Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Wales123098

Uk Political Poll End Of 2010

.  

36 members have voted

  1. 1. Who did you vote for in the election held on May 6th 2010?

    • Conservative
      14
    • Labour
      6
    • Liberal Democrat
      7
    • Plaid
      0
    • SNP
      3
    • UKIP
      0
    • Other
      1
    • Didn't vote
      5
  2. 2. Who would you vote for in an election held this week?

    • Conservative
      14
    • Labour
      10
    • Liberal Democrat
      2
    • Plaid
      0
    • SNP
      3
    • UKIP
      1
    • Other
      4
    • Would not vote.
      2
  3. 3. Do you approve of the Coalition government?

    • Yes
      16
    • No
      15
    • Not sure
      5
  4. 4. Who do you think should be PM?

    • David Cameron
      17
    • Ed Milliband
      8
    • Other
      11
  5. 5. Which party would you rather be in government?

    • Conservative
      20
    • Labour
      16


Recommended Posts

Labour all the way.

:)

Agreed although at 15 Im too young to vote! :smiliz19:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conservative 2 Labour 3.

Well, me and Snowstorm1 voted Labour, and the only other person brave enough to be a Labour supporter on here is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tory, Tory, Yes, DC, Tory.

Labour simply are not electable in any form at the moment. They don't seem to have any sense of direction or policy. Miliband and Johnson can't even agree with each other. It's all very well labelling the coalition as a sham, but Labour are hardly firing on all cylinders right now. Not that I would ever vote for them anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conservative 2 Labour 3.

Well, me and Snowstorm1 voted Labour, and the only other person brave enough to be a Labour supporter on here is...

Im Conservative all the way but there we go. I said I didn't vote in 2010 because I was only 16. But by the next election Il be a voter so put my preference. I wont go in to reasons why Im a Conservative voter as I don't want to cause conflict:P. If I did support Labour I would put other as who I want to be PM as I think David Milliband should be the next Labour PM not Ed. Ed is far too left wing for me, I don't like the fact his party didn't vote him in either, it was the trade unions. Im not saying hes a bad person but I don't like his political point scoring all the time, he wont tell us what his policies are, he won't tell us where he would cut and the fact is he don't support any cuts so my guess is that he's a deficit denier. He appointed a shadow chancellor who had to do 'his homework'. I think Labour is just too opportunist to me at the moment, I can see straight through them, they are not facing up to reality. Labour are going to have to wait until they have a completely different set of MPs before I vote for them, they ruined us financially in the last few years, there was a 6% deficit before the crisis even started. The EU says in good times it should be 3%. So as far as Im concerned they failed and it's going to take a good few years for me to class them as credible again. If the Conservatives completely fail in reducing the deficit and keeping stable growth, Il switch to a minor party I think as I don't think Labour would of done any better.

Ed can say New Labour is dead but it's the same set of people, Ed wrote the Labour manifesto sorry they are a no go in these times, we had to call in the IMF in 79 and if they got re-elected the IMF would of be back to save us.

I said I didn't want to cause conflict but I probs just did ah well:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for the Lib Dems in May and I would still vote for them now, but a lot more tentatively than before ("lesser of three evils" springs to mind) because of their being shown up to be liars in some key policy areas, notably the university fees policies.

Basically Tories seem to be "same old", they have a better idea of how to manage our economy than Labour but they neglect social factors and focus cuts in ways that will hit the poor more than the rich, and the north and west more than the southeast ("we are all in it together- proportionally" was a classic quote from a recent Have I Got News For You episode). I believe that New Labour aren't any better re. social factors and rich-poor divides so the "economy management" issue leads to the Tories getting the nod over Labour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm not pleased with Labour by 2015, I'd not vote Tory, their policies disgust me (some of them) but I won't go into it, the Lib Dems are two-faced [email protected]*<!#£..., the Greens go a tad mad for hating Nuclear Party (but I'm all for making the world colder *wink*), UKIP (too right-wing), BNP (Seriously. Nu Nazi's), Union (WTH), Communist (Um... I'll pass).

