left would have made a coalition; a tripartite coalition especially.
    Well, yes, naturally we wanted to stop a right wing government. On ideological grounds. As Gremlins pointed out, we are ideologically as close together as your party is.

    And yes, we certainly would have attempted a coalition regardless. Making a coalition makes it more likely that our measures will be passed, so there's always a benefit to it.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davireland)
    How do u justify that to your voters though?
    How do you justify the Tory-Liber coalition to your voters?
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oriel historian)
    It is, surely, in the interests of the Left not to have a Right-wing government which retards the advancement of left-wing policies. It's not pathetic, it's a perfect playing out of game theory.

    Consider, after all, the prisoners' dilemma.
    Trying to stop it, therefore, is also a perfect playing out of game theory? (if we use your interpretation of the situation.)
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    Of course there was a political element, this is essentially a politics game. But that's not what you asked. You claimed we had no ideological similarities and just wanted power. I showed we were fine ideologically. And the Tories didn't have a majority, they had a plurality, and actually the left won the popular vote. So what, out of interest, was the purpose of the Tory-Liber coalition, if not to keep the left out?
    It would've, surely, served us greater gain to form a lib dem-con coalition, so that's really a moot point.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Trying to stop it, therefore, is also a perfect playing out of game theory? (if we use your interpretation of the situation.)
    No, I think bending the rules (trying to precipitate a constitutional crisis) is slightly different tbh.

    (Original post by nativeenglish)
    It would've, surely, served us greater gain to form a lib dem-con coalition, so that's really a moot point.
    Had you done that you'd be doing exactly what you're accusing us of doing - surrendering your ideological values just to get into government. Jeez, did nobody ever teach you people what consistency means?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jace Falco)
    Well, yes, naturally we wanted to stop a right wing government. On ideological grounds. As Gremlins pointed out, we are ideologically as close together as your party is.

    And yes, we certainly would have attempted a coalition regardless. Making a coalition makes it more likely that our measures will be passed, so there's always a benefit to it.
    So, even if we hadn't have gained the majority vote, you would've still done the tripartite coalition?
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    No, I think bending the rules (trying to precipitate a constitutional crisis) is slightly different tbh.
    And what do you think the response to a TSR Molotov Ribbentrop pact would have been? What did you honestly expect?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    And what do you think the response to a TSR Molotov Ribbentrop pact would have been? What did you honestly expect?
    Us and the Lib Dems are ideologically pretty close, Bagration :rolleyes: See the political compass thread; we're only marginally more disparate than the Tory Party.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Trying to stop it, therefore, is also a perfect playing out of game theory? (if we use your interpretation of the situation.)
    Yes, but stamping up and down and wailing "it's not fair" is somewhat outside of the rules, no.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    Us and the Lib Dems are ideologically pretty close, Bagration See the political compass thread; we're only marginally more disparate than the Tory Party.
    Then let them ADMIT that. Let them admit to being ******* Socialists. When I see that I will stop protesting. When the Liberal Democrats start acting like Socialists (to be fair, that's not too far a step away) and start admitting that they're Socialists, then I will no longer have a problem with this coalition.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The Tories just don't understand coalitions - they're designed to advance each party's agenda, not to weld together all those of one 'ideology'.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Then let them ADMIT that. Let them admit to being ******* Socialists. When I see that I will stop protesting. When the Liberal Democrats start acting like Socialists (to be fair, that's not too far a step away) and start admitting that they're Socialists, then I will no longer have a problem with this coalition.
    Once again, you've completely changed the topic, but fwiw several Lib Dems have said that theirs is a left-wing party.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: November 30, 2014
New on TSR

The future of apprenticeships

Join the discussion in the apprenticeships hub!

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