FAO of crawley and all decent human beings

[parklane1]

you say this but all it needs is the right time and the right reason and the right platform, then people will start to sweat at the prospect.

Right now with bankruptcy and debt, immigrants on benefits, crime, social and ethnic minorities tension.....people not feeling safe in 'their own country' (which to some degree i can actually accept actually)...the time is right for a group, who have no idea how they are going to enforce all these Best intentions policies, to shout as loud as they can those best intention policies and have people run to vote with the idea that all these promises are going to be kept

can someone though actually educate me on what they think will happen to this country IF Ukip take over. what will actually change..? what will actually get better?

As i have said it will not happen, like it or not ( and i am not saying i do) the country is a two party country and will remain so for a very long time. We have had other partys that have bellowed over results in the past ( green, sdp, and others) but it will never transpire for them to run the country. The LD saved Camerons arse by going into a coalition but they have shot themselves in the foot and will drop back to being at best a distent third party again. (imo)

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

As i have said it will not happen, like it or not ( and i am not saying i do) the country is a two party country and will remain so for a very long time. We have had other partys that have bellowed over results in the past ( green, sdp, and others) but it will never transpire for them to run the country. The LD saved Camerons arse by going into a coalition but they have shot themselves in the foot and will drop back to being at best a distent third party again. (imo)

This!

 

[Crawley]

This!

Genuine question here.............

being as those "two" parties are so close in style and substance (or lack of) now, do you think only having 2 viable parties is a good thing?

If so, why?

 

[Gordinho]

Genuine question here.............

being as those "two" parties are so close in style and substance (or lack of) now, do you think only having 2 viable parties is a good thing?

If so, why?

To be honest I think it's immaterial whether anyone thinks it's a good thing or not, that's the way it's been for the last hundred years and more despite there being various short lived pretenders to the roles of third party over my life time.

It's one thing to believe in and promote a party's policies in the way yourself and Tunisia Garden Jap do, it's another for people to suggest voting for them because they're not the other two, change for change's sake is about as well thought out as those who suggested we field the U18s when we were drowning under Ramos because "they couldn't do any worse than the other c@nts". That's not an opinion, that's a response to an impulse.

 

[Crawley]

To be honest I think it's immaterial whether anyone thinks it's a good thing or not, that's the way it's been for the last hundred years and more despite there being various short lived pretenders to the roles of third party over my life time.

It's one thing to believe in and promote a party's policies in the way yourself and Tunisia Garden Jap do, it's another for people to suggest voting for them because they're not the other two, change for change's sake is about as well thought out as those who suggested we field the U18s when we were drowning under Ramos because "they couldn't do any worse than the other c@nts". That's not an opinion, that's a response to an impulse.

The reason behind my question was more based on the fact that the two "main parties" have drifted so much to the center, there is a fag paper between them now.
This isn't the obvious left v right battle of yesteryear that we all understood a lot better. And this is where I question "Gilzean" because without any disrespect, he seems to be living in the past as far as party support is concerned.

 

[Papercut]

People vote for UKIP because they don't like the way England is going. So why not vote for the Greens? The weather's been pretty dire for a long while and the environment has changed - what good is a 'perfect' England if we all have to swim to get to Warren Jackson's kebab shop?

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

you say this but all it needs is the right time and the right reason and the right platform, then people will start to sweat at the prospect.

Right now with bankruptcy and debt, immigrants on benefits, crime, social and ethnic minorities tension.....people not feeling safe in 'their own country' (which to some degree i can actually accept actually)...the time is right for a group, who have no idea how they are going to enforce all these Best intentions policies, to shout as loud as they can those best intention policies and have people run to vote with the idea that all these promises are going to be kept

can someone though actually educate me on what they think will happen to this country IF Ukip take over. what will actually change..? what will actually get better?

Well if we were to pull out of the EU we would not be tied to the crazy social policies they favour, our companies would not have to blindly follow the green taxes the EU have created or the soon mooted new increased tax on each members state engergy companies and an increase in VAT.