Oh, the wide range.

Wait a sec, I'll be 17 in 2015, get in, hopefully some social democratic leader will form for Labour, then steer us to a Scandinavian style system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm not pleased with Labour by 2015, I'd not vote Tory...

...I'll be 17 in 2015

Or anyone else in that case :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red Eds' proud achievment is to be as unpopular as Nick Clegg!

Red Ed is never going to be PM. His party didn't want or vote for him and he has shown no policy or direction for his battered rudderless party. Nu-labour, Old-labour? ... No-one knows.

The leader approval ratings are: Cameron 41% (-2), Clegg 31% (-5), Miliband 31% (-2) - so in line with other surveys the ratings for each of the leaders is moving downwards. Clegg and EdM are now level-pegging.

He’s on the lowest for any new leader just three months into the job with the exception of Michael Foot.

Labours only salvation is that the Coalition are taking the flak for clearing up Browns reckless, irresponsible socio-economic mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labours only salvation is that the Coalition are taking the flak for clearing up Browns reckless, irresponsible socio-economic mess.

This is very common in polls between elections. It was the case for the Tories too. Back in 2008 when they were 20% ahead there was no chance that they were ever going to win by that much. What tends to occur is that people punish the governing party in polls but when an election arrives and the opposition's policies are looked at in more detail then the gap tends to reduce.

For the Tories to be only a couple of points behind in such circumstances isnt too bad at the moment, even more so as they are polling more than their general election percentage. The majority of Labours percentage in the polls at the moment will be disaffected Lib Dem voters (or rather the anti-Tory 'soft' Lib Dem vote) and those arent exactly concentrated in Tory/Labour marginal seats.

We've also got the boundary changes and possible AV to contend with, not to mention 4½ years is a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted Lib Dem in May. I actually broadly regard myself as a Labour supporter, but my constituency (Meriden) is absolutely true-blue and basically Labour have no chance round here. The Lib Dems have done well just down the road in Solihull in recent years, so I voted for them partly because they are also a centre-left progressive party, and partly to keep the Tories out.

I'm dismayed at what has happened since; I never for one minute thought that Clegg would ever go into coaltion with the Tories. At first it seemed to make some sort of sense, in as much that the country needs a fully functioning government to keep the lights on, pay the bills etc. When the ConDem coalition was first mentioned I assumed it would be for perhaps eighteen months, maybe a couple of years tops. But they've locked themselves into this unholy arrangement for FIVE years - absolutely unworkable IMO.

The only smidge of comfort I take is that the current Tories do seem to be slightly more liberal than their predecessors in the 80's and 90's. Cameron has actually been very impressive as PM, likewise Ken Clarke and David Willetts. The less said about Gove and Lansley the better though..............:shudder:

For me the acid test will be the decision re Satan's planned takeover of Sky; if that is dumbly nodded through by Jeremy Hunt, then the Lib Dems may as well not exist as far as I'm concerned.

Bish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted Lib Dem in May. I actually broadly regard myself as a Labour supporter, but my constituency (Meriden) is absolutely true-blue and basically Labour have no chance round here. The Lib Dems have done well just down the road in Solihull in recent years, so I voted for them partly because they are also a centre-left progressive party, and partly to keep the Tories out.

I'm dismayed at what has happened since; I never for one minute thought that Clegg would ever go into coaltion with the Tories. At first it seemed to make some sort of sense, in as much that the country needs a fully functioning government to keep the lights on, pay the bills etc. When the ConDem coalition was first mentioned I assumed it would be for perhaps eighteen months, maybe a couple of years tops. But they've locked themselves into this unholy arrangement for FIVE years - absolutely unworkable IMO.

The only smidge of comfort I take is that the current Tories do seem to be slightly more liberal than their predecessors in the 80's and 90's. Cameron has actually been very impressive as PM, likewise Ken Clarke and David Willetts. The less said about Gove and Lansley the better though..............:shudder:

For me the acid test will be the decision re Satan's planned takeover of Sky; if that is dumbly nodded through by Jeremy Hunt, then the Lib Dems may as well not exist as far as I'm concerned.

