Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's all very well and good but as long as it's a two horse race here, I'm not gonna throw my vote away for a party that I KNOW aren't gonna get elected.-AC
Thats subjective - I didn't throw my vote away, because I voted for something I believed in - even if they do not get elected, i know that next time Blair does something shitty - i know hes not doing it in my name.
i think it would be good it Britain had the voting system that means every vote counts...rather than if you don't vote for the winning party your vote doesn't count..
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Well there you go then.I don't think "almost" everyone want them in power, or it wouldn't be between two parties.
The point is, people are being motivated to hate Blair coz he lied, which he did and yes he was wrong. That was what the problem was with Bush/Kerry though. They all focused on the Iraq situation instead of who was gonna do a better job with the country, which is of course the purpose of elections.
So while it's between Blair and Howard, I thought about who would be better to run this country and to be honest, I'd rather have Blair than Howard.
-AC
Put up the tuituion fees which blatantly put off any working class family from sending a child to university if the child is going to be in debt £20, 000 after he/she finishes the university.
I just have to comment on that -- that's about $35,000. Uni is SO much cheaper in Britain compared to the US -- here 4 years costs a LOT more. By the time I'll have gotten my bachelor's degree, I'll have shelled out probably close to $80,000, a lot of which will be loans that I'll have to pay back. And I'll be continuing on to get my Master's degree, and possibly a doctorate.
They just cut education funding here as well 😠
But anyway, my point is that the average US college grad is usually in debt nearly twice that much, some much more so if they go on to grad school or get a doctorate. My aunts are both doctors, they got their medical degrees 15 years ago, and are STILL paying back loans.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Reasons why Labour are shitheads --Lied about Iraq, got British soldiers killed, drained the money out of the economy to do so.
-Blatantly lied, not only the parlament, but every single person in this country - then refused to apologize for it.
IF blair lied about Iraq, whats stoping him lying about hospitals, pention, and school improvements? I don't believe a single thing that comes out of that lying, cheaming, low life, screaping-from-the bottom-of-the-barrow-in-the-gene-pool moron!
-Put up the tuituion fees which blatantly put off any working class family from sending a child to university if the child is going to be in debt £20, 000 after he/she finishes the university.
-Tony Blair is in favour of more nuclear power and possible nuclear weapons building
-When Bush says ''Jump'', Blair says ''How high?''
-The Lies about the war and the soldiers losing their lives has nothing to do with how this country is internally run.
-Didn't lie to me, really. Coz I'm sure me and anyone smart enough knew he was BSing. So it's irrelevent. More to the point, why are you dwelling on something that happened across the world? Yes it was bad, I'm with you there but that's not go anything to do with how our country is run.
-Before this war, hardly anyone had that view of him. As soon as that lie came out, he's all of a sudden lied about everything he's ever said and done? Strange rationale there. Like I said, I'm with you on Iraq view, and yeah he's a liar but I'm not concerned about that when it comes to internal workings of England. It's about who can do that better. Blair or Howard? Coz it IS out of them unless you wanna throw your vote away.
-Conservatives getting into power means that, to quote a friend of mine "Rich people have to pay their cleaners less." So if you wanna talk about screwing the public...
-So are many others. What's your point?
-Somehow I knew it'd come down to Bush. What you've gotta realise is relevance. Who out of the realistic winners of this election, will do better with the country? Blair....or Howard?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
-The Lies about the war and the soldiers losing their lives has nothing to do with how this country is internally run.-Didn't lie to me, really. Coz I'm sure me and anyone smart enough knew he was BSing. So it's irrelevent. More to the point, why are you dwelling on something that happened across the world? Yes it was bad, I'm with you there but that's not go anything to do with how our country is run.
-Before this war, hardly anyone had that view of him. As soon as that lie came out, he's all of a sudden lied about everything he's ever said and done? Strange rationale there. Like I said, I'm with you on Iraq view, and yeah he's a liar but I'm not concerned about that when it comes to internal workings of England. It's about who can do that better. Blair or Howard? Coz it IS out of them unless you wanna throw your vote away.
-Conservatives getting into power means that, to quote a friend of mine "Rich people have to pay their cleaners less." So if you wanna talk about screwing the public...
-So are many others. What's your point?
-Somehow I knew it'd come down to Bush. What you've gotta realise is relevance. Who out of the realistic winners of this election, will do better with the country? Blair....or Howard?
-AC
Lies about iraq - if he lied blatantly about iraq, he can blatantly do so about running of this country.
Besides, its my political outview on the collective bit of this country - wehter Blair lied to you personaly or not is of absolutely no interest or relevance to me.
Just because the rest of the world loves to be around nuclear weapons, does not mean many people ehre do too.
Poor people will never get the chance for university - nuff said.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Lies about iraq - if he lied blatantly about iraq, he can blatantly do so about running of this country.Besides, its my political outview on the collective bit of this country - wehter Blair lied to you personaly or not is of absolutely no interest or relevance to me.
Just because the rest of the world loves to be around nuclear weapons, does not mean many people ehre do too.
Poor people will never get the chance for university - nuff said.
Well if you wanna make that connection that's up to you. I'm not going to. I agree with you that he COULD, I'm agreeing with you on most things concerning Blair, I just believe that out of the two realistic and potential winners, a vote for Blair is better.
I don't either. Nuclear war is a fear of mine, but here's what you gotta remember. If everyone had nukes, we'd be at the safest point in history. Why? Because who would bother to kick off a nuke war then? Everyone's got em. I'm not saying nukes are good, but they're inevitable. So I'm taking the best view I can out of a bad situation.
Neither will stupid people, that's just the way life goes. I'm not gonna put someone completely incapable into power just so someone poor can get into Uni.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
While they did lie, they lied about something that involved, in hindsight, another country. Yes it was wrong, but at the end of the day Labour have done lots of good things. Why sacrifice having an even shitter person than Blair running our country, purely because Blair lied about something on the otherside of the world? Surely you should be judging by what he's actually done with England.
-AC
Even thought I have a small knowledge of British politics I can see what AC is saying here. They did lie but then again What politician doesn't lie? Can anyone really say a politician is honest? Of course not. And why do people keep having the idea that a more radical party would make things better? Just because they don't agree and have a different view than the current government therefore are the better party? No, I don't think so. IMO The labor party is favorite to win because is the most popular and most like Tony Blair remains PM.
I actually would have supported the iraq war IF they had told the true reason for invading iraq, which was regime change.
I opposed it because they lied about the weapons.
I worked out that since only about 40% of people voted in the last election, and only about 40% of them voted for labour, then only about 15% of the country voted Tony blair into power last election.
That means that the goverment only needs the support of 15% of the population to win the election. It isnt really democracy if 75% of the country oppose the people in power
"Poor people will never get the chance for university - nuff said."
Total lie.
Unlike Blair, who never lied in the way you make out.
This is the basic problem with the electorate- it lacks sufficient ability to discern.
But I voted Tory after all, because... frankly the local Labour candidate is terrible, and Whittingdale is a case of 'better the devil you know'.
I also abhor the idea of voting for the Lib Dems simply because you do not like Labour- their policies are in such mealy-mouthed disarry, I am absolutely convinced that people would not vote for them if they actually had a chance in hell of getting into Government. They are simply getting a protest vote.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriIt's that kind of thinking that makes it a 2 horse race.
That's all very well and good but as long as it's a two horse race here, I'm not gonna throw my vote away for a party that I KNOW aren't gonna get elected.-AC
This year it may mean nothing, but it will encourage others to move away from the main 2 ✅