- #1
vertices
- 62
- 0
If you're British, who/what party will you be voting for on the 6th May and why?
cristo said:Lib Dems:
* Vince Cable actually knows what he's talking about and has costed the Lib Dem manifesto, unlike those of the other parties.
* Nick Clegg is a great public speaker and is the only one who has actually answered the questions in the debates (well, to an extent; they are politicians after all!) and has done so in a personable way. I really believe he has the potential to lead this country to better things.
* The Lib Dems believe in taking a more commanding role in Europe which will certainly benefit the country more than stepping back and ignoring the issue, or joining with the crazy right wing parties in Brussels.
* Abolishing tuition fees (albeit within 6 years time) is a policy that I am in great support of: I'm lucky that I could afford to pay for university, but a lot of people are not so lucky and don't deserve to be disadvantaged.
* The Lib Dems believe in the importance of scientific research, and will provide a ring-fenced scientific budget.
* Nick Clegg believes in changing the electoral system from the current ridiculous system in which old MPs have a job for life and so nothing to work for, to a proper proportional representative system which will put an end to the tactical voting for the better of two evils.
I could go on...
vertices said:Do you think we're likely to have a hung parliament? I'm beginning to think that a real possibly, especially after yesterday's Brown "bigot" gaffe.
cristo said:Lib Dems:
* Vince Cable actually knows what he's talking about and has costed the Lib Dem manifesto, unlike those of the other parties.
* Nick Clegg is a great public speaker and is the only one who has actually answered the questions in the debates (well, to an extent; they are politicians after all!) and has done so in a personable way. I really believe he has the potential to lead this country to better things.
* The Lib Dems believe in taking a more commanding role in Europe which will certainly benefit the country more than stepping back and ignoring the issue, or joining with the crazy right wing parties in Brussels.
* Abolishing tuition fees (albeit within 6 years time) is a policy that I am in great support of: I'm lucky that I could afford to pay for university, but a lot of people are not so lucky and don't deserve to be disadvantaged.
* The Lib Dems believe in the importance of scientific research, and will provide a ring-fenced scientific budget.
* Nick Clegg believes in changing the electoral system from the current ridiculous system in which old MPs have a job for life and so nothing to work for, to a proper proportional representative system which will put an end to the tactical voting for the better of two evils.
I could go on...
Investment in “knowledge” is the key to economic recovery, said Cox. “There are figures like 6.4% of GDP comes from physics, 30% comes from science.”
He added that the “science vote” could play an important part in the election. “The science minister, Lord Drayson, thinks that there’s something like 3m votes that could be swayed by the party that says, ‘We want to make Britain the best place that does science in the world’.
“Someone’s got to shake these people. Why isn’t making Britain the best place in the world to do science a good idea? We would be if we spent an extra billion on it.”
Cox said that Dr Evan Harris, the Lib Dem spokesman on science, had “made the most commitment to science” and, when asked if he would vote Lib Dem, said: “Yes I would.”
The news will be embarrassing to Labour. Keyboardist Cox and D:Ream played a series of gigs for the party during the 1997 election campaign.
Does Clegg favor even higher UK taxes to pay for these benefits?cristo said:Lib Dems:[...]
* Abolishing tuition fees (albeit within 6 years time) is a policy that I am in great support of: I'm lucky that I could afford to pay for university, but a lot of people are not so lucky and don't deserve to be disadvantaged.
* The Lib Dems believe in the importance of scientific research, and will provide a ring-fenced scientific budget.
...
mheslep said:Does Clegg favor even higher UK taxes to pay for these benefits?
Any of the above would do, except cap gains which doesn't raise revenue. Clegg's link is ambiguous but says something like he will make the 'rich pay their fare share'. Really? In the UK the 'rich' don't pay enough?cristo said:It depends what you mean by tax (there are a lot of different taxes: income, VAT, NI, stamp duty, corporation, capital gains etc..). You can obtain a detailed breakdown here: http://www.libdems.org.uk/our_manifesto.aspx
mheslep said:Any of the above would do, except cap gains which doesn't raise revenue. Clegg's link is ambiguous but says something like he will make the 'rich pay their fare share'. Really? In the UK the 'rich' don't pay enough?
mheslep said:I asked about taxes because of the near default situation in Greece, and soon in Portugal in Spain. That is, when I see proposals for more government provided benefits in the EU it seems to me they should be immediately followed by a clear statement of how they will be financed via cuts elsewhere or taxes that won't do damage to the economy. Anything else would seem to be asking for similar problems.
cristo said:I think we are heading towards a hung parliament, but I don't think the bigot gaffe will make too much difference. I think it's fair to say that Brown will have to make up for it tonight though, and I expect a couple of snipes about it from either side of him!
