The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[roydo]

I know feck all about politics but can someone explain who's gonna win?

Scotland. Seriously.

 

[SNova]

https://aliberallife.wordpress.com/2015/04/03/farage-and-the-hiv-lie/

Thank you for sharing that. I believed his statistics mainly because the other parties didn't correct him, I think the green party women even said something along the lines of she treats unhealthy people as people regardless of where they are from, so I just assumed his statistics were right.

 

[Tubey]

Oh look, its the Jeremy Clarkson incident all over again.

Nope. In the instance of Jeremy Clarkson, people signed their name to support a guy because they found him entertaining by being racist and a bigot. A vote for a political party isn't the same - it's not explicity endorsing pedophilia or racism at any rate. There are a few that will vote UKIP for that reason (see Britain First for details) but most will vote because of a combination of factors, including a disillusionment with the status quo and a vague concern about immigration numbers impacting on key services.

So nothing like signing in support of a racist because he's a funny racist.

 

[Clint Planet]

Thank you for sharing that. I believed his statistics mainly because the other parties didn't correct him, I think the green party women even said something along the lines of she treats unhealthy people as people regardless of where they are from, so I just assumed his statistics were right.

No worries, mate. Similar piece in the Guardian too, I believe. Bit of a racist subtext to it all when you actually analyse what he said judged against the facts. Oddly enough.

 

[roydo]

Bit

Understatement imo mate. He knew exactly what he was doing. Hope it backfires massively on him. And not just in the publications that would normally have a pop at him.

 

[Eggs]

I know feck all about politics but can someone explain who's gonna win?

......nobody by the looks of it, bookies reckon the Conservatives will win most seats but not enough for them to have a majority when it comes to voting in the Commons. The 'winners' are likely to be a coalition of 2 or more different parties.

 

[Toffeelover]

@Toffeelover @peteblue
I'm absolutely delighted that people earning £30,000 are £826 better off than under labour. What an achievement. Now here's the reality.

In 2009/10, 40,898 people were provided with at least 3 days emergency food provided by a food bank charity. A shocking amount.

In 2013/14, 913,138 people were provided with at least 3 days emergency food provided by a food bank charity. 330,205 of these were children.

The huge increase in food bank users directly coincides with the new benefit rules and the powers to sanction and reduce benefits. In fact, while 20% of food bank users were forced there due to low income, over 30% were there due to benefit delays and sanctions.

This is why you cannot vote for a Conservative government in May. We ought to be absolutely ashamed of ourselves as a nation for allowing this to happen, but as long as the Tories preach their economy building mantra, it will never be accounted for. By voting Conservative, you are allowing this to happen.

I am glad some one found figures of food bank usage. Well done. But whoever one votes for the food banks will still be used. All parties are high on rhetoric but low on actuality.

 

[The Esk]

@Toffeelover @peteblue
I'm absolutely delighted that people earning £30,000 are £826 better off than under labour. What an achievement. Now here's the reality.

In 2009/10, 40,898 people were provided with at least 3 days emergency food provided by a food bank charity. A shocking amount.

In 2013/14, 913,138 people were provided with at least 3 days emergency food provided by a food bank charity. 330,205 of these were children.

The huge increase in food bank users directly coincides with the new benefit rules and the powers to sanction and reduce benefits. In fact, while 20% of food bank users were forced there due to low income, over 30% were there due to benefit delays and sanctions.

This is why you cannot vote for a Conservative government in May. We ought to be absolutely ashamed of ourselves as a nation for allowing this to happen, but as long as the Tories preach their economy building mantra, it will never be accounted for. By voting Conservative, you are allowing this to happen.

This is Lord Freud's (Conservative member of the House of Lords and a Minister) explanation for the rise in food bank users:

Challenged by the Bishop of Truro, the Rt Rev Tim Thornton, over whether ministers conceded a link between the benefits system and food bank use, Lord Freud replied that it was difficult to “make the causal connections”. The minister for welfare reform added: “It is difficult to know which came first – supply or demand.”

“Food banks are absolutely not part of the welfare system that we run. We have other systems to support people.” Asked what he meant, he replied: “If you put more food banks in, that is the supply. Clearly food from a food bank is by definition a free good and there’s almost infinite demand.”

 

[Toffeelover]

You can see why companies like being there......

I have converted the euros to £s, therefore:-

0% £6188
14% £6188 to £39171
42% £39172 to £185723
45% £185724 and over

It shows in Germany their rates favour for the most part the middle classes and very rich. Here in the UK the first £10600 is zero rated but in Germany only £6188. But that 14% I am envious. However VAT on food!

