UK General Election 2010

[Pokérob]

LibDems were always for the whole year a strong party to vote for, what the problem is that all the big companies are trying to adopt that they're worthless. Check out the radiotimes only showing a blue and red dalek and now yellow one eh? Plus the fact that in the daily telegraph yesterday Cameron was quoted saying that it was a two horse race.. yeah... he even mentioned that Nick Clegg wasn't even a threat.

I just view this as some spin doctoring going on and trying to tell us not to vote for them. But let's be fair, all of them have cocked up in the past, LibDems just say what you wanna hear, Labour sticks us into a financial crisis and Tories brought our social culture into disarray.

I'm voting Liberal Democrats.

 

[cookie]

I'm hoping this election will be the one that shatters the illusion that only Labour/Conservatives have any chance of winning. Then the two big ones will start focusing more on their policies and less on slandering the other one, which unfortunately achieves the same end when people think only one or the other is a valid choice (see: those annoying posters).

 

[akuchi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1oQvC4fUtk

Anyone watch the debate? Good ol' Tories trying to not come across as racists...and looking extremely stupid in the process.

Seems like Lib Dems are becoming a serious party now too.

Two main things I took away from the debate:
DAVID CAMERON ONCE SPOKE TO A BLACK MAN and
DAVID CAMERON KNOWS WHAT IT'S LIKE TO STRUGGLE TO MAKE ENDS MEET, REALLY. IT'S NOT LIKE HE WENT TO ETON OR ANYTHING

mmhm.

hey, look! it's the Conservative shadow cabinet!

 

[McGrrr]

Our economy is fucked. We need severe public spending cuts, and we need them now, but it would be bad politics to campaign on such a message.

The tories are the least of all evils, but I will not be voting. My constituency has been conservative since 1910 (except for 4 years) anyway.

 

[Firestorm]

Please refrain from insulting others for their voting habits.

 

[Deck Knight]

Two main things I took away from the debate:
DAVID CAMERON ONCE SPOKE TO A BLACK MAN and
DAVID CAMERON KNOWS WHAT IT'S LIKE TO STRUGGLE TO MAKE ENDS MEET, REALLY. IT'S NOT LIKE HE WENT TO ETON OR ANYTHING

mmhm.

hey, look! it's the Conservative shadow cabinet!

At some point you must realize that because the British will always win in this election, the electorate will always necessarily lose.

The only solution is to have the Pakistanis create their own party based on a platform of taxi operator strikes. How will they get around then? There are only so many British cab drivers around now. All they need is a good name... perhaps the Pakistani Operators-Westminster Party. POW for short.

POW will send a message right good to the government. They will do with democracy what Guy Fawkes did with explosives.

The good thing about the American system is that we're a nation of mutts and cross-breeders. Therefore if you don't like one American you can simply vote for a different one and expect different results. The American hegemon is thus a different beast than the British homogenon.

 

[s_foxy]

Not sure really... each party has their own policies that I don't support...

Don't like Labour:
1) Digital Economy Bill - It's obvious...
2) Bank bonus tax - London would lose out if it still wants to be among the top of the game in finance

Like Labour:
1) Won't cut spendings too soon
2) Fairer income distribution to the poor

Don't like Tories:
1) Digital economy bill
2) Public spending cuts really soon
3) don't really like them in general for some reason

Like Tories:
1) Maybe they can tackle the budget deficit properly - but it's a big question mark though...

Don't like the Lib dems:
1) They seem to be keen on joining the Euro

Like the Lib dems:
1) Anti Digital Economy Bill
2) they don't seem inclined to cut spending right away

What's wrong with going to Eton by the way?

 

[cantab]

What's wrong with going to Eton by the way?

The way I see it, the problem isn't so much going to Eton, but rather not going to state school, and thus not having any experience of that.

The other issue is the implication that ministers are being chosen by an old-boys-network, and not on merit.

And then it's just the "them versus us" factor. Voters tend to prefer politicians who seem like themselves. Not many people are old Etonians.

 

[akuchi]

Not a great deal wrong with Eton as such - rather when your entire shadow cabinet attended the same incredibly privileged, prestigious private same-sex school with you, you kind of lose any credibility to either deny the old-boys network of British politics, and also it really fucking rankles when as part of the electorate they try to tell you with straight faces 'WE KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO STRUGGLE TO MAKE ENDS MEET'. no, no you do not.

