Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

2015 General Election predictions


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#21 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,458 posts

Posted 31 July 2014 - 01:23 PM

Kinnock was well ahead of major right up until the actual day of the election. Ultimately, rightly or wrongly, the public preferred the devil they knew to someone who could talk well but had no governmental track record. Miliband has a governmental track record but cannot talk well or even eat a bacon sandwich without looking a total prat.

 

The Tories will gain last-minute switched votes.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#22 verbatim

verbatim
  • Coach
  • 65 posts

Posted 31 July 2014 - 01:44 PM

If Scotland breaks away from the UK in the September vote, Labour will lose about 40 MP's, so would this more or less guarantee a very close election?

I know that when politics have been discusses with friends, no matter whether they are left or right leaning, the impression I get is that people do not have a clue of who they would for this time round ( the best of a very bad bunch?) - but they all agree they won't be voting LibDem.


How would it work with Scottish independence? If they vote yes in September is there not still a while before they actually become independent?

If so, does Scotland still have MPs in the UK parliament next year and what happens to them when Scotland goes independent? Or am I just confused?

#23 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,696 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 02:50 PM

My prediction is that whichever party 'wins' the next election, they will achieve less than 40% of the actual votes cast on a turnout of about 65%, which won't give them much of a genuine mandate to do anything at all. Not that this will stop them claiming a mandate to do anything they choose.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#24 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:21 PM

My prediction is that whichever party 'wins' the next election, they will achieve less than 40% of the actual votes cast on a turnout of about 65%, which won't give them much of a genuine mandate to do anything at all. Not that this will stop them claiming a mandate to do anything they choose.

I disagree with that, if you choose not to vote then you accept and give mandate to the government that results.  If you feel particularly strongly that one party shouldn't be in power then vote, if you're defeated then you've at least done your bit for the democratic process.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#25 Bucksyed

Bucksyed
  • Players
  • 34 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:46 PM

CKN  there is only one problem, if you live in the area where the local MP is the speaker of the house, no other major party will put anybody up against him . This is because of an agreement between the political parties not to put a candidate up against him and being the speaker he has no voice in the house .Nigel Farage stood against him in the last election but being a rank Tory area he didn't get that many votes. Is there any point in voting in that situation?


        I have Kleptomania and when it gets bad I take something for it :tongue: .


#26 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,696 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:01 PM

I disagree with that, if you choose not to vote then you accept and give mandate to the government that results.  If you feel particularly strongly that one party shouldn't be in power then vote, if you're defeated then you've at least done your bit for the democratic process.

 

I always vote, but growing numbers don't, and that's a problem that needs addressing. It won't be addressed as long as 'mandates' continue to be endorsed when they represent ever-dwindling fractions of the electorate. How low is too low a share of the vote for the 'winner' to claim a genuine mandate, in an age when the drift of votes away from the two major parties looks set to continue indefinitely? 35%? 30% 25%. Lower than that? At what point do we admit 'this whole process is a sham' and begin to demand it be changed to something more representative?

 

Many people actively choose not to vote. That doesn't necessarily signal a disinterest in politics, more a general disgust at the process and the paucity of choice on offer.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#27 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:05 PM

CKN  there is only one problem, if you live in the area where the local MP is the speaker of the house, no other major party will put anybody up against him . This is because of an agreement between the political parties not to put a candidate up against him and being the speaker he has no voice in the house .Nigel Farage stood against him in the last election but being a rank Tory area he didn't get that many votes. Is there any point in voting in that situation?

Yes.  The reason the situation exists is that the convention has been allowed to stand by an apathetic electorate.  A concerted effort by a few local people to overcome the ridiculous situation and tap into those who don't want the horrible little man back in the seat could even get the Monster Raving Loony Party's first MP, turnouts are so low in these constituencies that it's not that difficult a view to take.

 

I think Farage is an odious little man just shy of Nick Griffin (my very personal opinion) but I'd rather vote for him than have my vote wasted due to a "convention" that essentially disenfranchises an entire constituency.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#28 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:13 PM

I always vote, but growing numbers don't, and that's a problem that needs addressing. It won't be addressed as long as 'mandates' continue to be endorsed when they represent ever-dwindling fractions of the electorate. How low is too low a share of the vote for the 'winner' to claim a genuine mandate, in an age when the drift of votes away from the two major parties looks set to continue indefinitely? 35%? 30% 25%. Lower than that? At what point do we admit 'this whole process is a sham' and begin to demand it be changed to something more representative?

 

Many people actively choose not to vote. That doesn't necessarily signal a disinterest in politics, more a general disgust at the process and the paucity of choice on offer.

I think the current Labour party are a disgrace in many aspects.  Ed Miliband is a weasel and is just a less popular version of Cameron in his attitudes towards doing anything that his focus groups say.  The rest of the Shadow Cabinet with their promises to out-do the Tories on cracking down on benefits claimants (not benefits fraud but claimants) and other nonsense policies are probably the weakest Shadow Cabinet since the early 1980s.  I'll still vote for them though because they're the best of a really bad bunch, it's either that or go sulk and tacitly approve the next government with my inaction.