We would gain control of our fishing waters which should be far more profitable then they currently are. We would not be tied to the EU rules on free movement of people so would not have thousands of romanians turning up in January no doubt asking for tax credits and help with their council tax. Also placing pressure on schools and teachers who will have to teach children with little knowledge of english.

We could then target our foreign trade to the emerging world and Asia somewhere which still has some money.

UKIP has also backed Grammar schools, so someone like me would not then have to pay to put his son private but could get him into a good local school(if he was accepted) Grammar schools are the thing that really offers social mobility something that decreased under labour. Did you know how popular Grammar schools are especailly with the Indian community, because they favour high level education and someone working there way up.

They were banned under labour because the unions and the teachers did not like losing the talented students who made their schools exams marks look better. It meant that they had to actually work to improve the other students grades, not something people on the left like to do.

UKIP have said that they favour a force into work of this countries unemployed, you know the ones that do not want to work. I often hear people sy immigrants do the jobs the British do not want to do. It is true to extent, im friends with a lovely latvian and i know how hard they work, but the point is not to turn your back on your own but do the carrot and stick approach to get them into work and lead a more rewarding life.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

People vote for UKIP because they don't like the way England is going. So why not vote for the Greens? The weather's been pretty dire for a long while and the environment has changed - what good is a 'perfect' England if we all have to swim to get to Warren Jackson's kebab shop?

Mate the is one reason not to vote for the Greens and that is Brighton. That stupid bint is well on the way to ruinning that town with fudging cycle lanes, and i say that as a keen cyclist. Shutting down community centres and bus routes while spending 6m on fudging cycle lanes.

@AFRICAN you will enjoy this bit.....Not only has that Greens leader recked brighton with cycles lanes but she keepss allowing the nutters from the EDL go there for their marches. I am totally agains those nutters being given a platform and the riots it causes. The first nice sunny day of the summer and they had a march and the poor shopkeepers and cafe owners who should have a day of good taakings had to shut up shop.

Caroline Green is a stupid bint and her and her freaky friends have wrecked brighton and from the friends i still have in the city all say she will be voted out soon.

I guess papercut people will vote UKIP because of things like the EU which is harming england, because of immigration which has got far to muc(i was never against it but the is only so much a country can take) and because of their support for great social mobility ideas like Grammar schools and also oddly for their tance against wind turbines, something that has never bothered me personally.

It is very telling how most of the posters on here who are vocal against UKIP are of an immigrant background, i think the is a fear when a party talks about immigration, yet despite this most polls say that most people think immigration has got to much, what with the schools crisis in London our housing crisis and the problem trying to get our unemployed into work.

 

[Papercut]

I was simplifying mate, I know there is more to UKIP. If the tabloids were more concerned about the environment then a lot of people here would be frightened into voting green. Let's face it, they could scare a brick load of Sun readers into thinking the end in nigh (perhaps a Wells'ian type of headline). Then again, they'd be likelier in linking immigrants and littering or non-recycling!

I'm on holiday at the mo and the German tourists a more likelier into driving me towards UKIP than the non-englanders back home!

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Genuine question here.............

being as those "two" parties are so close in style and substance (or lack of) now, do you think only having 2 viable parties is a good thing?

If so, why?

Political pluralsim is a good thing, as it provides for choice. However, a two party system affords stability. Look at Italy where there are a plethora of parties, none of which can gain a workable majority. Net result-instabilty. However, the major parties and society benefit from the presence of minor parties in the two party context, as they are forced to adopt some minor party policies. They need to do this to survive. Also, the emergence of minor parties, such as UKIP act as a ginger group and forces the established parties out of complacency. The tories have to confront a rival to their right. Eventually they will make the require adjustments.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

The reason behind my question was more based on the fact that the two "main parties" have drifted so much to the center, there is a fag paper between them now.
This isn't the obvious left v right battle of yesteryear that we all understood a lot better. And this is where I question "Gilzean" because without any disrespect, he seems to be living in the past as far as party support is concerned.

