Brilliant stuff from David Cameron today

[spring hall convert]

It's got as bad as here in the US now.

I argue the US started the politics of pragmatism and image. We shamefully followed them down the abyss until we've reached the point where we have a system that encourages no one to actually believe in anything.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I would not worry too much about it, I honestly think that the vast majority are so fed up with the lies and false promises from politicians that they are very wary of anything that is said, especially at a conference before an election. It was all what we plan to do but no when and how, surely right minded people will not fall for it again given Camerons track record and Prime Ministers before him.

I agree with you to a certain extent. All parties make promises they will no doubt break so what do we do as voters ?

a) Not vote in protest ?

b) Or vote for the party that has made the promises we're most akin with in some vain hope they will deliver ?

c) I'm really not sure there is a c option ?

 

[spring hall convert]

Labour will win, without the help of any other party.

I wouldn't be so sure - the SNP will take at least 20 seats off them in Scotland. That's a lot of ground to make up with a leader that just doesn't seem to connect with the people he needs to connect with.

A lot depends on how tactical the UKIP/Tory vote is. IMHO.

 

[Skylar]

I'm a full time carer without the luxury of other property income and to be honest we are struggling to make ends meet at the moment. Only wish I was being payed the minimum wage. By the way you should be receiving £61.35

Really? I don't know how the system works. I filled in forms and that's what they said I'd get and do get. Maybe I should look into it a bit more.

 

[spring hall convert]

I agree with you to a certain extent. All parties make promises they will no doubt break so what do we do as voters ?

a) Not vote in protest ?

b) Or vote for the party that has made the promises we're most akin with in some vain hope they will deliver ?

c) I'm really not sure there is a c option ?

It's got to be B, expose our electorial system to the unrepresentitive sham that it is. Unfortunately most people will do a) and that's exactly what they want. Not voting does no one any favours, we shouldn't kid ourselves that it does.

 

[piersa]

What's the point of coming up with a new term? Every understands Little Englander.

I'm not sure I do, can you explain please?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The thing is here, you approach it from a position of where we are now. I approach it from a position of where we could be.

We'll agree to disagree on this one, it's all speculation. You're not going to win me over and clearly I'm not going to win you over.

This. Also, I actually feel a lot more comfortable with a pan-European court with a very broad base of nations providing input. One thing it does is prevent more extreme ideas and/or vested interest and national bias going un-checked. The idea of Cameron and his cronies, or any UK government for that matter, deciding a set of human rights based purely on how they view the world is not only wrong but dangerous.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'm not sure I do, can you explain please?

Google it. I can't be bothered with rhetorical questions.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

With the FPTP system, although UKIP will get a fair % of votes, certainly a lot more than the LibDems, I don't think they'll win many seats. Probably 2 or 3 including the one at Clacton where the By-Election is next week.

It's just a question of whether in a Marginal Constituency enough Tories vote UKIP to let Labour in, as although Labour voters are also voting for UKIP, the numbers are less.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I'm not sure I do, can you explain please?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Englander

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I argue the US started the politics of pragmatism and image. We shamefully followed them down the abyss until we've reached the point where we have a system that encourages no one to actually believe in anything.

And we foolishly followed their fixed term idea. All this does is turn the last year into one long election campaign when there are more pressing issue to deal with.

 

[Buzzer]

any UK government for that matter, deciding a set of human rights based purely on how they view the world is not only wrong but dangerous.

It's wrong and dangerous for a democratically-elected national government to be allowed to amend, remove and create laws specifically for the people that they govern? Ah, European nanny knows best. It's rather funny how some people rail against big business and faceless corporations with no appreciation nor care for local culture, attitudes and demands yet they've no qualms about the same things when it comes to the laws that govern them.

 

[spring hall convert]

This. Also, I actually feel a lot more comfortable with a pan-European court with a very broad base of nations providing input. One thing it does is prevent more extreme ideas and/or vested interest and national bias going un-checked. The idea of Cameron and his cronies, or any UK government for that matter, deciding a set of human rights based purely on how they view the world is not only wrong but dangerous.

Yup, that's my view. I don't refute where Buzzer is coming from, I just think it's a little naive to not question the intention of people in authority removing human rights safeguards a little more stringently.

“It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority.”

Benjamin Franklin.

Equally Buzzer would argue that he's questioning authority himself. There's no common ground here is there, stop trying (that's aimed at myself!!)

 

[Westdene Seagull]

And we foolishly followed their fixed term idea. All this does is turn the last year into one long election campaign when there are more pressing issue to deal with.

The problem with the system before was the incumbent party could call an election when they wanted thus handing them an advantage. I prefer the slightly more level playing field we have now. Strangely with the old system, if Brown hadn't bottled it, we wouldn't have the current Tory government.

 

[Ludensian Gull]

Really? I don't know how the system works. I filled in forms and that's what they said I'd get and do get. Maybe I should look into it a bit more.

Yep,full time carer rate is £61.35. You can earn £100 on top of that without it affecting the benefit.

 

[Buzzer]

And we foolishly followed their fixed term idea. All this does is turn the last year into one long election campaign when there are more pressing issue to deal with.

Eh? The Americans aren't the only ones with fixed term elections. Your beloved EU has them every five years in June. Doesn't Germany also have them too?

Ah well, just like the true pan-European that you are, you're able to moan about narrow-mindedness and still hold the default position that anything American must necessarily be bad.

 

[spring hall convert]

With the FPTP system, although UKIP will get a fair % of votes, certainly a lot more than the LibDems, I don't think they'll win many seats. Probably 2 or 3 including the one at Clacton where the By-Election is next week.

It's just a question of whether in a Marginal Constituency enough Tories vote UKIP to let Labour in, as although Labour voters are also voting for UKIP, the numbers are less.

I made the point above (and most people are forgetting) that Labour will likely lose 20 seats to the SNP in Scotland. Plenty of ground for them to make up.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Yep,full time carer rate is £61.35. You can earn £100 on top of that without it affecting the benefit.

I'd imagine that it's highly unlikely that his two rented flats, bring in a combined total of less than £100 / week (less costs).

 

[somerset]

This. Also, I actually feel a lot more comfortable with a pan-European court with a very broad base of nations providing input. One thing it does is prevent more extreme ideas and/or vested interest and national bias going un-checked. The idea of Cameron and his cronies, or any UK government for that matter, deciding a set of human rights based purely on how they view the world is not only wrong but dangerous.

Aahhh the old bell curve approach, delete the extremes at either end of the spectrum and just wallow in the middle ground of ignorance.

What you actually mean I think, is ignore extreme circumstances, or the possibility of extremes actually existing and affecting areas of Europe, in the hope that it will just go away of its own volition.......HT once more banging the drum from the comfort of his euro-centric Germanic utopia....... smell those coffee beans matey....... one size can never fit all.......well with the possible exception of your elasticated jeans, too much currywurst eh?!

 

[piersa]

Google it. I can't be bothered with rhetorical questions.

So you don't know. That clears that up.