 

[B-Lulz]

If the Monster Raving Loonie party are running i'll vote for them. If not the Lib Dems most likely because I have NO desire to vote Labour or Tory and voting BNP is like a vote for Naziism to me.

 

[sbc]

Two main things I took away from the debate:
DAVID CAMERON ONCE SPOKE TO A BLACK MAN and
DAVID CAMERON KNOWS WHAT IT'S LIKE TO STRUGGLE TO MAKE ENDS MEET, REALLY. IT'S NOT LIKE HE WENT TO ETON OR ANYTHING

mmhm.

hey, look! it's the Conservative shadow cabinet!

He also endorses conscription of children into the navy, seeing how the black man in question has served for 30 years of his 40 year long life.

I found the Tory poster with Brown saying, "I increased the gap between rich and poor. Vote for me" quite funny since the main reason for the gap between rich and poor has increased primarily because of the 15 years of economic growth before the global economy hit the shitters and the creation of more high-income jobs in the City and the like, just see the increase in self-made millionaires. And this Labour govt has done a lot more than previous Tory govt for trying to increase equality, with the minimum wage and child tax credits. It is a shame that they're not fans of the grammar school system which is another means of upward social mobility.

I don't trust the Tories on the economy. I agree that early cuts are needed to send confidence that the deficit is under control but I'm not sure they have any idea how and where to cut. And I remember their response to the intial banking crisis was extremely muted to begin with, whilst Brown was quick to intervene and prop up these banks. We may be fucked now by the deficit but we'd be fucked regardless if we didn't intervene (like the Tories were seemingly advocating) since recessions caused by credit crunches tend to be the worst. Cameron is quite a bit of a soundbite showman. Criticising the poverty trap with regards to single mothers working extra hours and being 4p in the pound better off for instance. So he's going to cut working tax credits then? It's not exactly an easy thing to avoid, he's finding all these criticisms (that most likely would have been the same under a conservative govt) and not finding feasible solutions.

The Lib Dems have quite a few policies that I don't really agree with/ I'm not certain about like scrapping Trident, joining the Euro (I think this crisis has shown that we should have monetary sovreignity) and their receptiveness to an EU superstate. And I've heard things about cutting Tax credits and stuff, but that's all of out Brown's mouth and you all know politicians.

I think I'd vote Labour, maybe Lib Dems if they stop playing the we're not Labour/Tory card and actually properly discuss their policies and how they're actually feasibly going to do all this stuff (like withdraw from Afghanistan almost immmediately).


EDIT: Osbourne has the most punchable face in the world

 

[Son_of_Shadoo]

I have issues with the LibDems. First, there's the selection system, which I am very much against. I feel it's a ridiculous idea. Second, there's Clegg himself. He's slimier than he looks. He shrugs off the MP expenses scandal, despite practically being its frontman. He spent TWENTY THOUSAND POUNDS PLANTING PLUM TREES. When asked, he said "it's not my garden, it's the people's garden." That may be paraphrased, but still. Pardon my language, but that is just HORSESHIT.

Of course, all this is irrelevant, as I'm only 17...

 

[sce4]

To be honest I don't really like any of the three main parties, not that it matters as I'm 15. David Cameron is too hung up with pointing out flaws of Labour and not being himself to focus on any work in parliament. Gordon Brown lacks charisma and I can't see him having much influence over other countries making Britain even less well regarded. The Lib Dems have only risen in popularity because people don't want to vote for the other two.

The things I focused on most was the education, don't really care about much else in terms of the government atm. First of all I'd like to say that 7% of people got to private schools as a child yet ~90% of Oxbridge students were part of that 7%, taking this into account why is David Cameron putting his children in state schools when they'd be better off in private, is it because he wants to get people to like him hence he's putting him getting elected before his children (not someone I would vote for), or is it because Labour have done such a good job with education and are changing those statistics. TBH none of them seem to be doing anything good with education and kept going on about Labour wasting money/giving teachers more power (i.e they think discipline is more important than giving students fun lessons they will enjoy and learn from).

I chose other because if I was voting it would most likely be for the green party.