 

Even if we get 10% of the electorate voting, that's still a democratic mandate if the other 90% are not voting because of apathy.  It's their choice not to vote.  They could choose to turn up and vote for a local independent, they could vote for anyone they choose on the ballot paper, they could even spoil the paper by writing some obscenities that only a vote counter will see for a fraction of a second.

 

edit:  That picture of Miliband eating a bacon roll like a bit of a nerd was probably a focus group suggesting that people would vote for him if he publicly ate bacon.  He'd be fighting with Cameron for first in the line for a punt to the nuts if a focus group suggested it'd get them the vote of the nut punter.  Hmmm... there's a thought...


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#29 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,458 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:24 PM

  That picture of Miliband eating a bacon roll like a bit of a nerd was probably a focus group suggesting that people would vote for him if he publicly ate bacon.  He'd be fighting with Cameron for first in the line for a punt to the nuts if a focus group suggested it'd get them the vote of the nut punter.  Hmmm... there's a thought...

 

 

I hope he's not going to chase the gay vote.

 

;) :ph34r:


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#30 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:29 PM

I hope he's not going to chase the gay vote.

 

;) :ph34r:

Strangest gay people I've ever known if they go around punting each other in the nuts!


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#31 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,985 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:36 PM

Strangest gay people I've ever known if they go around punting each other in the nuts!

Perhaps they'd then offer to kiss it better?


"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#32 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,985 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:37 PM

I always vote, but growing numbers don't, and that's a problem that needs addressing. It won't be addressed as long as 'mandates' continue to be endorsed when they represent ever-dwindling fractions of the electorate. How low is too low a share of the vote for the 'winner' to claim a genuine mandate, in an age when the drift of votes away from the two major parties looks set to continue indefinitely? 35%? 30% 25%. Lower than that? At what point do we admit 'this whole process is a sham' and begin to demand it be changed to something more representative?

 

Many people actively choose not to vote. That doesn't necessarily signal a disinterest in politics, more a general disgust at the process and the paucity of choice on offer.

50% according to theTories. Oh, sorry, that's just for 'Union Barons'.


"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#33 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,458 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:47 PM

Personally, I think next years election results show will be brilliant television. The best since Labour's landslide in 1997.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#34 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,210 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:23 PM

The Scots reckon they;ll get an 80% turnout for the referendum, but that is a once for all vote.  If they vote "yes" they won't be able to say in five years that they've changed their minds.  It would be good though if just for once the people of this country could take the trouble to go to their local polling station and register their opinion.  Your vote does count, and if you don't use it you can't complain afterwards.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#35 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,575 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:55 PM

My prediction is that whichever party 'wins' the next election, they will achieve less than 40% of the actual votes cast on a turnout of about 65%, which won't give them much of a genuine mandate to do anything at all. Not that this will stop them claiming a mandate to do anything they choose.

This isn't unusual is it john. I think there's quite a long history if parties gaining power with less than half of the popular vote
It's a two edged sword in that at least we get a government in power that can carry out that mandate, rather than have to horse trade with other parties that's even true with the coalition in reality
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#36 The Future is League

The Future is League
  • Coach
  • 6,046 posts

Posted 02 August 2014 - 08:05 AM

I predict no party will have an overall majority forcing another GE within months. Clegg would have to be pretty dumb to get into bed with the Tories again, even if he had the opportunity too.



#37 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,341 posts

Posted 02 August 2014 - 08:12 AM

aren't we on fixed term parliaments now?  the GE is yet 9 months away. Plenty of time for things to change, in any case.



#38 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,575 posts

Posted 02 August 2014 - 05:34 PM

aren't we on fixed term parliaments now? the GE is yet 9 months away. Plenty of time for things to change, in any case.


Good point
We've got the Tories trying to out UKIP UKIP
Labour trying to say that image doesn't matter whilst working their asses off on Milliband's image

UKIP trying to think of something else now that they've played the immigration and Europe cards

The Lib Dems wishing the world would end

The Monster Raving Loony party a shadow if its former self without screaming lord sutch

I'll be voting for someone though
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#39 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,575 posts

Posted 02 August 2014 - 05:44 PM

I predict no party will have an overall majority forcing another GE within months. Clegg would have to be pretty dumb to get into bed with the Tories again, even if he had the opportunity too.

He won't have enough seats to make it worth the other party's while
I reckon we'll have a lame duck minority government that as you say won't last long
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#40 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 02 August 2014 - 11:05 PM

I think some people really need to understand the impersonality of the internet and stop having such thin skins over things that really shouldn't bother them as much as they do.  Play nicely or you'll just waste your time posting when I delete it.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway