• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

"Tories should pray to lose election"

#1
An interesting piece from Dominic Lawson

He raises a valid point that the early 90s financial situation would have shafted whoever won.

Personally, I'm keen for labour to win so there can be a more balanced view on which political party screwed up the country over a set period of time.
Interestingly enough, the old labour gripe about Thatcher snatching milk seem to fade when compared to Blair and the Iraq War (though he doesn't have quite such a catchy nickname)
 
#2
smallbrownprivates said:
An interesting piece from Dominic Lawson

He raises a valid point that the early 90s financial situation would have shafted whoever won.

Personally, I'm keen for labour to win so there can be a more balanced view on which political party screwed up the country over a set period of time.
Interestingly enough, the old labour gripe about Thatcher snatching milk seem to fade when compared to Blair and the Iraq War (though he doesn't have quite such a catchy nickname)
That's a good article, so thanks for posting it.

I had to look up "misanthrope" though (someone who hates mankind...)!

It has occurred to me that the Conservatives might be back-peddling in order to allow Labour to win - precisely because of the economic mess, but I don't think that Mr Cameron is that clever or Machiavellian.

Litotes
 
#3
I think that Labour should win. As I have said before, the country is not sufficiently screwed up yet for people to accept the radical changes required. The benefits system is far too generous and from that alot of our other problems are born.
 
#4
An interesting article. I don't think Cameron is the man to lead the Conservatives and another Labour term might mean a more 'solid' and upright man of substance gets the leadership.
 
#5
rockpile said:
I think that Labour should win. As I have said before, the country is not sufficiently screwed up yet for people to accept the radical changes required. The benefits system is far too generous and from that alot of our other problems are born.
If Labour did win then they would have to tackle the benefits system themselves and address the number of QANGOs. It would make a change to see a party forced to correct it's own appalling mistakes and face the reality of what it has done.
 
#6
Very interesting write up and some of the comments make good reading as well.

I am probably going to hate myself forever but I am seriously considering voting Labour for precisely the reasons highlighted in the article.

A Labour majority would force Brown to either deal with the issues or face massive political backlash from the Unions not to mention the potential of a massive backlash from the electorate. A labour victory could destroy the labour party for ever.

Besides, Cameron's a fucking cunt that doesn't respond to situations in the political spectrum that would have seen the likes of Thatcher, Hezza (and the gang) bury Labour up to their necks in shit.
 
#7
But if Labour win, don't you think Gordon's head will just expand even more? As he will then have a mandate from the people. Personally I want to see the look on his face when he realised that the people despised him so much, they got rid of him at the first possible opportunity; being beaten by Cameron would be a hard thing to swallow.
 
#8
The PM knows that everyone despises him. He isn't bothered.

I want to see his face as he realises that he has won and that he can't deliver (again) hopefully it will cause an anurism or at the very least a massive stroke that permanantly fixes his mouth in the position of that thing he does whenever he get's to a comma. A permanent expression which highlights what a fu.cking retard he actually is would be sweet justice.

I still stand by the conviction that Cameron is a joke and not fit to govern.
 
#10
This article presents a similar view to that which was aired ref Obama before he won the US election 14 months ago. Now is a bad time to be in government in many countries, not least the UK.

IMO we are stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one hand I believe that Labour has lost any momentum or vigour, and instead seems to be spending most of its energy tearing itself apart with inter-factional feuding. If they form the next government I just don't see how they are going to have the drive to actually take the steps needed to help the UK recover, especially if Cyclops retains his position at number 10.

On the other hand I just don't see the Conservatives as being fit for power. Cameron still strikes me as being more style than substance, and his unwillingness to clearly define their policies doesn't help. Also the most pressing issue for the next parliament is the economy, and I don't see the Tory's plan for slashing the deficit in the medium term as feasible.
 
#11
An excellent article from the young Lawson and one a lot of Cons can take heart in should they lose.
I predict that Lab will rule for another five, probably by hung parliament, but the Cons can sit and watch, not one, but two parties self destruct.
 
#13
Rinaldi said:
On the other hand I just don't see the Conservatives as being fit for power. Cameron still strikes me as being more style than substance, and his unwillingness to clearly define their policies doesn't help. Also the most pressing issue for the next parliament is the economy, and I don't see the Tory's plan for slashing the deficit in the medium term as feasible.
I think it unlikely that the Conservatives will release any details of policy until the last safe moment before the election is called. There is too much risk that Labour will cherrypick the best bits and present them as their own, as happened with the inheritance tax thing.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#14
I'd get a certain nasty joy if Labour got a narrow win but that oaf Brown lost his seat. Unfortunately the country would be fcuked but it is anyway.

