27th June 2007

[GuzziHero]

Who you think the people with high IQs would vote for?!  Its not like there have been any appealling alternatives.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We'd probably have a continuous Tory government. And we dont want that either.

 

It used to be that Tory was for the middle-class/rich, Labour was for the working class, hence the mindless entrenched voter morality in some people. Now greed has set in, the Tories are for the middle-class/rich, Labour is for nobody but themselves.

 

I still cant believe that Blair has never apologised for invading Iraq. He wont even admit, publically, that he made a mistake. And that is the one thing about his leadership that will mark his legacy. All this time and he cannot tell one single but important truth.

 

When Major followed Bush mk1 into the Gulf the first time, at least the entire country was mislead. Heck, I even have a free tshirt from The Sun supporting the war upstairs somewhere. Only afterwards did the truth about the Kuwaiti regime being worse than Iraq and the manipulation to invent causes for war come out.

 

Afghanistan *was* to a great deal justified. Yes, theres the oil pipeline that the oil barons want to ram through the country...but thats possibly a good thing...it would lead to less reliance on middle-Eastern oil and less having to prop up evil dictatorships like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. So theres pros and cons. Plus, the Taliban were downright evil themselves. So it was like trying to clear one cancer so you could avoid getting a few others.

 

Iraq...well, I wont start here. Its been discusses so many times before. It was just wrong, thats all. But so were 10 years of sanctions that have killed far more than the Iraq invasion has.

[Chimpy]

Say what you want about "We hate him" and "The public would burn him"...

 

...we voted him in.

THREE TIMES.

Once is understandable - people wanted a change of government. Twice was a mistake, but you can ALMOST see why. The third time was inexcusable and pathetic.

 

The people with common sense might generally hate him, but sadly, you're not the only ones with the vote. The morons can all vote as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Technically most people will vote for who they think will benefit them in their constituency it's pretty rare for a vote to be tactically made to make a point. The recent Scottish elections show a good example of the rare vote being made to make a point. Even still the local elections run at the same time give a different picture.

[Crazy_Harry]

also, technically, his last "landslide victory" involved him gaining something ridiculous like only 35.2% of the electorate support- once you action in the voters who DID'NT turn out, that represents something like 22% of the adult citizenry of the UK.

 

nice landslide, tone...

 

also, you have to remember that New Labour's main support came because, frankly, alot of people could still remember the 18 years of Tory rule and were a little wary about letting them back in. Not that New Labour did anything BETTER, per se...

[creepingfear]

This would never have happened under the Romans.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For a moment I thought your post was going to read "Zis vould never have happened under zi Nazis!"

 

Harry Enfields Jurgen the German?

 

No?

 

Oh well....

[Skarclaw]

also, technically, his last "landslide victory" involved him gaining something ridiculous like only 35.2% of the electorate support- once you action in the voters who DID'NT turn out, that represents something like 22% of the adult citizenry of the UK.

 

nice landslide, tone...

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thats a fault of our ######s electoral system, and the people that didn't vote. Against, I think the Labour party are a cunch of bunts, but its not really the fault of the party. 1997,2001 (and to a lesser extent, 2005) were big leads over the Torys.

[doc_newstead]

Nein.

[hardboiledcop]

I don't think Brown should be allowed in at all, I literally fear for a country under the thumb of Gordon Brown.. and did anyone else hear that he's moved the next election back to 2009?

 

I tell ya, there's no way that anyone should be allowed to succeed the PM without another election (except obviously in a time of crisis) noone voted for Brown, and I doubt he would have been voted in had it been up for debate.

[Rob15]

and did anyone else hear that he's moved the next election back to 2009?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, but thats disgusting.

[Cyber Soldier]

Who feels like having a coup?

[sniper_boi]

I hear ya on that one.

[Chimpy]

I don't think Brown should be allowed in at all, I literally fear for a country under the thumb of Gordon Brown.. and did anyone else hear that he's moved the next election back to 2009?