Bish

Doubling national debt and leaving a huge debt burden on future generations and then claiming they had nothing to do with it and refusing to say what they would do is not 'progressive'. Labour is the sham, not the coalition. Labour cares about short term gains and what happens to them in the polls. The coalition is about sorting the country out, making tough and unpopular decisions that are good for the country for its long term stability. Thing is towards the end of the parliament the benefits of what they've done will come through and if Labour keep Ed. Labour wont be in for over a decade. You can't reduce the gap between the rich and poor unless you get businesses creating jobs. Never mind giving people more and more benefits. Lower taxes, increase the private sector for job creation to increase. Every lefty saying tax the rich and business? Yeah and then there will be no wealth creation and job growth. As Thatcher once said, would you rather the poorer be poorer just so the rich are poorer too? Of corse there is going to be rich people in the country and IMO they are taxed enough a huge 50%. This 'ConDem' government has taken hundreds of thousands out of income tax all together. Thing is the previous labour government failed completely, the gap between the rich and poor increased at an accelerated rate, the economy slowed and eventually fell in to its deepest recession, they de-regulated the banks which led to the recession. Doubled national debt and we fell in international league tables in Education. Yeah it was a global recession but it was the British and American financial markets (the 2 largest in world) that caused the crash and the responsibility for it lays on the labour government and the republican government in the US. This is the hang over period for the wreck less years under an incompetent unrealistic labour government.

On average, British government bonds pay interest for 15 years. The more we borrow, the bigger our interest payments get. Last year national debt interest cost the taxpayer£27.2 billion. In 2010-11 that figure soars to a jaw-dropping £42.9 billion. The more we spend on interest, the less we have to pay down debt or invest for the future. That interest is dead money, which means higher taxes for years to come.

Government borrowing increases the total demand for credit in the economy, driving up the cost of borrowing in the process. Higher borrowing costs make it more expensive to finance investment in equipment, stock and other capital goods in the private sector. This harms the ability of the private sector to create the wealth and jobs needed to get us out of recession.

To make matters worse, the government needs to sell its bonds at attractive interest rates to entice investors away from alternatives. This is known as the 'crowding out' of private capital and means even less investment in business and real jobs.

If the Coalition didn't take these actions to reduce debt, interest rates would also go up and our currency would collapse as we would loose our top rated credit rating.

The coalition has ensured growth will remain, by reducing corporation tax and reducing job taxes and by going round the world securing business deals for our country. Reducing corporation tax is an incentive for business and industry to flock here and invest. Already there has been evidence that the 4% drop is increasing business activity, a company announced a few weeks ago its going to invest 500million pounds in to Britain as a result of the corp cut. Business confidence is looking good and the cost of borrowing is down. Britain has risen from being ranked 6th in the ease of business ranking to 4th since the Coalition government budget was announced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't mistake me as an apologist for the previous Labour government, because I'm not. But to simply lay the blame for the global financial crisis at their door seems very unrealistic to me. The crisis was almost 100% the result of the naked greed, rank stupidity, and rampant short-termism of the various financial institutions concerned.

It is also very important to note that, whilst in opposition, the Tories were supportive of even more financial de-regulation, not less. Only Cable and his fellow Lib Dems cautioned against the wisdom of such moves.

As for Ed Miliband; the jury is very much out as far as I'm concerned. I wanted his brother to win as I thought David the most likely to deliver a serviceable Labour majority at the next election. I actually warmed quite a lot to Ed M as the campaign progressed, however the manner in which he won was an absolute disaster for Labour. If you had to write a rulebook on how not to win a leadership campaign, then beating your own brother by a mathematical quirk whilst being essentially propped up by the unions would be very low down on the list, lol.

Bish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't mistake me as an apologist for the previous Labour government, because I'm not. But to simply lay the blame for the global financial crisis at their door seems very unrealistic to me. The crisis was almost 100% the result of the naked greed, rank stupidity, and rampant short-termism of the various financial institutions concerned.

