Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Oh no, you misunderstand me. I know plenty of people who will vote Labour. For what they can get, money grabbers. They won't vote for what Labour can do for he country, or any policies that don't apply to them.

    Labour supporters are either old syle, deluded socialists or money grabbers.
    I don't believe this either. You live in a complete bubble if you think that nearly every Labour voter is a money grabber and will be in for a culture shock when you get to uni, just as those people who think all Conservative voters are selfish rich fox-hunters are in for a shock.

    (Original post by Steevee)
    It's a cycle that is perpetuated thanks to the plebs. Labour give everyone what they want, and take us to the brink of ruin. Conservative bring us back on track, but people don't like that, because they can't see the big picture. So it's all this rubbish about them only caring about the rich.
    Such as the last government that received the proceeds of North Sea Oil, billions from selling off British Gas, British Telecom, British Rail and Housing Stock, and yet still failed to reduce the national debt and left us with enormous social problems and dire public services to boot?

    Or the Conservative government before that which shot debt upwards after a period of declining debt that had lasted since the 60s and bequeathed the incoming Labour government with a three-day working week?

    Pls don't try to re-write History to fit your understanding of recent events.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Pol..._A_YouGov_Poll

    Your days are numbered, Cameron and Clegg. Now that we have a new leader in the form of Ed Miliband, we'll be back in power quicker than Danny Alexander and the other ConDem scum can defraud the taxpayer by flipping their houses.

    And ha ha at the Lib Dems, languishing on a pathetic 12%....it doesn't surprise me one bit seeing as though I've seen literally hundreds of their members sign up to Labour over the past few weeks.

    Another 13 years of Labour is on the cards, as soon as we dispose of this filthy, disease-ridden ConDem.
    If you think what you have just written there is acceptable, then you are an ideologue for idelogue's sake and you are a fool.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Collingwood)
    1ppt lead in a poll with a +/-3ppt margin of error is "storming ahead" now?
    This.

    (Original post by Rakas21)
    You do realise that a 1% lead will create another hung parliament?
    Not unless labour's persistent rigging of constituency boundaries is reversed.

    Thankfully it probably will be.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    The coalition is doomed to collapse within the next couple of years. You don't seem to realise that you are dealing with the greatest political mind on TSR. I give it two years, max.

    I see.......
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I also find it funny how the red-flag brigade have gone nuts over every suggestion that public spending might not stay at bankrupting unsustainable levels forever, when their precious labour would either have to make the same decisions or end up going cap in hand to the IMF (assuming the IMF hasn't gone bankrupt in a few years time).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Bit late now...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Keckers)
    What Joe Public doesn't seem to understand is that it isn't possible to keep living above our means.


    Wow, way to make yourself look stupid. You yourself are revealed as 'joe public' by thinking of the economy in terms of personal finance.


    But honestly keep trying to be condescending it's hilarious. :borat:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TShadow383)
    I also find it funny how the red-flag brigade have gone nuts over every suggestion that public spending might not stay at bankrupting unsustainable levels forever, when their precious labour would either have to make the same decisions or end up going cap in hand to the IMF (assuming the IMF hasn't gone bankrupt in a few years time).


    The deficit was a result of the recession and the bail outs. Not public spending. In fact the deficit was lower under new labour than it was under the tory government. Do you seriously think that it is a coincidence the deficit levels rocketed in 2008? :dunce:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Houdizzle)
    The deficit was a result of the recession and the bail outs. Not public spending. In fact the deficit was lower under new labour than it was under the tory government. Do you seriously think that it is a coincidence the deficit levels rocketed in 2008? :dunce:
    But if the Labour Party love Keynes as much as they claim, they would have run surpluses during the boom.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    But if the Labour Party love Keynes as much as they claim, they would have run surpluses during the boom.


    Oh I do agree. But I am arguing against this commonly held misconception (not often explicitly denied by the tories) that the size of the deficit is down purely to Labours public spending. It is like the recession never happened for some people.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Hopefully the AV referendum will be voted 'yes' (seeing as it has both Labour and Lib Dem support, it hopefully should do), the Lib Dems will be better represented in number of seats compared to number of votes and will therefore become a more credible party (people will no longer see it as a wasted vote). The boundary changes will also make each vote as valuable as another, making a fairer system. The Fixed Term Parliaments Bill appeals to me in that it reduces political manoeuvring (which is normally constant in case of a sudden election), but I also like the round numberiness of the election years it produces.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    "Storm past the Tories". I find that LAUGHABLE. They have a 1% lead. I was expecting, with a new leader a much bigger lead of at least 7%. But 1% is absolutely nothing. In fact, its even small enough to just be a margin of error.

    I'm not a bigot, I support the Conservatives but will always be prepared to support another party if they have better policies. Yet Ed Milliband has destroyed the final 1% of respect I had for the party. He is a complete socialist douchebag. He's a pansy, and can you seriously imagine that guy fighting for the interests of British people? Or can you imagine him cave in to the demands of his trade union overlords? Yeah, I thought the latter too.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This is great news

    I still get the impression that the only reason the Conservatives 'won' this election (if you can call it winning) was because people were tiring of Labour, and desperately wanted a change, if only to remind ourselves how much worse it can be.

