SNP said they'll do everything they can to make sure the Tories are out of power. They said they'll never work with them but at the end of the day you never know.
I guess the Conservatives could offer something like that, it would be up to the SNP to agree or not. I guess my question would also be if the conservatives could even offer that just to stay in power. I know they do not want to go with UKIP and even if they did, it probably is not enough.
I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be EU referendum + the tories are staunch unionist so can't see and independence referendum for at least 10 years. Tories can only work with the Lib Dems (that even isn't certain or the DUP) small chance with UKIP. btw Tories can only get an EU referendum if they get an overall majority which is very unlikely.
The economist wants a return to the Conservative-Lib Dems. http://www.economist.com/news/leade...led-david-cameron-should-have-second-term-who
They're largely old school right of centre liberal, have almost always been vehemently anti-Labour and it's rare when they don't back the Tories. They even plumped for them in 1997.
Yep. The Economist would be center-left here, because it supports the social network. But in the U.K. it will pretty much always be Tory, as the Tories are likelier to push for lower tax rates and fewer business regulations.
The only times they have backed Labour it has been very reluctantly and when the Tories were in almost complete disarray (1964, 2001, 2005).
But they're not a single party. Even if you take this premise, with the Conservative share correct that would imply that the vast majority of the shortfall in his Lib Dem forecast would come directly from Labour. They were only within 3000 votes on 25 seats and only 13 were seats Labour won. So if it can't cope with three parties, what's the point of attempting it when there are five or six parties expecting to get a good share of the vote? He didn't really fall in the polls. Clegg got a boost from the TV debates, but it didn't really subside - it was simply a matter of the polls overstating Lib Dem support by several percent. Other predictions managed to adjust for "Cleggmania". Election Forecast got Labour one out and the Tories and Lib Dems 9 out (overstating the latter and understating the former) and Silver had the most inaccurate predictions of any. http://electionforecast.co.uk/2010/index.html Others: From http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/05/
Well, except that, if you look at population density of London and the south-east, it would mean America having a population of about 7 billion people, i.e. the population of the entire world all living in America. This is part of the problem when we're discussing these things with Americans, they tend to interpret everything in terms of how it works in the USA. The problem with immigration into the UK is that it's all been in a relatively small part of the country and over a relatively short period of time. If you combine that with a faltering economy you can see why it becomes an issue in a general election.
Please guys, just put this wali idiot on ignore. He's obviously just a troll.Put him on ignore and then you don't see his posts. I'm having a job trying to follow what you're talking about because, (I assume), people are , (pointlessly!!!), responding to his drivel.
Ordinarily I would, but I'm not convinced he's trolling. I'm leaning towards him not being "all there", and I would feel a pang of guilt in snubbing him.
In the Southwestern part of the USA, public polls suggest that immigration per year is in the tens of millions. Perception matters a lot. The bigger thing that Brits and Americans seem to differ on is that immigration to the US has always been seen as a good thing (even when we excluded the Chinese and put the 3% quota in place, immigration from the 'better' places was always seen as a good thing).
Well, let's just go through that logically. If the SNP keep the tories in power, how long will they do it... 5 years? That would mean Scotland having to suffer tory policies for 5 years. If they DON'T keep them in power for long and Scotland gets it's independence after, say, 2 years, then what happens? DO we have another GE? This is the problem. If you involve the SNP in government on the basis of them becoming an independent country at some point during the parliament, how is that a long term basis for a 5 year parliament. From the SNP's point of view, if they predicate everything on having another independence vote and they LOSE it, what do they do then? Bear in mind they lost the last one and I doubt the next one, carried out only a year or so after, would be any different. My guess is that would be their judgement as well. Also, let's get it straight, the SNP WANT to be inside Europe... but Cameron is promising a vote to come OUT... so are they really going to prop up a tory government to have a vote to leave something they want to stay IN??? I mean, leaving aside all the policy differences and everything else, the mechanics of it make absolutely NO sense. They're utterly impractical.
Have you seen some of his stuff on the other threads? He might not be 'all there' but a lot of his stuff is all OVER the place, tbh.
Depending on tactical voting swings between now and the election, I see a Lib Dems - Conservatives coalition OR Labour-SNP. Is that how you would forecast?
I've said before, I spent 6 days in an NHS hospital in June of last year and half the doctors, anaesthetists, etc, were from abroad. When people whinge about not being able to see their doctor 'because of immigrants', I always ask, (rhetorically!), "What, doctor Singh y'mean?"
I doubt it. The Lib Dems will have about half the number of seats of the SNP so, unless labour are a LOT lower than expected, the tories won't have enough seats to combine with anyone... as much as anything because, bluntly, NOBODY wants to work with them because of their policies. Don't forget, we almost got a left-wing government last time in this situation... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010#Results Lab+Lib+SNP+Grn was 258+57+6+1 = 322 Because Sinn Fein don't turn up that means you need 323, otherwise you would need 326. If they DID turn up, they'd support labour too so we'd have had a continued labour government. As it was we were 1 short. The polls are showing a fall in the tories and a rise in Labour so they're going in the OPPOSITE to that needed for the tories to get in.
SNP, PC, SDLP, Greens and an Independent in N.Ireland have said they won't back a Tory government. The nationalist parties and the greens just have to back Labour without any deals or coalitions. Cons have to hope they do better than the polls are saying and Labour do worse than expected.
I just don't think they're going to be anywhere near, tbh. It's only really a matter of whether the minor parties start getting 'antsy' but then, if they do and legislation doesn't go through, they'll be held responsible by the electorate when it goes wrong which, frankly, is what SHOULD happen anyway. It's going to need some horse trading and that's what people are saying they won't do but, to my mind, that's what the bastards are PAID for... it's a bit of a cheek for them to say they won't do it. But don't we all recognise that's what they've got to say, though? If they do a reasonable job, I doubt anyone's going to complain. Well, except the tory 'meeja' obviously. That won't be pretty
Ipsos MORI - CON 35%, LAB 30%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 10%, GRN 8% Panelbase - CON 32%, LAB 34%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 17%, GRN 4% YouGov - CON 34%, LAB 35%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 12%, GRN 5% Labour ahead in 2, cons in 1
Back to the punditry and horse race prognostications and predictions I see. Why isn't anybody talking about substance and the issues in this thread. The economy, immigration, EU and English Parliament??? I guess everybody wants to be Nate Silver on here. As regards to immigration I feel offended that people think that I demagoguing the issue. This issue has been a major issue and hotly debated for decades. Even ole Maggie warned of the foreign hordes In the 1979 GE. To think that I am bringing it up at of the blue when there is this anger out there is naive.