Living in the past? No living in the here and now! I'm just a person who has spent time working out my preferred world view and it happens to be democratic socialism. I'm not a 'leftist'" I'm a socialist. As a consequence right wing political action is repungent to me. Am I wide eyed admirer of all things Labour? No. I have not been happy with their swing to the right, but I believe they still offer more hope to the majority of people, than the Conservatives do. Just my view, not a party political broadcast.

What I fail to understand is the rabid hatred of Labour held by some on here and I'm referring to before Blair and Browne. Given how moderate Labour are now, I wonder what the reaction from them would be if a 'real' Labour government took power?

 

[parklane1]

To be honest I think it's immaterial whether anyone thinks it's a good thing or not, that's the way it's been for the last hundred years and more despite there being various short lived pretenders to the roles of third party over my life time.

It's one thing to believe in and promote a party's policies in the way yourself and Tunisia Garden Jap do, it's another for people to suggest voting for them because they're not the other two, change for change's sake is about as well thought out as those who suggested we field the U18s when we were drowning under Ramos because "they couldn't do any worse than the other c@nts". That's not an opinion, that's a response to an impulse.

That is the relevant point, there have been many different parties that have done reasonably well in council elections but they will never become a ruling party in Government. Anyone who believes that parties such as the Greens, SDP, UKIP, BNL, or any others of the pretenders will come to rule the country are living in a dreamworld.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

Living in the past? No living in the here and now! I'm just a person who has spent time working out my preferred world view and it happens to be democratic socialism. I'm not a 'leftist'" I'm a socialist. As a consequence right wing political action is repungent to me. Am I wide eyed admirer of all things Labour? No. I have not been happy with their swing to the right, but I believe they still offer more hope to the majority of people, than the Conservatives do. Just my view, not a party political broadcast.

What I fail to understand is the rabid hatred of Labour held by some on here and I'm referring to before Blair and Browne. Given how moderate Labour are now, I wonder what the reaction from them would be if a 'real' Labour government took power?

One of the greatest trick brown ever performed was through his mates at the BBC making him out to be moderate he was far from it hence the reason the country is in the state it is in now.

I hated kinnock and loved maggie, that will come as no suprise to you of course. But i do not get and i read it on here somewhere the other day not saying it was you but someone said that kinnock was a great leader, the guy lost how many times to thatcher? aand she was quite a decesive leader.

Labour and the tories are quite close now in that labour have said they would have done broadly speaking the same spending cuts as the tories. But we all know that if labour get back in they will borrow more money to appease the fan base in the north creating non jobs to boast the regions instead of trying to create indusstry. While also undoing the good work duncan smith has been doing getting the feckless back into work.

What would my reaction be to a true leftist government, shock, horror and disgust and would probably lead me to sell the house and move abroad 10 years earlier then planned.

 

[spitshine]

Living in the past? No living in the here and now! I'm just a person who has spent time working out my preferred world view and it happens to be democratic socialism. I'm not a 'leftist'" I'm a socialist. As a consequence right wing political action is repungent to me. Am I wide eyed admirer of all things Labour? No. I have not been happy with their swing to the right, but I believe they still offer more hope to the majority of people, than the Conservatives do. Just my view, not a party political broadcast.

What I fail to understand is the rabid hatred of Labour held by some on here and I'm referring to before Blair and Browne. Given how moderate Labour are now, I wonder what the reaction from them would be if a 'real' Labour government took power?

Whenever I have political debates with friends one of the things that comes up is they and others just do not think ed milliband comes across as a leader or even a politician. His persona dosen't Inspire or influence the electorate to believe in him. His brother was the better candidate and had more personality. Not that this is the crux but I've heard this argument alot. Ed milliband prime minister representing the UK ... Just can't see it

 

[Papercut]

That's the impression I get too.