 

I tell ya, there's no way that anyone should be allowed to succeed the PM without another election (except obviously in a time of crisis) noone voted for Brown, and I doubt he would have been voted in had it been up for debate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Mostly because that's not how our electoral system has worked... ever.

 

No one voted for Tony Blair either, except in his constituency, ditto with Gordon Brown.

 

You don't vote for the PM you vote for the local MP. The PM is selected by the Sovereign who is duty bound to choose the person who would have the support of the House of Commons. In practice this would be the leader of the party with the largest majority.

 

Technically he probably can be challenged for leadership of the Labour party. It is by no means a done deal.

[creepingfear]

2009?

 

Thats got to be a joke, surely?

 

In The Sun it has a brief article for Jeremy Clarkson tomorrow saying that on the 1st July Great Britain officially becomes a facist state. Whats that about?

[Chimpy]

And urrrm, the next election technically doesn't need to be held until the 3rd of June 2010... please fact check your hysteria!

 

The European Elections are occuring in 2009 hence the thought that the general election might be done at the same time.

 

Who here was old enough to vote in the 2005 general election?

[Cyber Soldier]

I was.

[Crazy_Harry]

me

 

and chimpy is quite correct- no-one choses the PM other than the majority party. We don't have a president, afterall.

 

However, I do stand by the Lib dems demands for a snap election- Tony Bliar did say he would govern for a full term in the 05 elections, which, as such, technically allows for a snap election.

 

not that it'll happen, of course.

 

And who the HELL in their right mind is reading the Sun? and reading what that twonk clarkson has to say as well? I mean, seriously- come on...

[Skarclaw]

In The Sun it has a brief article for Jeremy Clarkson tomorrow saying that on the 1st July Great Britain officially becomes a facist state. Whats that about?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To be honest if you read the sun, you don't deserve to vote.

[hardboiledcop]

To be honest if you read the sun, you don't deserve to vote.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The only reason I've ever read the sun is for JC.

[finderella1]

Hopefully one of Brown's first actions will be to order the public hanging of clarkson...

[Bengali]

no no no, Clarkson is a god, hopefully his first action will be to have every member of the labour party publicly hung, drawn and quartered for treason

 

LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!!!!!

[creepingfear]

To be honest if you read the sun, you don't deserve to vote.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And what if you read ALL newspapers to get a much better understanding of a situation? And besides, I never said I read The Sun, I said it had a small note about what Clarkson was going to be saying in saturdays edition.

 

My question again - anybody know whats so significant about the 1st of July?

[Chimpy]

If you read all newspapers you have too much time on your hands!

 

The only print stuff I read is The Times (also with Clarkson), New Scientist and the occasional guilty peek at Marie Claire/Cosmo or More over the girlfriends shoulder. That and a flick through industry guff in work.

 

Outside of that I spend a fair amount of time on Al Jazeera and the BBC News. Then the odd poke into other things if I'm bored.

[creepingfear]

And what else am I supposed to read when I'm taking a dump?

[finderella1]

And what if you read ALL newspapers to get a much better understanding of a situation? And besides, I never said I read The Sun, I said it had a small note about what Clarkson was going to be saying in saturdays edition.

 

My question again - anybody know whats so significant about the 1st of July?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1st of July would be round about when Gordon Brown would take over.

 

The only newspaper worth reading = The Gruaniad

[Cyber Soldier]

Independent FTW!!!

[alastairthegreat]

new scientist FTW

 

tony may not be perfect by any standards but he's a damm lot better than anyone else it could have been, and to be fair he has done a hell of a lot for this country, in my opinion his only mistake was taking us into iraq. apart from that hes done masses to ensure that britain has a stable economy and a fair system of education and healthcare for as many people as possible. take for example the fact that now every child has twice as much spent on their education per year than they did before 97, sure whoever's in power is going to be unpopular with a certain section of newspapers (doesnt the sun have an average reading age of about 7??) but thats just a fact of life nowadays.

 

neway just my 2 cents,

 

ali