Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   UK general election (May 5th)
Ooook!
Member (Idle past 5815 days)
Posts: 340
From: London, UK
Joined: 09-29-2003


Message 1 of 64 (198465)
04-12-2005 5:39 AM


Alright, here goes...by popular demand (well two people)
As there were a number of threads up and running around the time the US was electing a President, I thought I'd start one on the UK General Election which is just around the corner.
I don't really know how to focus this but I suppose we could start off on a general note, and then spin off into new threads if one or two specific issues get people's goat. I suppose it could also be a place for people to ask questions about how it all works over here - I'm sure they'll be someone around who can help
Here are a few questions to start the ball rolling:
What do you think the outcome will be?
Are there any differences between the two main parties?
How does the political process differ from that in the US? Does that make it better or worse?
Will the result have any significant effect on US/world politics?
Do you think the Liberal Democrats will have much of an impact this time?
Who are the Liberal Democrats?
Ooops, a fair few questions there! Plenty to hopefully get your teeth into.
From a personal point of view I think it'll either end as a small Labour majority, or a hung parliament. The other alternative doesn't bear thinking about!

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by contracycle, posted 04-12-2005 6:27 AM Ooook! has not replied
 Message 4 by Tusko, posted 04-12-2005 7:21 AM Ooook! has not replied
 Message 15 by CK, posted 04-14-2005 6:19 PM Ooook! has not replied
 Message 16 by MangyTiger, posted 04-21-2005 2:21 AM Ooook! has not replied
 Message 20 by mick, posted 04-23-2005 6:08 PM Ooook! has not replied
 Message 21 by Tusko, posted 04-30-2005 10:45 AM Ooook! has not replied
 Message 24 by Monk, posted 04-30-2005 12:11 PM Ooook! has replied

  
contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 64 (198475)
04-12-2005 6:27 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ooook!
04-12-2005 5:39 AM


I'd be much happier to see an applecart-upsetting Lib Dem win.
I do not know what the outcome is going to be, and think there is a serious risk of the fraud issue dominating the outcome.
I don't know if the Lib Dems will make much impact, but they stand to. As the only (parliamentary )party with both the principle and the courage to oppose the war, I'd be happy if they thrashed the warmonger parties to within an inch of their lives.
Tariq Ali lives in my constituency, and called for a Lib Dem vote to punish the warmonger candidate, in this case Barbara Roche. Its a Lib/Lab race only. Nonetheless I am more likely to vote for Respect, if I vote at all.
There is no difference between Labour and the Conservatives bar style. Both are parties of war and privatisation.
The Candidates Find Common Ground
Full employment, slave labor, and schemes
An unemployed workforce, the capitalist's dream
But lets keep Britain working--either way we must keep Britain working
Conventional weapons to kill people nicely
Nuclear weapons to keep the peace
But weapons definitely--either way we must defend ourselves
Nationalization, with one big boss
No, privatization, with lots of little bosses
But someone in control, of course, either way there must be someone giving orders
(Chorus)
A toast to democracy
The prison guard of this society
Sides in the voting game
Disappear into the same machine
The same machine
A toast
To US bases and nuclear weapons
To stopping pickets pulling down fences
To the British troops in Northern Ireland
To the wonderful victory in the Falklands
To the plastic bullet and the riot police
To the UDM, to the TUC
To isolating gays and to law and to order
To richer bosses, to poorer workers
(Repeat chorus)
To longer hours and to less pay
To the courts for those who get in our way
To the beating of people who step out of line
To the use of troops to break a strike
To the expulsion of extremists and political witch hunts
To repatriation, to benefit cuts
To peaceful settlements, and to no-strike agreements
To authority, to power, to GOVERNMENT!
One, two, three
To the annual rise in the MP's wage
To vested interests, to privilege
To the party who wins the next election
By definition a victory to capitalism

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ooook!, posted 04-12-2005 5:39 AM Ooook! has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 04-12-2005 7:02 AM contracycle has not replied
 Message 12 by mick, posted 04-12-2005 1:19 PM contracycle has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 3 of 64 (198491)
04-12-2005 7:02 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by contracycle
04-12-2005 6:27 AM


