Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: BashfulAnthony on October 07, 2015, 05:24:41 PM
-
Having watched David Cameron's speech to the Tory toffs and blue-rinse brigade, I am astounded at his audacity and duplicity. He firstly claimed to be a Government through the will of the people, yet he was elected by less than 37% of the electorate. His government has failed in it's promise to bring down net immigration to the "tens of thousands." It is currently running at 330,000 net, yearly, and rising. He has failed to cut the deficit to the level he promised: it is not even halved - and the Tories are now borrowing more than Labour ever did; though he continues to castigate Labour for their borrowing. He has failed to even come close to his promise to build 200,000 houses a year: it is still 100,000 short of that, and has gone down in all but one year in the last five and a half. Then there is the tax credit shambles: to make the poorer, "but hard-working" people better off, by taking over £1,000 a year off them!! Then there is his shambles of a promise to squeeze concessions from the EU over our referendum question. His foreign policy is a disaster! How people could ever have believed him is beyond me.
-
You hit the nail on the head there, Bashy, most voters and punters are dumbass stupid.
During the 2010 election he said no top down reorganization of the NHS, no VAT increase and no ifs and no buts about immigration. This time round no change to in-work child benefits. And guess what......and they still trust the pork sausage liar.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
I'm well aware of that Anchorman! It seems that the majority of the English have that lesson to learn yet.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
I'm well aware of that Anchorman! It seems that the majority of the English have that lesson to learn yet.
As BA's original post points out, only 37% of the people who even turned out voted Tory. The majority of the English did not vote for Cameron.
-
I think the Tories got lucky with Miliband and the SNP doing the hard work for him at the last election.
% of the vote when Labour one was 40% in 2005.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
15% of Scots say otherwise.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
15% of Scots say otherwise.
15% of voters in Scotland
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
15% of Scots say otherwise.
15% of voters in Scotland
What do you mean by that NS?
Are you implying that native scots were less likely to vote tory than people living in scotland who aren't native scots? In which so I suggest you provide some evidence.
And if you are breaking things down in that manner, you also need to include the voting record of native scots who are now living in other parts of the UK.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
15% of Scots say otherwise.
15% of voters in Scotland
What do you mean by that NS?
Are you implying that native scots were less likely to vote tory than people living in scotland who aren't native scots? In which so I suggest you provide some evidence.
And if you are breaking things down in that manner, you also need to include the voting record of native scots who are now living in other parts of the UK.
Eh? I merely adjusted jakswan's statement to be more clearly correct. I wasn't breaking it down in to being native Scots but rather pointing out that the figure he was using is just voters in Scotland, rather than anything to do with natives. Further, what of should have added was 'of those voting'
-
The majority of the English did not vote for Cameron.
Indeed.
The only people who voted for Cameron were the electors of Witney.
In the United Kingdom we do not vote for prime ministers. It is entirely possible that the Conservative members of Parliament could have selected another person to be their leader in the House of Commons who would then have been asked to form a government. It's not particularly common - it last happened in 1940.
-
Eh? I merely adjusted jakswan's statement to be more clearly correct. I wasn't breaking it down in to being native Scots but rather pointing out that the figure he was using is just voters in Scotland, rather than anything to do with natives. Further, what of should have added was 'of those voting'
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
-
Not up here, they don't.
Cameron is about as trustworthy as Thatcher - and nearly as popular.
15% of Scots say otherwise.
15% of voters in Scotland
What do you mean by that NS?
Are you implying that native scots were less likely to vote tory than people living in scotland who aren't native scots? In which so I suggest you provide some evidence.
And if you are breaking things down in that manner, you also need to include the voting record of native scots who are now living in other parts of the UK.
Eh? I merely adjusted jakswan's statement to be more clearly correct. I wasn't breaking it down in to being native Scots but rather pointing out that the figure he was using is just voters in Scotland, rather than anything to do with natives. Further, what of should have added was 'of those voting'
Fair enough - thanks for the clarification.
-
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
Mmm I take it you mean Anchorman's comment about Cameron not being popular - how is that inaccurate? The votes in Scotland for the Tories were considerably lower than in England. If Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron - Cameron is nowhere near as popular on that measure. Thatcher's Tories got 31% in 1979 - an increase of about 6% and greadually lost those votes recording 24% in 1987 but the 15% for the Tories is the lowest GE figure ever.
-
If Cameron is so terrible, how bad must the opposition have been that he managed to secure not only a victory, but a parliamentary majority.
