TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- UK elections on 5 may!
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by Jackson Seriously if i ever met anyone in the BNP of even voted BNP i would take a baseball bat to there kneecaps.

I watched that BBC undercover documentary and apparently BNP types get the shit kicked out of em quite regularly by the anti-fash!

quote:

Originally posted by denny_shibby 17 and the UK was being compared to some 3rd world countries. PBS.org Commanding Heights documentary. Maybe you should fucking go learn something you fucking tard. After her being pm gee back on world stage, huh coincidence I think not. The way it seems is that the books you read are Billy Learns to Pee or The Poopy Book Lol. Why don't you go fucking read an economics book? Since economics can't permeate your fucking brain. This is what I bet would happen if you ever decided to take me up on it, you would go and read the Commy Manifesto so you could claim that you read an econ book.

Am doing a presentation soon on Thatcher so doing a bit of research on her. For starters, Britain was going through recession as was most of Europe so i think at the time allot of Europe would have been having probs. Heard that 20,000 British ppl were made millionaires by her, didnt know 3rd world countries had that many millionaires lol?

Also someone said about Poll tax making Britain richer than USA? The poll tax was unfeasable. My mum and dad nearly lost the house because of that because my mum had no job (3 kids) and dad was a printer when money wasnt big in that industry yet they had to fork out �400 at the time. I dont think there would have been riots around country, especially London, if people just didnt want to cough up a bit more money.

I'll probably be voting Labour, but its more to do with voting them because i hate Conservative (Howard pisses me off with his opportunitism i.e. using a tragic event to win votes etc...) and Lib Dems, although i really like Charles Kennedy, just dont think they could hack it, so its Tony Blair for me

^^^ yeah Tone is a class act comapred to Charles but I think the reason Keneddy seems so boring is cos he speaks common sence.

One thing though Alec Samond (sp fest) the SNP guy is acually a quality caditate (cleaver boy roy). Just in a joke party, the lib dems only have one thing against them,and that is that they arn't going to have a majority atall. Which is a shit reason to not vote for them. They all seem switched on.

Anyway yay for booze.

Vote lib dem but say yes to nuclear.

quote:

UK's Blair Faces Election Pressure Over Iraq War 1 hour, 41 minutes ago LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Tony Blair will face calls on Monday to hold an inquiry into Britain's case for war in Iraq as his rivals try to keep the spotlight on his support for the U.S.-led invasion ahead of a May 5 election. AFP Photo AFP The opposition Liberal Democrat Party, which opposed the war, placed advertisements in several newspapers showing a smiling Blair beside President Bush under the headline "Never Again." "Britain's international reputation has been damaged by the way Tony Blair took us to war," the party's leader, Charles Kennedy, will say in a speech on Monday. "I call again today for a proper inquiry into how we went to war in Iraq." Iraq emerged as a central election issue for the first time during the campaign over the weekend, with the main opposition Conservative Party accusing Blair of lying over the war. Its leader Michael Howard said Blair had overstated the "sporadic and patchy" intelligence gathered by Britain's intelligence services on whether Iraq had banned weapons. "He has told lies to win elections," Howard told BBC television. "On the one thing on which he has taken a stand in the eight years he has been prime minister, which is taking us to war, he didn't even tell the truth on that." Blair has repeatedly defended his decision to support Bush's 2003 invasion of Iraq and has denied hyping the threat posed by former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. "I did what I honestly believe was the right thing to do," Blair told the Daily Mirror. "We know Saddam had WMDs (weapons of mass destruction) and we know we haven't found them. But he definitely had them because he used them against his own people." Most Britons opposed the war before it began and the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has eroded Blair's once sky-high public ratings. But newspaper opinion polls suggest voters view domestic issues, such as public services and the economy, as more important than Iraq. They forecast that Blair is on course to win a third straight election on May 5, albeit with a reduced majority compared to 1997 and 2001. A YouGov poll for Monday's Daily Telegraph put Blair's ruling Labour Party on 37 percent, unchanged from last week, and the Conservatives down one point on 33. The Liberal Democrats climbed two points to 24. A second poll, for the Daily Mirror and morning television show GMTV, put Labour down two on 39, the Conservatives static on 33 and the Liberal Democrats unchanged on 20. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...dc&sid=84439559

quote:

Originally posted by josh4

One of these days Josh will actually comment on the newspaper articles he posts up here!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Ian^ under that witch my nan also waited 4 years for an important leg operation, my brother needed tonsils and adonoids (sp) out and we moved house 3 times b4 it got done, 5 years later. They de-privatised the railways & fucked them up, made the rich richer & the poor very poor. think about getting a clue about the UK before preaching your bullshit to us

The railways were privatised around six years after Thatcher left office.

