Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Milliband's Welfare Cap
Is he just lying to grab a few floating voters from the Tories, or is he genuinely adopting Tory policies?
http://
http://
Answers
I certainly think he is trying to attract the floating voters. In our first past the post system, it is likely what the floating voters do that will decide a party majority, or another coalition. And if we get another coalition in 2015, by the way, perhaps it will be time to look properly at an alternative voting system - one that offers the prospect of greater...
09:36 Fri 07th Jun 2013
-- answer removed --
I agree with you gromit. But UKIP could still cause enough confusion to upset the apple cart, even this late in the day. Which, of course, is what Farage fully understands. He may be annoying and his Party uncomfortably close to the extreme right but he isn't stupid, in the same way that Boris isn't stupid either. Both know exactly what they are doing, which is why Cameron, another non-stupid, is so afraid.
Its going to be an interesting and, quite frankly, an enjoyable 23 months ahead !
Its going to be an interesting and, quite frankly, an enjoyable 23 months ahead !
UKiP might haved peaked too early. They only really have one policy, and voters, though interested in immigration, actually vote according to how they feel financially. UKiP do not really speak to people on that level. LibDems are toast.
The conservatives have a problem in that Cameron's successor already has a job and is not even an MP. Next years elections will be very bad for them, but they maybe stuck with Cameron / Osborne until after they lose the election, and a newly elected Boris takes over in opposition.
The conservatives have a problem in that Cameron's successor already has a job and is not even an MP. Next years elections will be very bad for them, but they maybe stuck with Cameron / Osborne until after they lose the election, and a newly elected Boris takes over in opposition.
I certainly think he is trying to attract the floating voters. In our first past the post system, it is likely what the floating voters do that will decide a party majority, or another coalition. And if we get another coalition in 2015, by the way, perhaps it will be time to look properly at an alternative voting system - one that offers the prospect of greater parliamentary representation? After all, given UKips current surge in popularity, their share of the popular vote will not translate to many, if any, parliamentary seats in the next general election under our current system.
All politicians court the floating voter - thats the nature of politics. And the manifesto commitments of a particular party should be subject to change - to argue otherwise is to argue for fossilization. It is not always a sign of weakness to change policy direction if the public mood dictates.
And thats where we are at right now. The public mood seems to favour a much reduced state spending programme, and Labour have to recognise that.There is more than a hint that they seriously underestimated the rise in immigration numbers back in the early 2000s - that underestimation has cost the country a lot in strained resources and bad feelings.
So - if Labour wish to regain the confidence of the electorate, it is not sufficient to rely on core voters, the collapse of the LibDem vote, and lack of popularity of the conservatives come the next general election - these will not be enough.
I for one welcome the recognition by Labour that issues such as welfare and benefits systems, and our need to balance out immigration. If they recognise that our relationship with the EU - and the EU itself - needs some reform, all to the good.
All politicians court the floating voter - thats the nature of politics. And the manifesto commitments of a particular party should be subject to change - to argue otherwise is to argue for fossilization. It is not always a sign of weakness to change policy direction if the public mood dictates.
And thats where we are at right now. The public mood seems to favour a much reduced state spending programme, and Labour have to recognise that.There is more than a hint that they seriously underestimated the rise in immigration numbers back in the early 2000s - that underestimation has cost the country a lot in strained resources and bad feelings.
So - if Labour wish to regain the confidence of the electorate, it is not sufficient to rely on core voters, the collapse of the LibDem vote, and lack of popularity of the conservatives come the next general election - these will not be enough.
I for one welcome the recognition by Labour that issues such as welfare and benefits systems, and our need to balance out immigration. If they recognise that our relationship with the EU - and the EU itself - needs some reform, all to the good.
"UKiP might have peaked too early."
My thoughts too.
I wonder if the LibDems might hang on to their seats - it's going to be rough for them in the next election.
If they can remind people of their role in raising the tax threshold for the poorest and increasing capital gains I think some of the champagne socialists may still have some love for them - if not Clegg.
My thoughts too.
I wonder if the LibDems might hang on to their seats - it's going to be rough for them in the next election.
If they can remind people of their role in raising the tax threshold for the poorest and increasing capital gains I think some of the champagne socialists may still have some love for them - if not Clegg.
"you shouldn't discourage people from voting for anybody by using the "wasted vote" line. "
I don't agree at all. For one thing, it may not actually discourage them and secondly it's actually perfectly correct nationally because enough people are never going to vote for UKIP for them to form a government.
And for the Tories it may be a highly advisory policy because of course in marginal constituencies enough UKIP votes might let in a Labour or Lib Dem candidate, which presumably is not what most UKIP voters want.
I don't agree at all. For one thing, it may not actually discourage them and secondly it's actually perfectly correct nationally because enough people are never going to vote for UKIP for them to form a government.
And for the Tories it may be a highly advisory policy because of course in marginal constituencies enough UKIP votes might let in a Labour or Lib Dem candidate, which presumably is not what most UKIP voters want.
Em10
Good time to remind you of the Conservative's promise at the last election.
// We are restoring order to our immigration system to bring annual net migration down to the tens of thousands – rather than the hundreds of thousands we saw under Labour //
It has staued at the hundreds of thousand level. Divine justice if voters turn away from them and vote... etc etc.
Good time to remind you of the Conservative's promise at the last election.
// We are restoring order to our immigration system to bring annual net migration down to the tens of thousands – rather than the hundreds of thousands we saw under Labour //
It has staued at the hundreds of thousand level. Divine justice if voters turn away from them and vote... etc etc.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.