That Ditty says a lot in a few words!
Contra, this topic started off quite neatly! Ooook brought up a solid topic and you came onstage right on cue with a grand response!
Britain has to worry about its private interests, however. Remember when Maggie Thatcher came to Aspen Colorado and shortly thereafter, the U.S. pledged to protect Kuwait? Kuwait=80% of U.K. oil at that time.
So guys, what are the major issues in THIS round of UK elections?
Check this out, contra. Are you a liberal democrat in the UK?
UK Elect: What If Forecast 2 - What if the Liberal Democrat vote surged
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 04-12-2005 04:06 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by contracycle, posted 04-12-2005 6:27 AM contracycle has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 4 of 64 (198495)
04-12-2005 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ooook!
04-12-2005 5:39 AM


I don't have a very strong grasp of political issues. I just have warm squishy feelings, which isn't really much of a way to govern your vote, I know. So what follows is a little blind man's buff around my primary concerns.
Perhaps its because I am from a relatively priviliged background, and so don't see life at the sharp end, but I really don't see what the trouble is with immigration. I don't understand at all why most people in this country want immigration tightened up. Its a total mystery to me. The Tory's "opposing immigration isn't racist" posters make me feel VERY uneasy. Every time I see one of their bloody posters I want to spraypaint "Not even close, Mike!" on the bottom.
Maybe its because I earn peanuts, but I'm all for increased taxation, if the results are going to be seen.
It the back of my mind, there's always the feeling that a vote for Labour will be on some level an endorsement of the invasion of Iraq.
That Lancet report, even if out by 50,000 civilian deaths (and I don't see why it necessarily would be), is utterly jaw-dropping. I won't allow myself to be seen to endorse something not totally disimilar to a decimation, even tacitly.
Charley K just had a baby! Aww!
I was reading in the Observer on Sunday that so many labour voters are disenchanted that there could be the outside chance of an upset. If Michael Howard becomes prime minister, I'm going to cry. But that isn't going to stop me voting for the Lib Dems most probably. I'd like to see them strengthening their hand this election but who knows? I don't believe that they are really that much of an alternative to the other two.
I agree with the Orangutang - its most likely to be a drastically cut Labour majority, isn't it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ooook!, posted 04-12-2005 5:39 AM Ooook! has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 04-12-2005 7:33 AM Tusko has replied
 Message 8 by contracycle, posted 04-12-2005 7:47 AM Tusko has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 5 of 64 (198499)
04-12-2005 7:33 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tusko
04-12-2005 7:21 AM


Tusko writes:
Maybe its because I earn peanuts, but I'm all for increased taxation, if the results are going to be seen.
The problem is that it is us who get the increased tax. The upper 5% needs to foot more of the bill.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tusko, posted 04-12-2005 7:21 AM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Tusko, posted 04-12-2005 7:41 AM Phat has not replied

  
contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 64 (198504)
04-12-2005 7:40 AM


No, I'm not a LibDem for several reasons, not least of which is that I am a member of a communist party. Secondly, I regard the Liberal movement as a sort of walking dinosaur that has already been superceded by the labour movement. Thats a long story though; the upshot is that the lack of commitment by liberals to actual Labour issues prevents me from supporting them. The only way in which I would consider doing so is in the form of tactical voting, and I am flirting with the idea because I think UK politics could stand to be shaken up by a third party.
The major issues depend on who you talk to - the major parties do not agree on what the central issue is.
Labour have their "reform agenda", but this is such a dubious and charged idea that its hard to discuss without covering a lot of ground. Their essential offering is economic competence.
The Tories have a fairly reacitonary agenda based on tax cuts and immigration controls. They are accused, rightly IMO, of playing to a racist audience in this regard; their tax proposals are controversial and disputed violently by Labour and the LibDems.
The LibDems central issue is of course The War. Their secondary issues are a local income tax to replace council tax and a stop to the Private Finance Initiative by which the government is flogging off our assets. These are all good issues and tempt me to vote for them.
Respect is a minor party headed by George Galloway, and which he recently described as "the ghost of Labour past". He is standing directly against the photogenic Oona King (related to ML King as I recall). But Respect is very young and is unlikely to have much impact overall. There are also some Muslim parties standing in opposition to the war and the demonisation of Islam.
So, as you can see, which issues you think are major depends already on your predelictions. Labour are inclined to see opposition to PFI as a non-issue in our "post-ideological" age, but I can confidently say from my own knocker-hanging that it gets a lot of discussion on the doorstep. Similarly, there are now many reports that Blair is widely percieved to be damaged goods, and that Labour would probably do better if they ditched him in favour of Brown.
Howard is making a much better showing than was expected, to be honest. I fear Blair actually has a genuinely ambitious man on his hands, and one who has nothing to lose. As a Newsnight reporter remarked, Howards whole life has been building up to his chance to run for PM, and you can bet he's going to make the most of it. I now fear there is a real chance the Tories will be returned to power.

