Off Topic The QPR Not 606 Rolling Election Poll

Hopefully that will be the kiss of death for the Hammers today...

 

Selective quoting again, Os? In the context of the article and the post, my comment is perfectly reasonable to all except those who cannot accept Labour can do anything wrong.

 

No, I would not. This should NEVER have been brought up in an election speech. He knew what he was doing and what he was saying. And anyone with any sence knows what he was directly implying.

 

Of course he is. That's what gets him up and feeling himself...

 

I hadn't quoted you in fact Chaz. But to put that right, you wrote: "Personally, this is about as low as a person wanting to get elected can stoop". Miliband made a valid comment in perfectly reasonable language, with no personal abuse at all. If you have seen the sh*te leading politicians of every persuasion have thrown at each other just before elections for at least the last 50 years, it ought to be apparent to you that Miliband didn't even "stoop", let alone get low.

Unfortunately, if a potential voter has a brain in their head at all, no political party that isn't one run by yourself, with Mum helping maybe, is likely to manage to do nothing wrong by you. All you can do as a voter is find the Party that seems to come closest to your own views, and see if it has a chance of providing a voice in Parliament. Could be the one that comes second or third closest to your views is the one to vote for, if the first 1 or 2 aren't going to get there, especially in the UK where you don't even have proportional representation.

 

Ok, here's the thing, Os. Millibars had a speech where he directly linked Cameron's policy and action to the deaths of many immigrants. That was released to the press and roundly condemned. They then watered it down considerably for the actual speech because they knew he would rightly be pilloried. So not only did he believe what I said, he also lacks the conviction to say it for fear of not getting elected. Abhorrent AND weak.

 

The "thing" is, without providing what he actually said, this is all your make believe. If he was feeling stronger about Cameron's personal role in all this, good on him for that, and also for keeping any personal abuse out of what he said.

 

The original press release is in the public domain. It's not being made up, just because it disproves your viewpoint.

 

The briefing was saying just that (within the norms of diplomatic and politically acceptable speech ) which is why there was a storm in the media that went beyond the Tory spin doctors, and why Ed sensibly decided to water down the claim in his speech

 

Interestingly, the 'storm in the media' has gone after 24 hours. Even Murdoch's Times, not normally an organ to pass up a bit of Miliband bashing, doesn't mention it today. If I was them, and Cameron, I'd be saying 'ok, what's your plan for Libya, Eddie?'. Of course nobody has a plan and it's not an issue in this election because the refugees are not knocking at our door.

This campaign is utterly ****, all manufactured outrage, scaremongering and no content. That's probably because there is no content.

 

Agree, Stan. Ed effectively diffused this one by moderating the language that had been in the briefing. Onto the next storm, and roll on May 8 whatever the result, except we could have days of haggling after that...

 

As usual, spin doctors set the agenda and the things voters are seriously concerned about are ignored. We are constantly fed bullsh*t , inaccurate facts and the usual suspect statistics by biased press on both sides.

It's really ironic that the one word MPs are not allowed to call each other in Parliament is 'liar', yet it's their stock-in trade. As one wag said "How do you know they're lying? - Their lips are moving!"...

 

Both of the main parties seem to be playing safe by preaching to their already converted support. Very uninspiring.

 

Watching Andrew Marr this morning giving Miliband a soft ride in comparison to his rottweiler performance with Cameron last week. It was funny listening to him literally choking as he apologised for confronting Cameron with inaccurate facts last week but then that makes it all right.

Sadly, both Tories and Labour are totally uninspiring and it really will take a seismic shift in their presentation to entice a decisive swing...

 

The Sunday Times is packed full of election stuff, none of it readable or interesting. In the sub set of polling questions it is clear that the majority of (potential) voters feel the campaigns are negative and dull.

More interesting was a book review about behavioural economics, which I know nothing about but am now interested in. Partly because it explained something that had caught my interest in the past - in the gents in Schipol Airport all the urinals have little depicitions of a fly stencilled onto the enamel. 'Interesting branding' I thought as I took my ease.....in fact it makes men aim higher, reducing splashback and cleaning costs. Apparently the Government has a 'Behavioural Insights' unit, be interesting to know how, if at all, it has influenced policy.

 

...unless the fly is mistaken for a mosquito, in which case you'll have businessmen jumping up and down trying to swat it, with associatd lounge-suit dry cleaning costs...

 

The Tories are running scared and would rather attack the labours personalities and dig up as much dirt as possible while spouting their scare mongering tactics....they know that its going to be a hung parliament and have only the tory ukip party who would side with them, so it looks more like labour will form the next government but who with as most of the others want the Tories gone and the libdem's wont have enough seats to help them this time.

 

As drab as the campaign has been, the outcome will be fascinating – to me at least. Ever since I was a kid, I’ve enjoyed election night as if it was a major sporting event. The first election I remember would have been 1964, when I stayed up with my father (a trade unionist, staunch Labour supporter and, dare I say it, Socialist) watching the results come in. I had little notion of politics at that time, but my dad cared so passionately that it rubbed off on me, much as your dad’s football team becomes your own after he takes you to your first game. I’m not sure how long I stayed awake that night, but the drama of it was intoxicating to me. The 1966 election was another win for ‘our team’, followed by England’s World Cup win and the Rangers winning at Wembley - all my teams were winners. But this was Labour, England and QPR - things would go wrong.

I will always be a QPR and England supporter, but am aware enough now (I’m not ten any more) not to blindly follow one team politically. Labour have let me down, just as QPR and England have at times. You can’t, or shouldn’t, change your team, but there can be very good reasons to change your political alliance. I would love to have a political ‘team’ that I could have faith in, but I don’t.

However, if Labour are my QPR, The Tories are Chelsea.

And up your arse and up your arse…………………..

 

[QUOTE="Stroller, post: 7862972, member: 1025402"
However, if Labour are my QPR, The Tories are Chelsea.

And up your arse and up your arse…………………..[/QUOTE]

if QPR are Labour, we may have five years of being bossed by the Scottish Football League!

 

You must be following a different campaign. Labour have zero credible policies, and are bleating all about the 'nasty party' constantly. Only the Tories have credible plans, and won't need to sell the country to the SNP in order to implement them.