    I think the country has changed a lot since Blair took power in 1997, and the days of long Tory runs in government are over.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jarred)
    "Storm past the Tories". I find that LAUGHABLE. They have a 1% lead. I was expecting, with a new leader a much bigger lead of at least 7%. But 1% is absolutely nothing. In fact, its even small enough to just be a margin of error.

    I'm not a bigot, I support the Conservatives but will always be prepared to support another party if they have better policies. Yet Ed Milliband has destroyed the final 1% of respect I had for the party. He is a complete socialist douchebag. He's a pansy, and can you seriously imagine that guy fighting for the interests of British people? Or can you imagine him cave in to the demands of his trade union overlords? Yeah, I thought the latter too.
    Newsflash....Labour is a Democratic Socialist party...what else do you expect? Next you'll be complaining that the leader of the Conservative Party is a conservative.

    And I reject your pansy insult. I'd much rather have an intellectual representing Britain than an offensive public school boy bully in Cameron.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ripellino)
    That's right son, just let it all out. We're here to listen.

    It's common sense, look at the facts look at who the tories actually work for, look at the ethical basis of their policies. The exist to serve only the wealthiest who have no consideration for anyone and see the working classes, even the middle classes only as a resource to be exploited or excluded.

    So many people are deluded thinking that the tories have something to offer them but it's just not true they just have the propaganda machine of the super wealthy media moguls on their side telling all the brainless little idiots with not even a conscience to guide them how to vote.

    My mum works for the NHS and my dad works at BT.

    Your point being?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ripellino)
    That's right son, just let it all out. We're here to listen.

    It's common sense, look at the facts look at who the tories actually work for, look at the ethical basis of their policies. The exist to serve only the wealthiest who have no consideration for anyone and see the working classes, even the middle classes only as a resource to be exploited or excluded.

    So many people are deluded thinking that the tories have something to offer them but it's just not true they just have the propaganda machine of the super wealthy media moguls on their side telling all the brainless little idiots with not even a conscience to guide them how to vote.
    Weak minded fool...

    I happen to be one of those rich heirs and I happen to have more friends who go to a local comp and who I am friends with rather than the 'chundering' 'rahs' at my Private school. So stop generalizing.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    David joined the Labour party first, Ed followed, David got the better job with Tony Blair, Ed got a good job with Gordon Brown, David got elected in 2001, Ed in 2005, David was given a cabinet position first and Ed was then awarded a cabinet position, probably with a good recommendation from his brother. 2008 is where it gets interesting though, because in 2008 it has since emerged that David was prepared to move against Brown but talked out of it by Ed, the first sign of his opportunism perhaps? And perhaps most important, David declared himself in the race and then had to be told by a member of his team that his own brother had also declared himself, how can you not tell your own brother given how close they are/were?

    The fact is that while i will never vote Labour, even i recognize that aside from being more articulate and generally better presented, David is more in touch with modern Britain than his brother Ed, who it looks like could have been scheming since as early as 2008, who is opportunistic, who is a union puppet and who will make sure Labour will be out of the limelight for the next decade. The unions are to blame for Labour downfall, they supported the wrong man for their own cause.

    Just my take on things. You have an opportunistic backstabber as your leader.

    Also OP, why do you support the Labour party if you are a Liberal socialist, the Labour party are strongly authoritarian, would the Greens not be a much better representation of your veiws?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    who is a union puppet and who will make sure Labour will be out of the limelight for the next decade. The unions are to blame for Labour downfall, they supported the wrong man for their own cause.
    Old news is old. This has all been disproven as a right wing press scandal anyway. It might be your view, but it's been formulated by the press who were staunch David supporters. The Mail even tried to pin him being unmarried as a dreadful thing for a politician.

    The more moderate newspapers such as the Independent, the Guardian and even the Times think 'too early to tell', a wise move.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Houdizzle)
    The deficit was a result of the recession and the bail outs. Not public spending. In fact the deficit was lower under new labour than it was under the tory government. Do you seriously think that it is a coincidence the deficit levels rocketed in 2008? :dunce:
    Two things:

    -We still had a large deficit, even in the middle of one of the largest consumer booms in generations, with record tax receipts.
    -You're not paying attention to what I've said. I'm saying that the current levels of spending are unsustainable NOW. If you can come up with some sort of solution for how we could keep up the current levels of government spending without bankrupting the country then please do say, I'm sure we'd all love to hear it.

    (Original post by Teh User)
    Old news is old. This has all been disproven as a right wing press scandal anyway. It might be your view, but it's been formulated by the press who were staunch David supporters. The Mail even tried to pin him being unmarried as a dreadful thing for a politician.

    The more moderate newspapers such as the Independent, the Guardian and even the Times think 'too early to tell', a wise move.
    Uh huh, so he wasn't chosen by the unions at all eh?

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I really don't care what party you support/dislike as long as your reasoning is sound and does not resort to calling the other side stupid. If you do that then you're clearly intellectually stunted.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,283

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Will you be tempted to trade up and get out of your firm offer on results day?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.