Politics, politics, politics

[Danishfurniturelover]

What did I say about desperation? Poor old Sscara is really crapping his pants at the prospect of a government that might just stop the wealth re-distributive policies of the Tories ie from poor to rich.

The current tories have risen the tax threshold for lower wage earners(not something agree with) and the higher rate of tax has been higher under this government(not something i agree with) then it was under the last labour government.

For someone like me who thinks poor people should be taxed more and high earners less, Labour 97-08 are better then tories 08-present.

 

[scaramanga]

I am not missing the point, Cameron used it because he thought some idiots would believe it to be true and fact.

Nobody believe's it's precisely true but you can't deny there's an element of truth in there. It's very likely that the SNP will essentially have a veto over anything they like for the next 5 years.

It's more than a little distasteful that he would crow about such a thing in public.

 

[scaramanga]

The current tories have risen the tax threshold for lower wage earners(not something agree with) and the higher rate of tax has been higher under this government(not something i agree with) then it was under the last labour government.

For someone like me who thinks poor people should be taxed more and high earners less, Labour 97-08 are better then tories 08-present.

People keep ignoring this fact.

The personal allowance has kept rising, the gap between the personal allowance and the higher rate has stayed pretty much the same. The point at which you begin to lose your personal allowance hasn't moved a bit - that's a big tax increase to those at the better end of the pay scale.

 

[Baleforce]

Voters 'left in the dark', says IFS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32424739

 

[parklane1]

would not have been able to use it if Salmond had not said it though would he.

He would have found other flimflam to spread.

 

[We are Tottenham]

Yeah the Tories have such a rich history of 'bringing people together.' Maggie Thatcher anyone? You think Ramsey MacDonald created the great Depression too? Deluded, my friend, totally deluded.

the grammar alone deserves "slagging down"

Ok my grammar is not so good ..but your using that as an argument against a point of view.

And Scara..I'm entitled to have my say but I'm wrong! well that's your opinion. I could be right..I think I am.

 

[the dza]

That's not how it works. Not all votes are free votes for each party to act as they feel on each subject.

There cannot be a Labour government without SNP votes - they're unlikely to be the largest party after the election so Labour will have to buy SNP votes on an issue by issue basis. That means that if the SNP tell Labour they will only approve the budget if Labour orders the slaughter of the first born of everyone earning more than £50k then Labour don't have an option.

But the SNP have an election to fight in 2016, so they will not bring down a Labour government (and install a Tory one) else they will lose tons of the voters who they have taken from Scottish Labour. They don't have a particularly strong hand to play imo, because they have set themselves out as extremely anti-Tory. For Trident, the SNP will vote against or abstain to be 'true' to their support, but they won't take Labour out of the game over it. They can't. And the Tories would work with Labour to ensure Trident renewal, I am certain of that.

 

[NWND]

My seat (Bradford South) is going to be interesting in the next few elections. Labour should still win comfortably but there's a lot of UKIP posters in people's windows and they're expected to eat into Labour's majority quite significantly. The UKIP candidate is a local lad and the Labour candidate is a career politician who was moved to the area by Labour. I think that's been a significant factor.

 

[scaramanga]

But the SNP have an election to fight in 2016, so they will not bring down a Labour government (and install a Tory one) else they will lose tons of the voters who they have taken from Scottish Labour. They don't have a particularly strong hand to play imo, because they have set themselves out as extremely anti-Tory. For Trident, the SNP will vote against or abstain to be 'true' to their support, but they won't take Labour out of the game over it. They can't. And the Tories would work with Labour to ensure Trident renewal, I am certain of that.

They don't have to install any kind of government, they can just be an obstacle to Labour until they get what they want.

They could just vote against Labour but for them in a vote of confidence.

 

[NWND]

They don't have to install any kind of government, they can just be an obstacle to Labour until they get what they want.

They could just vote against Labour but for them in a vote of confidence.

It's laughable that Ed Milliband tries to rule out a deal with the SNP. He will need them. They're basically a huge bunch of traditional Labour seats that aren't Labour anymore. A lot of Labour's policies are opposed by the conservatives and Lib Dems, so he would need SNP support on those issues. They're not going to give it without something in return, either a second referendum on independence, more money or power for Scotland or scrapping trident, less austerity measures or whatever.

 

[the dza]

I'm talking specifically about Trident, because this has been used as the scare story. Labour (if they form the next government) will renew it and the SNP won't be able to do anything about it, I am 100% certain of that. This is one area where the Tories and Labour would work together, making SNP votes irrelevant.