 

[cantab]

7% of people got to private schools as a child yet ~90% of Oxbridge students were part of that 7%

Incorrect. Cambridge and Oxford have in recent years taken about 50% of their intake from state schools. Some detailed statistics for Cambridge from 2008 are here: http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2008-09/special/17/

Independent schools had a higher acceptance rate (32%) than comprehensive schools and 6th form colleges (25%), but a slight lower rate than state-funded selective grammar schools (33%).

What you said is typically of the kind of misconceptions that put students at state schools off applying to Oxbridge. Cambridge is many things, but one thing it is not is full of toffs.

 

[Burn Jack]

First of all I'd like to say that 7% of people got to private schools as a child yet ~90% of Oxbridge students were part of that 7%,

If by "~90%" you mean "about 50%", then sure.

 

[sce4]

Sorry, my statistics must be old, it's just what I heard on a (obviously unreliable) tv show, and on my visit to Oxford me and my friends saw 10 people from ethnic minorities in a hall of 200, that was probably just that college, but I hardly saw any toffs at Cambridge. The only reason I remembered those statistics was because I was thinking of applying to Cambridge in the future. I acknowledge that I was wrong but around 50% is still quite a lot coming from 7% of people going to private schools. I still don't know why the show said 90, maybe they exaggerated, muffled their words, or I misheard (probably the latter if it's me).

 

[joshua]

I got a polling card in the post despite being 16. any chance i could get away with voting? i mean its anonymous so i don't think i could get in trouble

 

[jc104]

Form the lib dems party manifesto:

Give the right to vote from age 16.

Well you've persuaded me - but I can't vote! lol

On a more serious note though, I am very glad to see this. I certainly feel that most people at my school know more about politics than the average person. After all, a large proportion of us study politics. On top of this, many 16-year olds pay taxes.

Similarly changing the electoral system would be beneficial I feel. Although there would probably be a public outcry when people realised that the BNP and other extremist parties had a significant chance of gaining a largely irrelevant seat, I feel representation is not fair with the current system. It is possible to obtain a significant proportion of the vote in a large number of constituencies without being significantly represented in parliament. The lib dems at the moment display this, getting about 20% of the vote and less than 10% of the seats. The current system results in far too strong a two-party system, with successive labour and conservative governments merely reversing each other's changes. Decreasing the chances of an overall majority would prevent these swings, particularly given that we need no fast, sweeping changes to be made, and would help to focus on a long-term outlook.

(I think this crisis has shown that we should have monetary sovreignity)

I think the euro stood up much better to the recession than our pound. We have a huge reliance on the US and Europe anyway as it is, so it is merely securing us.

I would highly recommend the reading of the Lib Dems manifesto. It is much easier to read than that of the Tories, and is much better than Labour's "animated video" (not joking.) I have to say that I agree with the vast majority of their policies, with the possible exception of Trident, if only because of the very vague "defence review" being offered as a replacement. In reality, we have to remember that we are members of the UN and have a so-called "special relationship" with the US, and as such are largely well-defended. Trident can do nothing to prevent terrorism, which may well become a nuclear threat to the UK.

I'm giving my full support to the lib dems (not that I can do anything) and I couldn't care less about the digital economy bill either. It seems to me only fair that copyright law should extend to the internet and be properly enforceable.

EDIT: Osbourne has the most punchable face in the world

Damn right.

 

[sbc]

Form the lib dems party manifesto:


Well you've persuaded me - but I can't vote! lol

On a more serious note though, I am very glad to see this. I certainly feel that most people at my school know more about politics than the average person. After all, a large proportion of us study politics. On top of this, many 16-year olds pay taxes.

Similarly changing the electoral system would be beneficial I feel. Although there would probably be a public outcry when people realised that the BNP and other extremist parties had a significant chance of gaining a largely irrelevant seat, I feel representation is not fair with the current system. It is possible to obtain a significant proportion of the vote in a large number of constituencies without being significantly represented in parliament. The lib dems at the moment display this, getting about 20% of the vote and less than 10% of the seats. The current system results in far too strong a two-party system, with successive labour and conservative governments merely reversing each other's changes. Decreasing the chances of an overall majority would prevent these swings, particularly given that we need no fast, sweeping changes to be made, and would help to focus on a long-term outlook.

I think the euro stood up much better to the recession than our pound. We have a huge reliance on the US and Europe anyway as it is, so it is merely securing us.