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Ooook!, posted 04-12-2005 9:47 AM contracycle has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 7 of 64 (198505)
04-12-2005 7:41 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Phat
04-12-2005 7:33 AM


Yes, I think I agree with you there. Redistribution makes me feel all warm and squishy. I can't help it.
I don't know, maybe I would want to hang on to more of my hard earned (?) wealth if I was in the top 5% of earners; however, the likelyhood of me having to make that decision are pretty small, so I'm not going to start losing sleep over it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 04-12-2005 7:33 AM Phat has not replied

  
contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 64 (198507)
04-12-2005 7:47 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tusko
04-12-2005 7:21 AM


quote:
Perhaps its because I am from a relatively priviliged background, and so don't see life at the sharp end, but I really don't see what the trouble is with immigration. I don't understand at all why most people in this country want immigration tightened up. Its a total mystery to me. The Tory's "opposing immigration isn't racist" posters make me feel VERY uneasy. Every time I see one of their bloody posters I want to spraypaint "Not even close, Mike!" on the bottom.
The immigration "debate" is a nonsense; the UK population is actually falling. As John Snow covered last night on Channel 4 news, of 133,000 east europeans who entered the country last year, all of 23 are on benefits. But a public pole revelaed an aggregate estimate that 57,000 would be on benefits, in the public mind. The is a PERCEPTION of an immigration problem, but in fact there is no problem. IMO, this is entirely due to the Tories playing the race card, but phrasing it as an "immigration" debate rather than a racial purity debate, which is what it really is. As if to prove the point, the Guardian reports today already spotting on of the Tory posters on which someone had written "Paki's out" - this election issue is definitely pandering to racism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tusko, posted 04-12-2005 7:21 AM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Tusko, posted 04-12-2005 8:22 AM contracycle has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 9 of 64 (198511)
04-12-2005 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by contracycle
04-12-2005 7:47 AM


I agree - that's what the whole immigration thing looks like to me too (also, isn't Channel 4 news fun?)... but the scary thing is that SO MANY people think its an issue. I don't think that it is just a few diehard racists. To me it looks as though it is also appealing to traditionally more moderate people... and certainly the Tories are banking on the fact that it will run with more cuddly moderate types.
I'm wondering why that is? I hope it isn't the confused expression of some kind of latent islamophobia... which I suppose it could be. But I guess that racism is pretty deeply ingrained in our culture and goes back a little further than early/mid September 2001.
Talking of crazy, foaming racists, there hasn't been very much talk about the BNP this election. I wonder where they have got to? Perhaps the media have made a decision en masse not to give coverage. If that is the case, that makes me a little uneasy, personally. Or maybe the Tories have squeezed them by nicking their "caring - even to wogs" clothes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by contracycle, posted 04-12-2005 7:47 AM contracycle has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 10 of 64 (198527)
04-12-2005 9:33 AM


I fear that a Lib Dem victory is beyond hope. So we have to hope for a Labour win with enough of a reduced majority to rein in Tony's ego.
I was going to say I would only vote for Labour in this election if the only other likelihood in my constituency was a Tory victory, but having looked at the results for my constituency at the last election it looks like I won't have that choice to make. I have to choose between the Scottish National Party or the Tories, sheesh.
I guess I'll be voting SNP, what a world.
TTFN,
WK

  
Ooook!
Member (Idle past 5815 days)
Posts: 340
From: London, UK
Joined: 09-29-2003


Message 11 of 64 (198530)
04-12-2005 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by contracycle
04-12-2005 7:40 AM