No.... Brown took us into this crisis with one of the worst economies and highest structural defecits of the G20 nations before the bankers screwed up....

Delivering his 2003 Budget, Gordon Brown forecast a budget deficit of £20 billion for 2008-09. The eventual outcome was nearly twice that. The structural debt cannot be blamed on the cost of rescuing the banks. As Mr Darling made clear, that is likely to prove much less expensive than previously expected, while there is every chance that the Government may eventually make a profit on its stakes in Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland.

The Government chose to run deficits during the years that the economy was growing strongly when others, such as Australia, were paying down their national debt. That is the biggest reason for a structural deficit. It is one with which, in all probability, our children — and maybe even their children — will also be saddled.

Source -- The Times Dec 2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.... Brown took us into this crisis with one of the worst economies and highest structural defecits of the G20 nations before the bankers screwed up....

Delivering his 2003 Budget, Gordon Brown forecast a budget deficit of £20 billion for 2008-09. The eventual outcome was nearly twice that. The structural debt cannot be blamed on the cost of rescuing the banks. As Mr Darling made clear, that is likely to prove much less expensive than previously expected, while there is every chance that the Government may eventually make a profit on its stakes in Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland.

The Government chose to run deficits during the years that the economy was growing strongly when others, such as Australia, were paying down their national debt. That is the biggest reason for a structural deficit. It is one with which, in all probability, our children — and maybe even their children — will also be saddled.

Source -- The Times Dec 2009

Oh dear

Forgetting that the Tories pleaded with Brown to be even more relaxed. Oh dear if the Tories were in charge they would have done anything different. Sure the bubble burst on labours watch but if Brown went earlier for an election and lost it would have burst on the Tories watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless I'm mistaken (apologies if I am) I think you've missed the point of my post which had nothing to do with banking regulation relaxation on anyones watch.

My post was refering to Labours addiction to spending beyond it's means before the banking crisis. Labours house was well on fire before the bankers poured petrol on it.

post-1596-0-33963000-1293405996_thumb.gi post-1596-0-75616300-1293406061_thumb.gi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple facts remain: Nu-Labour promised the world and sold our (UK taxpayers) assets to pay for them.

After that they borrowed prolifically to fund policies which they jolly well knew were un-affordable. That you might agree with such policies or disagree with such policies is utterly irrelevant - I agree with universal peace, and societal standing based on merit alone (never going to happen in my lifetime, and I wouldn't raid next door's shed, nor the childerns piggy banks to pay for it) - the facts of the matter are we, as a country, owe too much money both in absolute terms, and in structural terms.

Riding up debt is nothing new to Labour. Labour is now approx £10m in debt - more than any other political party. Yes, they can't even look after their own tea, biscuits and sandwiches despite record donations. The minimum payments for that lot will probably exceed the cashflow available - ie they will default - my guess is by 2nd Qtr next year.

I don't want that default to happen to UK plc. I live here, I pay taxes here - and I certainly do not want to entrench debt obligations to future tax payers which will be my children and grandchildren.

Back to my main point - you cannot keep expecting to spend more than you have. Imagine if you had done such a thing on the basis that global warming was going to make UK winters always warmer and snow would be something for the history books (it has, would you believe it, been said by a UK scientist back in 2000) and on that basis, whilst you are up to your neck in credit card bills, you forget to plan for the rather large fuel bills that this winter is now, almost certainly, going to bring in even adjusting for fuel inflation. You have put the money aside, I take it ....

(oh and btw, the bank bailout with tax-payers funds is a forced (?!) purchase of shares, and therefore appears in the asset column not the liabilities column on a balance sheet, so whilst the left-wing press bleat on and on (and on and on and on and on) it's probably best to pick up a 101 guide to beginning book-keeping. It'll be in chapter two, after chapter one. Chapter one is the chapter where it explains that accounts must balance, and that PFI is a rather naughty enterprise, and that if individuals got up to it, they'd go to prison at least for fraud, but also on a more technical offence such as obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The labour legacy as I see it is as follows: -

A missed opportunity.