I would highly recommend the reading of the Lib Dems manifesto. It is much easier to read than that of the Tories, and is much better than Labour's "aminated video" (not joking.) I have to say that I agree with the vast majority of their policies, with the possible exception of Trident, if only because of the very vague "defence review" being offered as a replacement. In reality, we have to remember that we are members of the UN and have a so-called "special relationship" with the US, and as such are largely well-defended. Trident can do nothing to prevent terrorism, which may well become a nuclear threat to the UK.

I'm giving my full support to the lib dems (not that I can do anything) and I couldn't care less about the digital economy bill either. It seems to me only fair that copyright law should extend to the internet and be properly enforceable.
Damn right.

I am backing Labour. Tories are the same old Tories, who have tried to mask this by putting a photogenic darling Cameron, who is actually true to the cliche of all style no substance. See what happens when he forgets his pre-prepared lines . I don't think their economic policies are in the best interests of the country but rather their wealth benefactors. He loves to say "jobs tax" multiple times, but I'm willing to bet that his plan of "cutting waste" would cost more jobs. FT estimated 20-40 000 public sector job cuts, not to mention how many job cuts would stem cutting billions worth of private sector contracts. He also can't promise that he won't put up VAT, whilst cutting inheritance tax. Regressive taxation ftw. And their initial response to the credit crunch was slow and indecisive. Labour have made mistakes on all fronts but the Tories are simply dreadful.

Clegg too is quite a charmeleon...trying to hide his wealthy upbringing but at least the Lib Dems have proper policies. But I think there is too much change for the sake of it, particularly in their foreign policy. Getting rid of trident, wanting to high-tail from Afghanistan as soon as possible and wanting to join the Euro is a bit too much for me.

I do find it quite retarded that you can be deemed mature enough to choose to leave school and get a full-time job, have sex and drive a car, and previously smoke yet not at the same time be considered old enough to vote. I know an 18 year old girl in my year, who wants to vote Tory. Why? Because Cameron is uh...uh... better than Brown. I know people who are more mature than that and are a couple of years younger.

Re the euro, I think the sterling depreciating helped us on the exports/imports front and helped our recovery, as well as the housing market recovery to an extent. That would have been moot if we were in the euro. The sterling falling against the euro quite a bit helped more cos 60% of our trade is to the eurozone. And the eurozone interest rates were at 1% all the time ours were at 0.5%, and quantative easing would also have been controlled by the ECB. So all in all I think we needed monetary sovreignity during the crisis.

 

[cantab]

Sorry, my statistics must be old, it's just what I heard on a (obviously unreliable) tv show, and on my visit to Oxford me and my friends saw 10 people from ethnic minorities in a hall of 200, that was probably just that college, but I hardly saw any toffs at Cambridge.

Cambridge is rather low in ethnic minorities - or at least, British ethnic minorities. (There are loads of far eastern - Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc - students). But then again, something that may be easily forgotten by those who live in cosmopolitan cities is that 90% of the overall UK population is white. So while Cambridge feels devoid of minorities, it's not ridiculously far off the UK as a whole.

The only reason I remembered those statistics was because I was thinking of applying to Cambridge in the future.

If you are expecting straight As in A-Levels, apply. (I think Cambridge might now be asking for A*AA, but you get the idea).

If you're worried about toffs, choose your college correct. The newer colleges, like Robinson and Churchill, have more state students. King's I think is 3/4 state school, but it's also the most competitive. (And also very left-wing, they have a hammer and sickle painted on the wall in their bar IIRC). Avoid Magdelene, and possibly Trinity and John's - though if it's Mathematics you intend to study, Trinity is huge for Maths.
Oh and don't confuse Trinity College with Trinity Hall! They are two unrelated colleges. Trinity Hall is older, smaller, and better.

Sorry for off-topicness. Any Cambridge discussion should probably be continued by VM, or in a new thread if there's likely to be more general interest.

 

[sce4]

Incorrect. Cambridge and Oxford have in recent years taken about 50% of their intake from state schools. Some detailed statistics for Cambridge from 2008 are here: http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2008-09/special/17/

Independent schools had a higher acceptance rate (32%) than comprehensive schools and 6th form colleges (25%), but a slight lower rate than state-funded selective grammar schools (33%).