But then the politicians will have to campaign everywhere instead of just in half a dozen marginal seats - imagine a plague of them across the land!DrGreg said:If a hung parliament leads to a change in the electoral system from the current "first past the post" system, that can only be a good thing, in my view.
Curses! You are right. That's the flaw in my argument!mgb_phys said:But then the politicians will have to campaign everywhere instead of just in half a dozen marginal seats - imagine a plague of them across the land!DrGreg said:If a hung parliament leads to a change in the electoral system from the current "first past the post" system, that can only be a good thing, in my view.
The nice thing about living in a town that has been labour since the ice age is that you never see a politician!
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/europe/la-fg-britain-voters-20100507,0,493291.storyReporting from London
In the trendy neighborhood where it all began, the centrist revolution led by Tony Blair — the swaggering days of "Cool Britannia," the unprecedented 13 years of Labor Party rule — could be sputtering to an exhausted, inglorious end...
Ivan Seeking said:The results are coming in.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/europe/la-fg-britain-voters-20100507,0,493291.story
Exit polls are suggesting that the conservatives may emerge as the leaders.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/e...onservative-voters-hate-it.html#ixzz0msXOKrcCIf he wins, he will – [...]
He will claim (falsely) that ‘Right-wing’ policies lost the last three Elections.
Those Tory MPs who agree with you and me will be cowed and silenced for good. The power will lie with the A-list smart set, modish, rich metropolitan liberals hungry for office at all costs who would have been (and who in the case of one of the older ones actually was) in New Labour 13 years ago.
And then where will you have to turn for help as the PC, pro-EU bulldozer trundles across our landscape destroying what is good and familiar and replacing it with a country whose inhabi*tants increasingly cannot recognise it as their own?
Meanwhile labour supporters are complaining that their right wing policies won them the last 3.He will claim (falsely) that ‘Right-wing’ policies lost the last three Elections.
Because of the unavoidable execution of austerity measures which will make the party in power unpopular for a generation?mgb_phys said:I think this is going to be one of those 1945 elections where the smart tactic was to lose.
arildno said:Tories: 306, Labour: 258, LibDem: 57
Yep - and there is obviously going to be a labour leadership battle, so a few quiet years of scheming for a young back bencher as all the old guard get blamed for the last screwup.mheslep said:Because of the unavoidable execution of austerity measures which will make the party in power unpopular for a generation?
mgb_phys said:From the results on the BBC site, I worked how many seats each would win if you had proportional representaion
[pre]
Party Seats % votes % seats
Conservative 306 36.1 10706647 234
Labour 258 29 8604358 188
Liberal Dem 57 23 6827938 149
UKIP 0 3.1 917832 20
SNP 6 1.7 491386 11
Green 1 1 285616 6
Dem Unionist 8 0.6 168216 4
BNP 0 1.9 563743 12
Plaid Cymru 3 0.6 165394 4
Sinn Féin 5 0.6 171942 4
Cons Unionists 0 0.3 102361 2
SDLP 3 0.4 110970 3
[/pre]
arildno said:Such parties generally lose out in proportionally based systems as well, for example in Norway, since you need a total exceeding 4% in order for your national votes to be pooled together in order to gain "adjustment mandates" for proportionality concerns lost in the initial county-based mandate distribution.
arildno said:Thus, I think that the best, and most realistic way for the UK to reform is to increase the number of MP's, say, from 650 to 800 (or some other number).
cristo said:No way; we have too many members in the commons as it is.
I think the best switch would be to a German-type system of "mixed-member proportional representation", which is essentially a hybrid between PR and FPTP.