They were already fucked up, when the entire system was nationalised some years previously. They are no more fucked up now than they were then.

quote:

Originally posted by denny_shibby 17 and the UK was being compared to some 3rd world countries. PBS.org Commanding Heights documentary. Maybe you should fucking go learn something you fucking tard. After her being pm gee back on world stage, huh coincidence I think not. The way it seems is that the books you read are Billy Learns to Pee or The Poopy Book Lol. Why don't you go fucking read an economics book? Since economics can't permeate your fucking brain. This is what I bet would happen if you ever decided to take me up on it, you would go and read the Commy Manifesto so you could claim that you read an econ book.

For the good of the British people I'm glad you are not from this country.

For the good of the American people I'm glad you're not old enough to vote.

didn't he say de-privatised?

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish didn't he say de-privatised?

Yes, but not sure why.

They were nationalised many years before Thather came to power (1948, labour government).

quote:

Originally posted by Jackson On a side note i will probably vote Lib Dem...because i am a student. But i really want the NHS to get sorted...its really messed up. I was admitted to Hospital on Saturday night in excruciating pain. Stayed overnight, still in the same condition. So they dosed me up on Morphine and sent me home because they said its likely id catch something much worse (MRSA) if i stayed there....my parents were like...WTF! Labours ok....but like most Brits i've lost faith in Blair and i'd like to see us move away from the US and closer to Europe where we belong.

Slightly off topic, but I actually have a theory you might want to read up on. I have heard of a condition that results in great pain due to being poisioned by various metals. Have you considered that the chain around your neck in the photo might be causing your condition?

Thought he ment nationalised but that happened way before her (1948 tanks again google).

quote:

Blair's Fortunes Bolstered by Opposition By ED JOHNSON, Associated Press WriterSat Apr 30, 4:41 PM ET He's loathed by sections of his own party, has been heckled by voters and accused of lying over the Iraq war. Yet Prime Minister Tony Blair heads into the final days of Britain's election campaign leading the polls � thanks in part to alienated Labour Party stalwarts who will hold their noses and vote for him anyway. The war opponents nonetheless value the Labour government's increased spending on education and health; some disappointed by the party's shift to the center simply see no attractive alternative in the vote on May 5. Blair's fortunes have also been bolstered by the unpopularity of the main opposition Conservatives, who dominated British politics for most of the 20th century. Under Margaret Thatcher, who championed individual initiative and the free market, the party commanded was unassailable. But throughout the 1990s its popularity slipped, because of an unpopular new local tax, internal feuding over European integration, an economic recession and repeated sleaze scandals. "I don't like him, but there is no one better to take his place," said David Server, 44, working at his fruit stall in central London. "He doesn't tell his own party what he is doing, let alone anybody else. But we haven't got an alternative." Blair's credibility has been badly dented by the war and accusations that his government exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. In recent days he has been buffeted by renewed questions about the legality of the Iraq war. Blair has transformed the socialist Labour Party, broadening its appeal to the middle classes and big business. Since Labour won the first of two landslides in 1997, the Conservatives have struggled to find a message and a leader to recover lost ground. Michael Howard, the third Conservative leader since 1997, took the helm 18 months ago and has enforced discipline in a party which had indulged in public feuding. Labour's "forward not back" slogan is intended to remind voters that Howard was a prominent member of the government they decisively rejected in 1997. The approach appears to have damaged Howard. "I just don't think as a leader he is imposing enough," said Toby Bowers, 28, who says he's disillusioned with Labour but cannot bring himself to vote Conservative. "This is the gritted teeth election," said professor Steve Reicher at St. Andrews University. "People are thinking, what choice do I have? They think, 'I don't like what Blair has done, but I don't like Howard.'" Some Labour candidates have flaunted their opposition to Blair; even more have pointedly omitted his picture from their campaign literature. But every Labour candidate wants to win, and each Labour victory will build toward the majority needed to keep Blair in office. Blair has long been unpopular with left wing of his party, which was unhappy with his shift to the right but willing to embrace him as a winner. "Iraq is a big issue and it is so big that some people won't vote," said former Labour lawmaker Alice Mahon, a vehement critic of the war and Blair. "I am still going round asking people to vote Labour. There is a lot to defend," she added. She cited his accomplishments as high employment, the minimum wage law legislated by his government and a new hospital in her area. Robin Cook, who resigned from Blair's cabinet in opposition to the war, wrote in The Guardian newspaper that an acquaintance "seethes at the very mention of Iraq but is resolved to vote Labour because of parents whose lives have been transformed by (a) pension credit" of the equivalent of $85 a week. Labour's fear is that disaffected supporters will either stay at home or switch allegiance to the Liberal Democrats, the only major party to oppose the war. "If people drift off, and either stay at home or vote Liberal Democrat ... the result will be not that they remove the difficulties, problems, or disappointments that they have had with this government; they actually end up with a Conservative government that will remove the very things they want to keep," Blair said on Friday. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050430...rites&printer=1