What you said is typically of the kind of misconceptions that put students at state schools off applying to Oxbridge. Cambridge is many things, but one thing it is not is full of toffs.

Thanks for correcting me, I rewatched the show just to make sure, turns out I misheard (I feel stupid now). But i did some mental calculations and if 93% of people go to state schools (which I'm sure is right) and (hypothetically) if 1% of people go to Oxbridge (assuming it's a 50/50 state/private split) then people from state schools have a 1 in 186 chance of attending. If we take the other 7% of people they have a 1 in 14 chance of going, meaning that they are 13.35 times more likely to attend (which applies for whatever percentage of Oxbridge students there are).

At the moment Canbridge and Oxford want straight A's but they are changing that to A*s if not this year then next (so before I even start my A-levels). And sorry for continuing on with this discussion.

 

[FrenzyB3ar]

I'd vote for Labour, mainly because I don't want Conservatives to win.

I like the Lib Dems, but I don't know how much to trust them. I think they can get away with promising amazing things, because they know that they'll never be in the position where they'll actually have to do the things they promise. If there was a chance they'd win, I think they wouldn't be promising so much, as they would be scared to let us down if they did win. I like the party though.

True, but then again we are always scared of things we are uncertain of.
I'd say put them in power, I'm sick of Labour and the Cons personally.

 

[Deucalion2]

Can we stop attacking people based on whether they are posh? I have a double-barrelled surname and I attend a private school (admittedly on scholarship), my accent is Oxford English, and I hope I will make Oxford University. Does this make me a bad person? I can still try and empathize, try and help. I've been lucky, I won't deny that, but I'd like everyone else to have experienced what I've experienced, if I could somehow do that. The minute people hear my voice, they immediately think all I can do is play cricket, eat scones, and govern small South Pacific islands, when I'm much more than that. I don't support Cameron, and I dislike his policies, but I really do dislike it when people say "I won't vote for him because he is a posh twat". That's not a reason to withhold your vote from somebody. Your background shouldn't matter, it's what you make of yourself. If you're not going to vote for the Conservative party, do it because their policies are a load of bullshit, not because of Cameron's upbringing.

 

[sce4]

Can we stop attacking people based on whether they are posh? I have a double-barrelled surname and I attend a private school (admittedly on scholarship), my accent is Oxford English, and I hope I will make Oxford University. Does this make me a bad person? I can still try and empathize, try and help. I've been lucky, I won't deny that, but I'd like everyone else to have experienced what I've experienced, if I could somehow do that. The minute people hear my voice, they immediately think all I can do is play cricket, eat scones, and govern small South Pacific islands, when I'm much more than that. I don't support Cameron, and I dislike his policies, but I really do dislike it when people say "I won't vote for him because he is a posh twat". That's not a reason to withhold your vote from somebody. Your background shouldn't matter, it's what you make of yourself. If you're not going to vote for the Conservative party, do it because their policies are a load of bullshit, not because of Cameron's upbringing.

It doesn't make you a bad person at all. The thing is that with David Cameron he tries to act like he can relate to everyone but it seems like an act and we feel he doesn't actually know anything about poorer people.

Also I thought I'd show everyone this video. It is not an attack against posh people, just the tories, and is excellent even if you support them.

 

[sbc]

Can we stop attacking people based on whether they are posh? I have a double-barrelled surname and I attend a private school (admittedly on scholarship), my accent is Oxford English, and I hope I will make Oxford University. Does this make me a bad person? I can still try and empathize, try and help. I've been lucky, I won't deny that, but I'd like everyone else to have experienced what I've experienced, if I could somehow do that. The minute people hear my voice, they immediately think all I can do is play cricket, eat scones, and govern small South Pacific islands, when I'm much more than that. I don't support Cameron, and I dislike his policies, but I really do dislike it when people say "I won't vote for him because he is a posh twat". That's not a reason to withhold your vote from somebody. Your background shouldn't matter, it's what you make of yourself. If you're not going to vote for the Conservative party, do it because their policies are a load of bullshit, not because of Cameron's upbringing.

Well maybe also because Cameron pretends to emphathise with the average joe, whilst never being in the position to actually understand what people are going through. To top it off, he continues to pander to the traditional elements of the Tory party through continued regressive policies, whilst not really considering the actual needs of the economy.