The framing of the election debate was conducted by the mainstream media, and by and large that focused on economic capacity where - rightly or wrongly - the Tories were seen as a better option than Labour or the SNP that were promoted as holding the balance of Labour's potential power.
If you want to target those 'responsible' for the Tory election win, point at Miliband's ineffectiveness (and Blair's legacy that he failed to overcome), Sturgeon's violently anti-English rhetoric and the right-wing media's general misrepresentation (and the gullible public that lap up the tripe they pass off as journalism).
O.
-
Can you point me to this violently anto-English rhetoric of Nicola?
-
Well when you've all finished bickering about the exact figures and splits - what it does show is that democracy in the UK is not (in that dreaded phrase) fit for purpose.
However much I despise UKIP the fact that they got 1 MP on 12.7% of the vote and the SNP got 56 MP's on 4.7% of the vote and that the LibDems got 8 MP's on 7.9% of the vote clearly demonstrates that the whole system is skewed and needs overhauling.
This simply is not representative democracy.
-
Well when you've all finished bickering about the exact figures and splits - what it does show is that democracy in the UK is not (in that dreaded phrase) fit for purpose.
However much I despise UKIP the fact that they got 1 MP on 12.7% of the vote and the SNP got 56 MP's on 4.7% of the vote and that the LibDems got 8 MP's on 7.9% of the vote clearly demonstrates that the whole system is skewed and needs overhauling.
This simply is not representative democracy.
Absolutely agree
-
And then of course there was this
http://www.carbonated.tv/news/david-cameron-jon-snow-saudi-arabia-channel-4-interview-video
-
Well when you've all finished bickering about the exact figures and splits - what it does show is that democracy in the UK is not (in that dreaded phrase) fit for purpose.
However much I despise UKIP the fact that they got 1 MP on 12.7% of the vote and the SNP got 56 MP's on 4.7% of the vote and that the LibDems got 8 MP's on 7.9% of the vote clearly demonstrates that the whole system is skewed and needs overhauling.
This simply is not representative democracy.
Absolutely agree
The electoral system needs reforming, yes, but that electoral system was the same for each of the parties - they knew what it was going in, and so did we. It might be responsible for the misrepresentation that Parliament is of the popular vote, but it's not responsible for Cameron's win - it was the same system for all of them.
O.
-
The electoral system needs reforming, yes, but that electoral system was the same for each of the parties - they knew what it was going in, and so did we. It might be responsible for the misrepresentation that Parliament is of the popular vote, but it's not responsible for Cameron's win - it was the same system for all of them.
O.
And? The system is skewed against certain voting patterns so it isn't the same for all
-
The electoral system needs reforming, yes, but that electoral system was the same for each of the parties - they knew what it was going in, and so did we. It might be responsible for the misrepresentation that Parliament is of the popular vote, but it's not responsible for Cameron's win - it was the same system for all of them.
O.
And? The system is skewed against certain voting patterns so it isn't the same for all
Exactly - and as such, is in part, responsible for Cameron forming a majority.
-
The electoral system needs reforming, yes, but that electoral system was the same for each of the parties - they knew what it was going in, and so did we. It might be responsible for the misrepresentation that Parliament is of the popular vote, but it's not responsible for Cameron's win - it was the same system for all of them.
O.
And? The system is skewed against certain voting patterns so it isn't the same for all
That system, though, is not something new - I agree that it favours the larger, more established parties over the smaller, but that doesn't change the fact that the reason the 'left' lost is because:
a) Labour failed to capitalise on the Tory austerity measures (largely because the media focused on economic effects rather than social)
b) the left-wing vote fragmented, especially the divisory forces on the right either dissolved (BNP) or shifted towards the centre (UKIP) in search of more votes.
Socialist nationalist parties, the Greens, a significant portion of the Lib Dems and the Labour party were all competing for the centre, centre-left and left wing votes, whilst no-one was standing in opposition to the Tory's for the centre-right and right wing.
O.
O.
-
That system, though, is not something new - I agree that it favours the larger, more established parties over the smaller, but that doesn't change the fact that the reason the 'left' lost is because:
a) Labour failed to capitalise on the Tory austerity measures (largely because the media focused on economic effects rather than social)
b) the left-wing vote fragmented, especially the divisory forces on the right either dissolved (BNP) or shifted towards the centre (UKIP) in search of more votes.
Socialist nationalist parties, the Greens, a significant portion of the Lib Dems and the Labour party were all competing for the centre, centre-left and left wing votes, whilst no-one was standing in opposition to the Tory's for the centre-right and right wing.
O.
O.