Blair seems very reluctant to go into depth on the Iraq crisis..... Do you think Bush lied to him about there being WMD or was Blair in on it too?

he knew what he was doing

So, tomorrow is it...

btw, dont you think you need a new election system?!

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew So, tomorrow is it... btw, dont you think you need a new election system?!

is there a single country out there with a great one?

quote:

Originally posted by josh4 is there a single country out there with a great one?

Yes, but eg the US's and the UK's are pretty bad imo, cause they make people do tactical votes instead of what they really want...

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Yes, but eg the US's and the UK's are pretty bad imo, cause they make people do tactical votes instead of what they really want...

Well I'll let you tomorrow if there some big goon forcing me to vote for someone I dont want too!

But there are 'tactical voting' but its not forced - its the lesser of two evils (ie, if you aren't going to vote, but the BNP or the Conservatives are standing in your constituency, then you must go out an vote!)

Bloody hell! Just got back from the polling booth and they had a UN election monitoring team from Georgia to make sure nothing funny was going on!!!

I'll see if there are any when i go to vote tonight. This will be my first time ever as i only turned 18 in August.

i shall be voting lib dems in about half an hour.

out of the three they seem to be the most sensible...good green policies, sensible wealth distribution ideas, sensitive immigration policies, keeping us in EU, liberal outlook to foreign policy

labour lost my vote beacause, although on refelection i think Blair did a pretty good job with Iraq, the health system, pensions are fucked so id like to see if lib dems could do any better. was a close call beteen labour and libe dems for me, labour have done some good things for me like mn wage increases etc, but i think lib dems would do things like that anyway

torys: good policy on health, i beleive we should be looking to scrap the nhs all together now, and they're going a step in that direction. silly immigration policy, silly proposals to withdraw from EU particularly Eu Convention on H-Rights, and silly drug policy.

SNP lost my vote because theyre beleief that scotland would be better independent was based on the fact that 'if norway can do why cant we'

UN moderators??

I've gone for Labour but I feel pretty shit about it! I vote Labour cos they still have some of the Old Labour types who believe what I believe (altho I'm not sure the MP I voted for in Leeds is like that, the one back home near Sheffield used to be a miner so he obviously was!) Do think they done a good job on the economy and foreign affairs doesn't really come into elections. Wouldn't mind if Lib Dems won tho

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley foreign affairs doesn't really come into elections.

i used to think this but if you think about it alot of the asylum seekers that come here are coming from Iraq and surrounding area. no war=less reason for them to come here, which in turn leads to less strain on public services etc., and less racism

quote:

Originally posted by svens_bath i used to think this but if you think about it alot of the asylum seekers that come here are coming from Iraq and surrounding area. no war=less reason for them to come here, which in turn leads to less strain on public services etc., and less racism

The solution to the asylum seeker "problem" is to let them work, simple as

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley The solution to the asylum seeker "problem" is to let them work, simple as

then you get the "they took our jobs" speil. anyway, thats another issue. all what im saying is that you would have less asylum seekers if there is no conflict back home...which can be influnced by a gov's foriegn policy. plus the reason for the islamic terrorist threat is beacsue of the way a country and its scoiety is represented on the world stage: the foreign policy..so it does matter.

quote:

Originally posted by svens_bath then you get the "they took our jobs" speil. anyway, thats another issue. all what im saying is that you would have less asylum seekers if there is no conflict back home...which can be influnced by a gov's foriegn policy. plus the reason for the islamic terrorist threat is beacsue of the way a country and its scoiety is represented on the world stage: the foreign policy..so it does matter.

Assuming there is a terrorist threat

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.