 

[parklane1]

Whenever I have political debates with friends one of the things that comes up is they and others just do not think ed miliband comes across as a leader or even a politician. His persona doesn't Inspire or influence the electorate to believe in him. His brother was the better candidate and had more personality. Not that this is the crux but I've heard this argument alot. Ed miliband prime minister representing the UK ... Just can't see it

The problem with both parties is that their leaders are really poor, i know Cameron is PM but lets look at the situation. He lead the Tory party into a general election against a Labour party that was on its knees, with ( allegedly)the worst PM for generations but could not win his party a majority. If it had not been for Clegg saving his arse he would have been replaced by the Tories for failing to win the Majority which was there for the taking.

As you have said Miliband is not a strong leader either and why ( imo) the state of both parties ( and hence the country) is really in the brick.

 

[Gordinho]

Whenever I have political debates with friends one of the things that comes up is they and others just do not think ed milliband comes across as a leader or even a politician. His persona dosen't Inspire or influence the electorate to believe in him. His brother was the better candidate and had more personality. Not that this is the crux but I've heard this argument alot. Ed milliband prime minister representing the UK ... Just can't see it

P'raps it's an age thing but there's not many I do see have much of a presence about them, Cameron, Milliband, any of them.

Here's an example I'll use to justify my previous post about choosing change for the wrong reasons, if we don't think Cameron has much about him just imagine if it was Osborne who was PM-but that alone isn't enough reason alone to vote for Cameron, just because he's not Osborne.

If I was to nominate who I'd have as a Conservative PM to lead us through a crisis I wouldn't look past Clarke, he's been there and done it but he's regarded as yesterday's man and a bit of a joke in the modern party.

 

[Gordinho]

The problem with both parties is that their leaders are really poor, i know Cameron is PM but lets look at the situation. He lead the Tory party into a general election against a Labour party that was on its knees, with ( allegedly)the worst PM for generations but could not win his party a majority. If it had not been for Clegg saving his arse he would have been replaced by the Tories for failing to win the Majority which was there for the taking.

As you have said Miliband is not a strong leader either and why ( imo) the state of both parties ( and hence the country) is really in the brick.

Two quotes, one reply!

P'raps it's an age thing but there's not many I do see have much of a presence about them, Cameron, Milliband, any of them.

Here's an example I'll use to justify my previous post about choosing change for the wrong reasons, if we don't think Cameron has much about him just imagine if it was Osborne who was PM-but that alone isn't enough reason alone to vote for Cameron, just because he's not Osborne.

If I was to nominate who I'd have as a Conservative PM to lead us through a crisis I wouldn't look past Clarke, he's been there and done it but he's regarded as yesterday's man and a bit of a joke in the modern party.

 

[parklane1]

Two quotes, one reply!

P'raps it's an age thing but there's not many I do see have much of a presence about them, Cameron, Milliband, any of them.

Here's an example I'll use to justify my previous post about choosing change for the wrong reasons, if we don't think Cameron has much about him just imagine if it was Osborne who was PM-but that alone isn't enough reason alone to vote for Cameron, just because he's not Osborne

If I was to nominate who I'd have as a Conservative PM to lead us through a crisis I wouldn't look past Clarke, he's been there and done it but he's regarded as yesterday's man and a bit of a joke in the modern party.

I can agree with most of that, the problem with most MP's is that the have no real conviction ( its all hair dye, false smiles, expensive suits and ties) they are selling us a lie and false promises.

 

[Gordinho]

I can agree with most of that, the problem with most MP's is that the have no real conviction ( its all hair dye, false smiles, expensive suits and ties) they are selling us a lie and false promises.

I'm sure they do have conviction but it's swamped beneath the PR image they're forced to adopt for fear of not conforming to what they're told the public wants. Three of the finest conviction politicians that spring to my mind (leaving their politics out of the equation) are Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner and Tam Dalyell, none of them had time for image makeovers or PR speak.