The first term of Labour from 1997-2001 was undoubtedly a success. We had a well respected charismatic leader, a strong economy, improvements to public services, an enterprise culture and a country that was reasonably happy with itself. Even as someone who was not a natural Labour voter, I fully endorsed them winning a second term. Then what did we get?

A war nobody wanted purely so we could cosy up to a nutter in the White House who believed the universe was 6000 years old

A chancellor that reverted to Old Labour-type. Even though we got higher taxes and stealth taxes this could not keep pace with the increase in wasteful spending as the public sector got ever more bloated.

Any social mobility progress made in the first term was quickly reversed as economic and immigration policy created a massive underclass. The tripling of house prices in real terms was criminally allowed to go unchecked leaving most of the population that didn't own a house incapable of ever realistically owning one.

The two most powerful people in government openly feuding putting their own political ambition above the interest of the country and its population.

I am far from being aligned from Conservative idealism and am not yet won over by either Cameron or Osborne, however, Labour would need to change beyond all recognition for me to ever consider voting for them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ... am not yet won over by either Cameron or Osborne

I don't think anyone is, to be honest. The coalition, it seems to me, is six of one, half a dozen of another when what we really need is a bakers dozen! I think we are going back to the polls next October (Libs will hang in there long enough to secure AV ...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone is, to be honest. The coalition, it seems to me, is six of one, half a dozen of another when what we really need is a bakers dozen! I think we are going back to the polls next October (Libs will hang in there long enough to secure AV ...)

Disagree. Im family friends with my Conservative MP and the Conservative and Liberal MPs are getting on fine. This government will remain until 2015. It would be a disaster for our economy if the government breaks up, the plan needs to be sticked to now. The Lib Dems know it would seriously hurt business confidence and that they would be seen as even more badly. At the moment half the country are okish with the Lib Dems (the 40% Tories and around 10% Libs) They make enemies with Tories and they are on their own and will loose their only shot at government they are going to have in decades. I want a full on Conservative government personally but thats not going to happen until boundaries change at the moment Labour would be able to pull off an majority being 2% BEHIND the Tories. Before long it will be the other way round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the Lib Dems don't have anything to gain by forcing an early election.

Even with AV, 10% of the vote won't give them more than around 35 seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the Lib Dems don't have anything to gain by forcing an early election.

Even with AV, 10% of the vote won't give them more than around 35 seats.

Indeed, it would be very foolish to crystalise the losses now.

I think they'll just grit their teeth and wait for things to improve, though no longer being seen as an anti-Tory protest vote will undoubtably harm them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would've voted SNP, I would still vote SNP and I have a completely clear conscience about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tory, Tory, Yes, DC, Tory.

Labour simply are not electable in any form at the moment. They don't seem to have any sense of direction or policy. Miliband and Johnson can't even agree with each other. It's all very well labelling the coalition as a sham, but Labour are hardly firing on all cylinders right now. Not that I would ever vote for them anyway.

I'll just echo this (including the voting pattern). I couldn't live with myself if I voted Labour (besides the fact that they nearly lost their deposit in my constituency, and it isn't amazingly affluent), if I did, it's time someone took me out and put a shotgun to the back of my head. mega_shok.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Temperatures into heatwave territory and no rain

    Some parts of the UK could qualify for heatwave conditions later this week and it's not the usual suspects. No rain as water levels decline and how are the evening skies for LanuchAmerica viewing? Watch the video here

    Netweather forecasts
    Netweather forecasts
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    High pressure in the driving seat until at least the end of May

    High pressure continues to dominate our weather until at least early next week, with most staying dry and fine. The warm conditions will spread north, and the highest temperatures will transfer to the west as the high moves east and eventually over Scandinavia. Read the full update here

    Netweather forecasts
    Netweather forecasts
    Latest weather updates from Netweather
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...