Whilst on purely party grounds it might be better for the Tories to lose on grounds of the national interest they must win. Incidentally I'd like Brown to keep his seat in that case so he has the humiliation of continuing to serve as a backbencher in a failed party.
 
#15
Crouch_and_Hold said:
An excellent article from the young Lawson and one a lot of Cons can take heart in should they lose.
I predict that Lab will rule for another five, probably by hung parliament, but the Cons can sit and watch, not one, but two parties self destruct.
The problem I see with a hung parliament is that if the Lib Dems get into bed with Labour their price will be proportinal representation in some form or other. This is highly likely to mean that a Labour/Lib Dem coalition will rule forever.

Conversely if the Conservatives get in the shake up of the constituencies to get rid of the inherent bias towards Labour might (with luck) keep that party out of power for the foreseeable future.

Either way the result of the next election* will change the nature of democracy in the UK for a very long time.


*If Lord Mandleson doesn't invoke the Civil Contingencies Act & cancel the next one, of course!
 
#16
Crouch_and_Hold said:
An excellent article from the young Lawson and one a lot of Cons can take heart in should they lose.
I predict that Lab will rule for another five, probably by hung parliament, but the Cons can sit and watch, not one, but two parties self destruct.
But at what price to the country?
 
#17
CaptainPlume said:
Crouch_and_Hold said:
An excellent article from the young Lawson and one a lot of Cons can take heart in should they lose.
I predict that Lab will rule for another five, probably by hung parliament, but the Cons can sit and watch, not one, but two parties self destruct.
The problem I see with a hung parliament is that if the Lib Dems get into bed with Labour their price will be proportinal representation in some form or other. This is highly likely to mean that a Labour/Lib Dem coalition will rule forever.

Conversely if the Conservatives get in the shake up of the constituencies to get rid of the inherent bias towards Labour might (with luck) keep that party out of power for the foreseeable future.

Either way the result of the next election* will change the nature of democracy in the UK for a very long time.


*If Lord Mandleson doesn't invoke the Civil Contingencies Act & cancel the next one, of course!
I understand the concern, however, do we really think that the people of this country are so thick that if we moved to a PR world, then they would not be able to vote in the government they wanted, once they had worked out how the system worked?

Or is it that people believe there is an inherent, underlying preference for parties other than the tories? In the last hundred years, only one party has ever achieved more than 50% of the vote - that was the tories. However, since then, their popularity has waned.

If we stick with the curretn FPTP system - it will always be open to abuse and manipulation by the sitting government.
 
#18
jagman, In all honesty I can't see the country unfu.cking itself over the next 5-6 years. Best to let labour reap what they have sown and make sure they get****ed in the process. As it stands the Tories can't sort out the problems they will inherit and will end up out on their arrses after 1 term. Let Labour fuddle around in a mire of their own making and they will become unelectable for at least 20 years, a bit like 1979 -1982 (difference being Maggie got the Falklands to bail her out - otherwise she would have been gone too). The next Party in the driving seat are going to need a very long term in government if they are going to make any sort of headway in flushing away the turd that labour have left in the pan.
 
#19
BPS666 said:
jagman, In all honesty I can't see the country unfu.cking itself over the next 5-6 years. Best to let labour reap what they have sown and make sure they get****ed in the process. As it stands the Tories can't sort out the problems they will inherit and will end up out on their arrses after 1 term. Let Labour fuddle around in a mire of their own making and they will become unelectable for at least 20 years, a bit like 1979 -1982 (difference being Maggie got the Falklands to bail her out - otherwise she would have been gone too). The next Party in the driving seat are going to need a very long term in government if they are going to make any sort of headway in flushing away the turd that labour have left in the pan.
And this is my point. No party has any clear mandate for the next term of parliament. All three are still aiming for the 'middle ground-middle class' vote a la 2001 & 2005.
The political system requires a greater upheaval than it has been through/going through (expenses, safe seats, Grandees etc). Perversely, a hung parliament that fails then gives the opposition a stronger hand to play in five years time.
 
#20
Crouch_and_Hold said:
And this is my point. No party has any clear mandate for the next term of parliament. All three are still aiming for the 'middle ground-middle class' vote a la 2001 & 2005.
Yes, because that's where the floating votes are. The lower classes would (& have) voted for a monkey if you stick a red rosette on it.

It is highly dangerous that the traditional "I vote for Labour because my father did & his father before, they're the party of the working man" persists - it has been argued here that Labour has done as much damage if not more to the working class than Thatcher ever did.

Something needs to be done about the inherent bias towards Labour in the way constituencies are set up. That's why I'm praying for a Conservative Government.

It might also be time to look at voting legislation as fewer people vote for the winning party than the number of people who do not even use thir mandate at all!
 

Latest Threads