Thatcher dead

[Balti]

is she still dead?

 

[dazdon]

is she still dead?

She's closer to her children than she ever was in the past.

Have they fucked off back to where they come from now the party is over or are they waiting for the obligatory handouts to dry up?

I'm a cynic :-)

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Haha,

I know that is the case but a general idea wouldnt go a miss. At the moment although they will probably win the next election its hard to support or agree with them when I have no idea what they actually think

Are you in a safe seat?

Where I am now is a swing seat I think as it was labour until last election when Tories won. Which I was surprised about myself considering where I am so I think it's up for a joust come next election

 

[Balti]

is she still dead?

She's closer to her children than she ever was in the past.

Have they fucked off back to where they come from now the party is over or are they waiting for the obligatory handouts to dry up?

I'm a cynic :-)

I noticed ;-)

 

[tommyhair]

She's snuffed it?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

nulabour was created by the sun. Mail telegraph and times readers were/are permanently tory, the sun is bought by the less entrenched but easily swayed.
blair/brown were terrified of the ability of the press to form opinions, and so became tory in all but name, to further their own careers and in so doing buried the labour party.
Both sides have a hard-core support that will never cross, in fact according to research by the tory back office, 4% of the electorate elects the next government. Whatever the reason this is not democracy.The winners will say it is of course. And the cycle will continue. And for most of the population the the future will get grimmer

Agree with most of your post and glad to say I'm in the 4%.
However, New Labour was created by the Labour party itself after recognising that if they carried on as they were they were going to remain unelectable. Labour used 'new' as early as 94 in its own slogan, though the utlimate spinner that is Alistair Campbell really 'popularised' it.

I too am a swing voter although I've habitually lived in Labour strongholds since the '97 election. That said, I guess I'm not a floating voter in the purest sense of the word as I never have voted Tory, not least because of the inveterate absence of social liberalism among large parts of their membership and MP's.

In spite of the disproportionate power vested in me and my fellow floating voters I still consider it to be a wholly unjust way of determining how the country is governed. There is clearly little appetite from the electorate for a more representative electoral system, which is a little depressing tbh.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

nulabour was created by the sun. Mail telegraph and times readers were/are permanently tory, the sun is bought by the less entrenched but easily swayed.
blair/brown were terrified of the ability of the press to form opinions, and so became tory in all but name, to further their own careers and in so doing buried the labour party.
Both sides have a hard-core support that will never cross, in fact according to research by the tory back office, 4% of the electorate elects the next government. Whatever the reason this is not democracy.The winners will say it is of course. And the cycle will continue. And for most of the population the the future will get grimmer

Agree with most of your post and glad to say I'm in the 4%.
However, New Labour was created by the Labour party itself after recognising that if they carried on as they were they were going to remain unelectable. Labour used 'new' as early as 94 in its own slogan, though the utlimate spinner that is Alistair Campbell really 'popularised' it.

I too am a swing voter although I've habitually lived in Labour strongholds since the '97 election. That said, I guess I'm not a floating voter in the purest sense of the word as I never have voted Tory, not least because of the inveterate absence of social liberalism among large parts of their membership and MP's.

In spite of the disproportionate power vested in me and my fellow floating voters I still consider it to be a wholly unjust way of determining how the country is governed. There is clearly little appetite from the electorate for a more representative electoral system, which is a little depressing tbh.

I would presume that you would prefer PR, or its watered down version AV.
The electorate, rightly, IMO, rejected this resoundingly, which has had the heartwarming effect of leaving Nick Clegg looking as if he is permanently on the verge of tears. Voting by constituencies rather than some unworkable poll of the whole country has served us well enough, if say, you want a Labour MP as your local representative, you then don't need to accommodate the views of Tories/Liberals/Greens etc; impinging on the policies of your chosen man.
This makes more sense, to me and results in the community getting the MP they want, by democratically rejecting all others.

 

[M18CTID]

nulabour was created by the sun. Mail telegraph and times readers were/are permanently tory, the sun is bought by the less entrenched but easily swayed.
blair/brown were terrified of the ability of the press to form opinions, and so became tory in all but name, to further their own careers and in so doing buried the labour party.
Both sides have a hard-core support that will never cross, in fact according to research by the tory back office, 4% of the electorate elects the next government. Whatever the reason this is not democracy.The winners will say it is of course. And the cycle will continue. And for most of the population the the future will get grimmer

Agree with most of your post and glad to say I'm in the 4%.

However, New Labour was created by the Labour party itself after recognising that if they carried on as they were they were going to remain unelectable. Labour used 'new' as early as 94 in its own slogan, though the utlimate spinner that is Alistair Campbell really 'popularised' it.