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

Disabled charity that helped Cameron's son loses out in cuts
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...d-camerons-son-loses-out-in-cuts-2269618.html

 

[daylightrobber]

This is Lord Freud's (Conservative member of the House of Lords and a Minister) explanation for the rise in food bank users:

Challenged by the Bishop of Truro, the Rt Rev Tim Thornton, over whether ministers conceded a link between the benefits system and food bank use, Lord Freud replied that it was difficult to “make the causal connections”. The minister for welfare reform added: “It is difficult to know which came first – supply or demand.”

“Food banks are absolutely not part of the welfare system that we run. We have other systems to support people.” Asked what he meant, he replied: “If you put more food banks in, that is the supply. Clearly food from a food bank is by definition a free good and there’s almost infinite demand.”

Lord Freud hasn't got a clue.

 

[Seanjd]

I am glad some one found figures of food bank usage. Well done. But whoever one votes for the food banks will still be used. All parties are high on rhetoric but low on actuality.

Of course they will, but to what extent? Food banks were used under labour, food banks are use over 20x the amount under the Tories. Why? I would say mainly because of their benefit sanctioning policy. This is not a cost cutting policy, it saves the nation next to no money. It is purely ideological. Even Ian Duncan Smith has said that he is 'proud' of the sanctioning policy he has introduced as it has got more people into work. It's certainly got more people into food banks. Weather they are ignorant to the day to day struggles of poor families, out to punish the less fortunate or a mixture if both, they are dangerous. It amazes me how even people on even a modest income would consider voting for a party of such cruel intentions.

 

[Blue 1]

This is Lord Freud's (Conservative member of the House of Lords and a Minister) explanation for the rise in food bank users:

Challenged by the Bishop of Truro, the Rt Rev Tim Thornton, over whether ministers conceded a link between the benefits system and food bank use, Lord Freud replied that it was difficult to “make the causal connections”. The minister for welfare reform added: “It is difficult to know which came first – supply or demand.”

“Food banks are absolutely not part of the welfare system that we run. We have other systems to support people.” Asked what he meant, he replied: “If you put more food banks in, that is the supply. Clearly food from a food bank is by definition a free good and there’s almost infinite demand.”

He's a turd, him.

 

[chewee]

It's a little complicated this election but I'll try to explain it as simply as I can. There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, a party (or combinations of parties who agree to work together) require 326 seats to for a majority government. By having more than half the seats in the house this means they can pass through bills easier. (It's actually a few seats less unofficially but I won't go into that and bamboozle you!)

On current projections the conservatives will have a handful of seats more than Labour however the general feeling is Labour will form a government with the help of the SNP (Depending on seat numbers). The current government is an official coalition between the Lib Dems and Conservatives, if Lab / SNP combine its will be slightly different as it won't be an official coalition. Labour will be the official government with the SNP offering votes to sure them up.

Given how volatile the polls currently are we could see the tories hold a 15-20 seat lead over Labour but still be short of an overall majority. If the gap is that large they will argue they have a clearer mandate to form a government, they may also look to form their own coalition with Lib Dem / UKIP (Dependant on if they can get over the 326 seat mark)

It is impossible this far out to predict what will happen, a lot depends on the number of seats each party wins. One largely accepted thing we can predict is that there will not be a clear winner so it will boil down to the ability of parties to negotiate a deal between them.

The key constitutional date is May 27th - The Queens Speech. This has to be voted through so there will have to be an agreement in place. Realistically speaking we should at the latest expect something in place 5-7 days after Election Day (7th May).

 

[Seanjd]

It's a little complicated this election but I'll try to explain it as simply as I can. There are 650 seats in the House of Commons, a party (or combinations of parties who agree to work together) require 326 seats to for a majority government. By having more than half the seats in the house this means they can pass through bills easier. (It's actually a few seats less unofficially but I won't go into that and bamboozle you!)

On current projections the conservatives will have a handful of seats more than Labour however the general feeling is Labour will form a government with the help of the SNP (Depending on seat numbers). The current government is an official coalition between the Lib Dems and Conservatives, if Lab / SNP combine its will be slightly different as it won't be an official coalition. Labour will be the official government with the SNP offering votes to sure them up.

Given how volatile the polls currently are we could see the tories hold a 15-20 seat lead over Labour but still be short of an overall majority. If the gap is that large they will argue they have a clearer mandate to form a government, they may also look to form their own coalition with Lib Dem / UKIP (Dependant on if they can get over the 326 seat mark)

It is impossible this far out to predict what will happen, a lot depends on the number of seats each party win. One largely accepted thing we can predict is that there will not be a clear winner so it will boil down to the ability of parties to negotiate a deal between them.

Thankfully, it doesn't look at though Tory, LD and UKIP will gain enough seats to form a coalition. Lib Dems wouldn't enter any coalition agreement with UKIP anyway. I can only really see a labour SNP partnership.