I think iit's a bit simplistic to classify UKIP as a centrist - indeed the whole left/right approach is very simplistic.
-
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
Mmm I take it you mean Anchorman's comment about Cameron not being popular - how is that inaccurate? The votes in Scotland for the Tories were considerably lower than in England. If Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron - Cameron is nowhere near as popular on that measure. Thatcher's Tories got 31% in 1979 - an increase of about 6% and greadually lost those votes recording 24% in 1987 but the 15% for the Tories is the lowest GE figure ever.
I took AMs statement to mean that Cameron was as popular as Thatcher.
-
I think iit's a bit simplistic to classify UKIP as a centrist - indeed the whole left/right approach is very simplistic.
Economically, UKIP were hitting a centrist path - they're authoritarian and isolationist, and I agree that a purely economic overview is simplistic, but that's what the media focussed on and therefore that's how the debate was held.
I'd question, as well, whether the Tory's still held the centre-right position or were more explicitly economically right-wing, but I'm mindful of how the debate was painted on the public consciousness rather than an in depth analysis of the reality.
O.
-
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
Mmm I take it you mean Anchorman's comment about Cameron not being popular - how is that inaccurate? The votes in Scotland for the Tories were considerably lower than in England. If Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron - Cameron is nowhere near as popular on that measure. Thatcher's Tories got 31% in 1979 - an increase of about 6% and greadually lost those votes recording 24% in 1987 but the 15% for the Tories is the lowest GE figure ever.
I took AMs statement to mean that Cameron was as popular as Thatcher.
-
Yep.....
And that's about on the same popularity scale as a pork pie at a bar mitzvah.
-
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
Mmm I take it you mean Anchorman's comment about Cameron not being popular - how is that inaccurate? The votes in Scotland for the Tories were considerably lower than in England. If Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron - Cameron is nowhere near as popular on that measure. Thatcher's Tories got 31% in 1979 - an increase of about 6% and greadually lost those votes recording 24% in 1987 but the 15% for the Tories is the lowest GE figure ever.
I took AMs statement to mean that Cameron was as popular as Thatcher.
Yep.....
And that's about on the same popularity scale as a pork pie at a bar mitzvah.
Take it up with NS then, he wrote 'Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron'.
-
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
Mmm I take it you mean Anchorman's comment about Cameron not being popular - how is that inaccurate? The votes in Scotland for the Tories were considerably lower than in England. If Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron - Cameron is nowhere near as popular on that measure. Thatcher's Tories got 31% in 1979 - an increase of about 6% and greadually lost those votes recording 24% in 1987 but the 15% for the Tories is the lowest GE figure ever.
I took AMs statement to mean that Cameron was as popular as Thatcher.
Yep.....
And that's about on the same popularity scale as a pork pie at a bar mitzvah.
Take it up with NS then, he wrote 'Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron'.
Any reason why you removed the IF from the start of that quoted sentence?
-
Yes it wasn't a wholly accurate statement in response to an even less accurate statement. The person that made the original statement though was a Scot and I'm a fool for expecting equality where nationalism is involved.
Mmm I take it you mean Anchorman's comment about Cameron not being popular - how is that inaccurate? The votes in Scotland for the Tories were considerably lower than in England. If Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron - Cameron is nowhere near as popular on that measure. Thatcher's Tories got 31% in 1979 - an increase of about 6% and greadually lost those votes recording 24% in 1987 but the 15% for the Tories is the lowest GE figure ever.
I took AMs statement to mean that Cameron was as popular as Thatcher.
Yep.....
And that's about on the same popularity scale as a pork pie at a bar mitzvah.
Take it up with NS then, he wrote 'Jim was inaccaurate it would be in ascribing any similar popularity between Thatcher and Cameron'.
Any reason why you removed the IF from the start of that quoted sentence?
The 'if' existed as a result of a condition that AM had removed.
-
Can you point me to this violently anto-English rhetoric of Nicola?
That's a fair point - Nicola Sturgeon has been fairly explicitly anti-Westminster, which is a more than valid distinction. If she has any personally anti-English feelings she's not making them public - that was a mischaracterisation on my part.
That the SNP have motivated a groundswell of both anti-Westminster and anti-English sentiment isn't as far as I can see the work of anything they've said publicly.
O.
-
I thought that the best line of the Tory conference was Hunt praising the Chinese for working hard. That is a true gem. I think Osborne was praised after his recent China visit for not raising human rights - pragmatism, folks!
-
Can you point me to this violently anto-English rhetoric of Nicola?