I'm not sure I agree that Labour were unelectable in the mid-90's. No doubt re-inventing themselves as New Labour under Blair helped hugely but I think Labour would've gotten close to winning if John Smith hadn't passed away. By 1994 they were far more electable than they had been a decade or so earlier. For me even Kinnock deserves a bit of credit for moving them further towards the centre.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

nulabour was created by the sun. Mail telegraph and times readers were/are permanently tory, the sun is bought by the less entrenched but easily swayed.
blair/brown were terrified of the ability of the press to form opinions, and so became tory in all but name, to further their own careers and in so doing buried the labour party.
Both sides have a hard-core support that will never cross, in fact according to research by the tory back office, 4% of the electorate elects the next government. Whatever the reason this is not democracy.The winners will say it is of course. And the cycle will continue. And for most of the population the the future will get grimmer

Agree with most of your post and glad to say I'm in the 4%.
However, New Labour was created by the Labour party itself after recognising that if they carried on as they were they were going to remain unelectable. Labour used 'new' as early as 94 in its own slogan, though the utlimate spinner that is Alistair Campbell really 'popularised' it.

I too am a swing voter although I've habitually lived in Labour strongholds since the '97 election. That said, I guess I'm not a floating voter in the purest sense of the word as I never have voted Tory, not least because of the inveterate absence of social liberalism among large parts of their membership and MP's.

In spite of the disproportionate power vested in me and my fellow floating voters I still consider it to be a wholly unjust way of determining how the country is governed. There is clearly little appetite from the electorate for a more representative electoral system, which is a little depressing tbh.

I wouldn't be that keen to hoist the proportional representation/single transferrable vote banner right now if I were you, my friend.
After all, your party came an extremely remote third, yet still get a say in how the country is (mis)managed, whereas the party who came a much closer second are exiled to the opposition benches.
Hardly a scenario that reflects the wishes of the electorate, especially given that I don't recall seeing a 'Conservative/Liberal Sellouttwats Coalition' box to tick on my ballot paper, yet that's the fudge we ended up with.
First past the post isn't my idea of the democratic ideal either, but sometimes we have to be careful what we wish for in the way of alternatives.

 

[Cheesy]

What we really need in this country is a credible third party, one that reflects the views of those on the left and on the right in different policy areas. One that reflects nationalist & socialist views if you like. It could be called the National Socialist party to ensure that it attracts people from across the political spectrum.

 

[Andy Dale]

I think a lot will depend on whether Scotland votes for independence .
Labour will lose a hell of a lot of seats as well as 3 million or so votes.
So whichever system we use in the future , labour will lose out massively dependent on Scotland .

 

[waterloo blue]

What we really need in this country is a credible third party, one that reflects the views of those on the left and on the right in different policy areas. One that reflects nationalist & socialist views if you like. It could be called the National Socialist party to ensure that it attracts people from across the political spectrum.

One people,one country,one leader,by any chance?.

 

[Cheesy]

What we really need in this country is a credible third party, one that reflects the views of those on the left and on the right in different policy areas. One that reflects nationalist & socialist views if you like. It could be called the National Socialist party to ensure that it attracts people from across the political spectrum.

One people,one country,one leader,by any chance?.

Sounds like a good idea.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Agree with most of your post and glad to say I'm in the 4%.
However, New Labour was created by the Labour party itself after recognising that if they carried on as they were they were going to remain unelectable. Labour used 'new' as early as 94 in its own slogan, though the utlimate spinner that is Alistair Campbell really 'popularised' it.

I too am a swing voter although I've habitually lived in Labour strongholds since the '97 election. That said, I guess I'm not a floating voter in the purest sense of the word as I never have voted Tory, not least because of the inveterate absence of social liberalism among large parts of their membership and MP's.

In spite of the disproportionate power vested in me and my fellow floating voters I still consider it to be a wholly unjust way of determining how the country is governed. There is clearly little appetite from the electorate for a more representative electoral system, which is a little depressing tbh.

I would presume that you would prefer PR, or its watered down version AV.
The electorate, rightly, IMO, rejected this resoundingly, which has had the heartwarming effect of leaving Nick Clegg looking as if he is permanently on the verge of tears. Voting by constituencies rather than some unworkable poll of the whole country has served us well enough, if say, you want a Labour MP as your local representative, you then don't need to accommodate the views of Tories/Liberals/Greens etc; impinging on the policies of your chosen man.
This makes more sense, to me and results in the community getting the MP they want, by democratically rejecting all others.

I agree that there is considerable merit in the current system in terms of MP's representing their constituents, at least in theory. Unfortunately the interests of their constituents are nearly always subservient to the demands of whatever party they are aligned to. Only on very rare occasions will they vote in defiance of the party whip because they believe it to be in their constituents' best interests.

I believe that MP's should be, by law, truly independent of any political party. They can then be elected based on their own views, not those of the political machine that they are attached to. Their voting in parliament would be based on the best interests of their constituents and would be judged as such. Real democracy in action. I also believe it would lead to a palpable increase in the quality of those that represent us; more people with real life experience, rather than the procession of characterless career politicians that we have foisted upon us. We need more characters in politics.It could also mean more working class people could be there to represent the interests of that section of society rather than the Oxbridge educated types they often have imposed upon them.

I would then abolish the Lords and have a more representative second chamber.

Best of both worlds.