Hi Contra,
Somehow I thought I'd see you in this thread .
There's one or two things that interest me in the exchange you've been having with Tusko.
The first is to voice an agreement on the "immigration" issue, and to underline what I see as the worrying Jingoism in the Tory campaign. It might just be me, but a chill ran down my spine when I heard cuddly Mr Howard talk of speaking for the "ignored majority" the other day. It is the kind of inaccurate, misleading phrase that I normally hear spewing from Mr Griffin's lips, and it made me shout at the telly - Grrr!
As an addition to your comments about the white poster campaigns, there was something in the Indy a while back when one of the offending posters was unveiled right opposite a school in a very multicultural area declaring to the world IT'S NOT RACIST TO IMPOSE LIMITS ON IMMIGRATION. By the end of the first day it was up someone had helpfully painted over the "NOT".
The other thing that you probably won't agree with me on is that the Labour party should be campaigning on more than a economic stability platform. The changes they have brought about are broadly based on redistribution and an increased role for the public sector and I think they should be proud of that. Compare this to the Tory policy of "small government" and it's consequences and I think you have a real choice. As someone else put it in the Indy "Do you want a country like Texas...or Sweden"
Oh dear did I just write that - sorry to all you Texans out there, but I like my national health service
Nice brief summary of the issues BTW.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by contracycle, posted 04-12-2005 7:40 AM contracycle has not replied

  
mick
Member (Idle past 4986 days)
Posts: 913
Joined: 02-17-2005


Message 12 of 64 (198637)
04-12-2005 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by contracycle
04-12-2005 6:27 AM


all i want to see is the queen's head on a stick, but none of the parties are offering that. Is it too much to ask?
added in edit:
okay, before anybody jumps on me, I know that the royal family doesn't have that much political power, its just a symbol, etc. etc. But if the monarchy is a symbol, then i want it represent something I believe in (i.e. upper class heads on sticks). If we really have to have a monarchy, then I think we should at least be allowed the occasional guillotining or something as payback.
This message has been edited by mick, 04-12-2005 12:25 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by contracycle, posted 04-12-2005 6:27 AM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by contracycle, posted 04-13-2005 11:13 AM mick has replied

  
contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 64 (198939)
04-13-2005 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by mick
04-12-2005 1:19 PM


The royals are spreading like boils, it does your head in
We have no choice, we're invoiced for the weddings
It's like a soap, a Dallas or a Dynasty
We live in hope to put them out their misery
Fire the freaky family, we're tired of the cheek
As you holiday your life away our futures look bleak
As your castle's burning down you want the people to pay for it
Ask us to defend you, we've got nothing to say for it
The family, the family, the family horribilus
The family, the family...
Kicking at the gates like we think we're on the guest list
We're told to wait - too late, we're getting restless
The crowd is swelling as they're smelling the thrill
There's dancing in the rubble and there's trouble at the mill
There's warning of the storming, news of the resistance
The peasants are revolting, advancing from the distance
There's panic and there's anarchy and breaking the rules
They're making fake money and they're taking the jewels
What will it be? Funky! (x4)
All without a fuss, the coup has been victorious
The banners wave, proclaiming annus glorious
What will it be? Funky! (x4)
courtesy Pop Will Eat Itself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by mick, posted 04-12-2005 1:19 PM mick has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by mick, posted 04-14-2005 6:14 PM contracycle has not replied

  
mick
Member (Idle past 4986 days)
Posts: 913
Joined: 02-17-2005


Message 14 of 64 (199421)
04-14-2005 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by contracycle
04-13-2005 11:13 AM


It's very telling that I didn't notice the word "funky" in labour's manifesto...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by contracycle, posted 04-13-2005 11:13 AM contracycle has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 15 of 64 (199425)
04-14-2005 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ooook!
04-12-2005 5:39 AM


quote:
What do you think the outcome will be
Labour to win with sizable majority.
quote:
Are there any differences between the two main parties?
Not really but the Labour party seems to more together in public and a large percentage of the population will not bring themselves to vote Tories under any circumstances.
quote:
How does the political process differ from that in the US? Does that make it better or worse?
Beats the shit out of me.
quote:
Will the result have any significant effect on US/world politics?
more of the same.
quote:
Do you think the Liberal Democrats will have much of an impact this time?
No - I think they will end up with about the same number of seats as last time.
quote:
Who are the Liberal Democrats?
The party who seem to think that a penny on income tax will solve all problems.Oh and it's the one where the leader is either drunk or drying out depending on the time of year.
This message has been edited by General Krull, 14-Apr-2005 05:20 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ooook!, posted 04-12-2005 5:39 AM Ooook! has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024