That's a fair point - Nicola Sturgeon has been fairly explicitly anti-Westminster, which is a more than valid distinction. If she has any personally anti-English feelings she's not making them public - that was a mischaracterisation on my part.
That the SNP have motivated a groundswell of both anti-Westminster and anti-English sentiment isn't as far as I can see the work of anything they've said publicly.
O.
anti Westminster has been generated by a number of SNP members including Nicola. I don't see that as problematic or indeed surprising.
I think there is less anti Englishness now than say forty years ago in part because the SNP changed to a civic nationalist party and reduced such sentiment not just in their nuttier elements but in overall Scottish civic society
-
I think there is less anti Englishness now than say forty years ago in part because the SNP changed to a civic nationalist party and reduced such sentiment not just in their nuttier elements but in overall Scottish civic society
As someone with an English accent and an English address, I find that there's a huge swathe of anti-English sentiment amongst the Scottish people I come into contact with. I'm only just into my forties, so I couldn't tell you what it was like back then, but it's noticable now.
O.
-
I think there is less anti Englishness now than say forty years ago in part because the SNP changed to a civic nationalist party and reduced such sentiment not just in their nuttier elements but in overall Scottish civic society
As someone with an English accent and an English address, I find that there's a huge swathe of anti-English sentiment amongst the Scottish people I come into contact with. I'm only just into my forties, so I couldn't tell you what it was like back then, but it's noticable now.
O.
That makes me quite sad, any number of such ignorant dickstinks is depressing and I know that there exist such wankspittoons but I do genuinely think that the SNP in the last 30 years or so has been a positive force against this. Not that there aren't nutters still, and with the quadrupling of members after the referendum, some new and quite strange nutters, but the party is now as cosmopolitan and open as any in Scotland.
-
I think there is less anti Englishness now than say forty years ago in part because the SNP changed to a civic nationalist party and reduced such sentiment not just in their nuttier elements but in overall Scottish civic society
As someone with an English accent and an English address, I find that there's a huge swathe of anti-English sentiment amongst the Scottish people I come into contact with. I'm only just into my forties, so I couldn't tell you what it was like back then, but it's noticable now.
O.
I know its anecdotal but my experience is the same and vice versa. I was at the Liberty the other day and the anti-Scottish abuse from a few supporters close by aimed at Steven Naismith was appalling and these were Welshmen! Divide and rule might not be the tactic but its working.
-
I was in the army and lived in various parts of England for a number of years and our English cousins aren't short of anti-Scottish rhetoric or anti everyone else for that matter!
Maybe you should visit a different part of Scotland O because half the people I work with (in Glasgow) are English, my ex and my son are English and unless it's one of the great unwashed (chav's to you who hate everyone) they get on fine.
Unless of course your making your point as some do just as an excuse to blame/bash the SNP ::)
Still waiting to see what alternative to the SNP there is in Scotland? Labour :) Libdems ;D or Tories :o
Yeh, no thanks.
-
I was in the army and lived in various parts of England for a number of years and our English cousins aren't short of anti-Scottish rhetoric or anti everyone else for that matter!
As a southerner I've had my fair share of derogatory commentary from our cousins in the North, whereas my Scottish family appear to get on fine with them. That said, here in the south I've heard plenty of people be derogatory about the Cornish and the East Anglians. Tribalism, it seems, will always find a way.
Maybe you should visit a different part of Scotland O because half the people I work with (in Glasgow) are English, my ex and my son are English and unless it's one of the great unwashed (chav's to you who hate everyone) they get on fine.
I got it worse in Glasgow than I do in Fife, but I confess it's been twenty odd years since I visited Glasgow. Inverness and Stirling were like Fife (but without family :) ), and I've not had much opportunity to get any further into the hinterlands than that.
Unless of course your making your point as some do just as an excuse to blame/bash the SNP ::)
No, as I admitted, my experience of the Scottish hoi-polloi was transferred - so far as I can remember the SNP speeches have been targetted at Westminster, not at England, and if some of their support doesn't make the differentiation that's not the SNP's fault.
Of course, I think it's at least implicit in the SNPs idea of wanting independence, but then swapping Westminster for Brussels by joining the EU as a small-fish that it's about getting rid of Westminster more than it is about actual independence - that's why I advocated for the 'No' camp. I actually wanted genuine independence for Scotland, not swapping UK rule for EU rule.
Still waiting to see what alternative to the SNP there is in Scotland? Labour :) Libdems ;D or Tories :o
I'd like to think the Lib Dems or Greens would be able to make the case for left wing, liberal politics without the need to sever the links.
O.