With regards other policies, I suspect that Miliband and Sturgeon have quite a lot of common ground anyway, so a little compromise won't be too hard for either party. Scrapping the 'bedroom tax' would be an example of common ground. 'Red Ed' can be a little bit left-wing and blame it on the SNP.

 

[scaramanga]

I'm talking specifically about Trident, because this has been used as the scare story. Labour (if they form the next government) will renew it and the SNP won't be able to do anything about it, I am 100% certain of that. This is one area where the Tories and Labour would work together, making SNP votes irrelevant.

With regards other policies, I suspect that Miliband and Sturgeon have quite a lot of common ground anyway, so a little compromise won't be too hard for either party. Scrapping the 'bedroom tax' would be an example of common ground. 'Red Ed' can be a little bit left-wing and blame it on the SNP.

It's not really about what they agree on and more about what the SNP think they can get.

It doesn't matter if Sturgeon and Milibland agree on policy, if Scotland isn't getting what Sturgeon wants, she can (and I'm sure will) hold the country to ransom until she gets it. That's the problem with dealing with a special interest party - that special interest will always come first.

It was different with the Lib Dems as they're fighting the same ground in the same political arena as the two main parties. I would be just as against any deal involving a "London and the South East" party even though it would almost certainly benefit me - it wouldn't work with the country's best interests in mind.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

would not have been able to use it if Salmond had not said it though would he.

Yes, stupid politics from him. No coincidence that the SNP have come on leaps and bounds since Sturgeon took over, as she is a great operator.

 

[THFC]

Must admit, Red Ed is grabbing most of the headlines and attention lately, it's all about him. Really surprised at the campaign strategy of the Conservatives

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Must admit, Red Ed is grabbing most of the headlines and attention lately, it's all about him. Really surprised at the campaign strategy of the Conservatives

Miliband is an intelligent man and theTories have made the classic mistake of hubris and badly under-estimated him. Serves them right.

 

[monkeybarry]

It's not really about what they agree on and more about what the SNP think they can get.

It doesn't matter if Sturgeon and Milibland agree on policy, if Scotland isn't getting what Sturgeon wants, she can (and I'm sure will) hold the country to ransom until she gets it. That's the problem with dealing with a special interest party - that special interest will always come first.

It was different with the Lib Dems as they're fighting the same ground in the same political arena as the two main parties. I would be just as against any deal involving a "London and the South East" party even though it would almost certainly benefit me - it wouldn't work with the country's best interests in mind.

I'm not so sure. If they had quietly got into power ( by that I .mean coalition or propping up a minority) then I would agree

But its out there now and their every move will scrutinised. By " filibustering " ( I'll borrow that term) they will just upset a lot of people and do themselves harm. Even with some of their own voters

And they are not GOP type gigantic party where they can hold a country to ransom and by and large get away with it. It would be political suicide.
I'm sure they will do it on a Scotland centric issues under the guise of their mandate being Scottish interests, but I think it's scaremongering to say it will be on a large scale

 

[parklane1]

It's laughable that Ed Milliband tries to rule out a deal with the SNP. He will need them. They're basically a huge bunch of traditional Labour seats that aren't Labour anymore. A lot of Labour's policies are opposed by the conservatives and Lib Dems, so he would need SNP support on those issues. They're not going to give it without something in return, either a second referendum on independence, more money or power for Scotland or scrapping trident, less austerity measures or whatever.

If it did happen that would be a good start.

 

[scaramanga]

I'm not so sure. If they had quietly got into power ( by that I .mean coalition or propping up a minority) then I would agree

But its out there now and their every move will scrutinised. By " filibustering " ( I'll borrow that term) they will just upset a lot of people and do themselves harm. Even with some of their own voters

And they are not GOP type gigantic party where they can hold a country to ransom and by and large get away with it. It would be political suicide.
I'm sure they will do it on a Scotland centric issues under the guise of their mandate being Scottish interests, but I think it's scaremongering to say it will be on a large scale

Their own voters mainly have Scotland's interests in mind anyway. I really don't think "Fvck the English, I'm getting the best deal I can for Scotland" is much of a vote killer for the SNP.

 

[monkeybarry]

Their own voters mainly have Scotland's interests in mind anyway. I really don't think "Fvck the English, I'm getting the best deal I can for Scotland" is much of a vote killer for the SNP.

Im sure they have picked up a lot of labour deserters, people who like the union and will expect them to govern properly.
There is also this assumption that people who voted to leave the union are in some way anti-england - whilst I'm sure that is true for some, it is not the same as being pro-independence and they may not want another childish party .......they can get that in Westminster

 

[monkeybarry]

I've just worked out my favourite thing about the swear filter - making people use a v instead of a u to type fvck or can't......its very 1700s